39 réponses à ce sujet

[AnethmA]

I always almost side with the mages
I just feel bad for them
Being punished for something that isnt your fault isnt nice =[

[Sordel]

I always felt that you "should" side with the mages in DA:O and I thought that this would be the case in DAII as well, but, by the time I got to the end of DAII, I realised that the templars were "right" all along. As though Anders wasn't bad enough, there's Orsino to think of. There are really only three bad templars in the whole of DAII but by the time you've finished the game you'd be hard-pressed to think of three good mages. (Other than the dead ones, obviously.)

[Andronic0s]

I think it is important to note that all the blood mages I see throughout the game with the exeption of 2 or 3 are former circle mages, rather than current, like the starkhaven ones they could have learned the blood magic outside in desperation. In such a case I find it extremely hard to justify the annihilation of the circle of Kirkwall, I really wanted to side with the templars by end game but the writing in the build-up to the end of Act III painted 90% of the Kirkwall circle as innocents...

[Plaintiff]

Mages. Always mages. They resort to Blood Magic (which isn't inherently evil anyway) because they feel they have no other choice. They're in an awful situation and I can't fault them for wanting to be free. It's an extreme situation and it's abundantly clear that they can't free themselves through regular means. You encounter a lot because of the plot demands, but it doesn't take much in the way of critical thinking faculties to recognise that they are not the majority, and that they were driven to their course of action by the tyranny of the Chantry-controlled Circle.

The existence of the Circle (or at least, its current form) goes against everything I believe about an individual's freedoms and rights. The fact that magic allows for "abuses beyond the scope of mortals" is ultimately irrelevent. There is no justification for imprisoning and pre-emptively punishing someone for something they might do. Any institution that would follow that sort of policy deserves to be blown up, frankly.

Also, it's been mentioned before that demons prey on mages, and that a weak or emotionally-distressed mage can become an abomination without willingly succumbing to a demon. It happens with Thrask's daughter, and to a mage you encounter on your way to the Gallows for the final showdown. And even if someone does willingly succumb,  are they truly to blame? Demons are shown in Night Terrors to be capable of turning all companions against you (with the notable exception of Anders). They are extremely persuasive, and have powers that we do not yet fully understand. It's easy to criticize, but I know that if I were a Kirkwall mage, I would take any avenue to freedom that I could find, and damn the consequences.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 06 avril 2011 - 02:04 .

[Caralampio]

I went for the mages only because I had sided with them the whole game, and I was mage myself. However, it is quite clear that mostly all mages are evil. At least that's the new gospel of DA2. In DAO you still had this sensation that most mages were good, only a few corrupted, and it was unfair to treat them all badly and be oppresed by circles and templars. In DA2 however, 99% of mages are evil. Practically, only the champion (me) was the one good mage in the world. And, if I had selected to use blood magic (I didn't because I was roleplaying the good guy) the champion would have been evil too.

Merrill is a blood mage. Anders is an abomination, and his crime is unjustifiable. Not just from a moral point of view, but also it served no purpose. The first enchanter is an abomination. Every mage you find in the game is an abomination, a maleficar, a blood mage, or whatever. You find no good mages here, no Dwynn, no Irving in DA2. So in that light, the rebellion of the Ferelden circle wasn't an isolated incident, it was a forerunner.

So thanks to the champion all the circles rebelled? To do so, they surely resorted to blood magic, abomination, demons etc. So essentially all mages of Thedas became Tevinter. And they want a world where blood mages and demons rule, and all the non-mages are their slaves.

Oh and about the argument that blood magic isn't evil, that's what blood mages themselves argue. But from the story it is clear, the power of blood magic comes from demons, and most blood mages become abominations. It's like proof.

So, THE TEMPLARS ARE RIGHT.

And, as an aside, the writers of the game sh**ted on the wonderful fantasy world they created in DAO.

[Rifneno]

Caralampio wrote...

I went for the mages only because I had sided with them the whole game, and I was mage myself. However, it is quite clear that mostly all mages are evil. At least that's the new gospel of DA2. In DAO you still had this sensation that most mages were good, only a few corrupted, and it was unfair to treat them all badly and be oppresed by circles and templars. In DA2 however, 99% of mages are evil. Practically, only the champion (me) was the one good mage in the world. And, if I had selected to use blood magic (I didn't because I was roleplaying the good guy) the champion would have been evil too.

Tevinters thinned the veil to paper in Kirkwall.  Demons have *much* more influence there, which is why it seems like they retconned how evil mages are.  We're only seeing mages that live in a place that drives them insane or evil.  The real plot hole is that neither the Chantry, nor the templars, nor the Circle (whom spend most of their lives studying and researching!) realized that Kirkwall is full of insanity.  But yeah, outside of Kirkwall (i.e. places we don't see) mages are presumably still as they were portrayed in DAO.

[Ealos]

Hopefully in DA3 there's more grey areas and people wanting compromises than the super-strict Meredith/insane evil blood mage combination in DA2. Now the war's out in the open, make the two sides human again, not madmen all round.

[Curry Noodles]

Rifneno wrote...


Nope you actually get the reverse where you can show mercy to mages who surrender to you.

As opposed to joining the mages where they all turn into abominations and leap on your sword. As a way of showing their appreciation for joining their side.

It's silly, but I'm pretty sure it only works that way because they have to provide you with good gameplay challenges if you pick the mage side and they didn't want you to have to be a merciless monster if you pick the templar side.  In the actual ending speeches the mage one specifically mentions the many survivors while the templar one does not.

It's pretty ridiculous that they let you spare any mages if you're doing an annulment.  The whole point of an annulment is that you kill everyone, especially the ones who look innocent, because you no longer can judge who is innocent and who isn't.  

I'm also kinda confused about the logic of conflating the blood mages in kirkwall with the mages in the circle.  We know next to nothing about the mages in the circle because we never see them.  All the mages we see in game are apostate because by the end of the game Meredith has restricted the mages to their cells and no longer lets them out...

Modifié par Curry Noodles, 06 avril 2011 - 03:10 .

[Ealos]

Well, Meredith's not happy with you spoiling her Annulment party, which is why Cullen is the one to let them off - he doesn't think Annulment is justified. In any case, Meredith needs a Grand Cleric's authority for it (I think), which she should have sent for.

[Plaintiff]

Caralampio wrote...

I went for the mages only because I had sided with them the whole game, and I was mage myself. However, it is quite clear that mostly all mages are evil. At least that's the new gospel of DA2. In DAO you still had this sensation that most mages were good, only a few corrupted, and it was unfair to treat them all badly and be oppresed by circles and templars. In DA2 however, 99% of mages are evil. Practically, only the champion (me) was the one good mage in the world. And, if I had selected to use blood magic (I didn't because I was roleplaying the good guy) the champion would have been evil too.

Merrill is a blood mage. Anders is an abomination, and his crime is unjustifiable. Not just from a moral point of view, but also it served no purpose. The first enchanter is an abomination. Every mage you find in the game is an abomination, a maleficar, a blood mage, or whatever. You find no good mages here, no Dwynn, no Irving in DA2. So in that light, the rebellion of the Ferelden circle wasn't an isolated incident, it was a forerunner.

So thanks to the champion all the circles rebelled? To do so, they surely resorted to blood magic, abomination, demons etc. So essentially all mages of Thedas became Tevinter. And they want a world where blood mages and demons rule, and all the non-mages are their slaves.

Oh and about the argument that blood magic isn't evil, that's what blood mages themselves argue. But from the story it is clear, the power of blood magic comes from demons, and most blood mages become abominations. It's like proof.

So, THE TEMPLARS ARE RIGHT.

And, as an aside, the writers of the game sh**ted on the wonderful fantasy world they created in DAO.

I don't think it's clear that the mages are evil at all. Merrill is a blood mage, but does she ever use her magic for evil? Does she kill other people to power her spells? No. Is she naive and stubborn? Yes. In Origins, Jowan was a blood mage too, but his only real "crimes" were gullibility and wanting the same rights as an ordinary human being. The fact that the ability is learned from demons doesn't mean it can't be used for good. It very much can be, and the games make that clear. Magic of all kinds is merely a tool, the blame lies entirely with the individual who uses it. The whole point of the grey-and-grey morality of the Dragon Age series is to show people that they can't make the sort of sweeping generalizations that you just have.

Unless the game explicitly states that all the mages in Thedas resorted to blood magic and demonic pacts, then I think you'd have a hard time supporting that assumption. From what I've seen they don't need to at all. Once the mages start fighting back, they can actually be incredibly effective without blood magic. Anders is a case in point. As for his crime being unjustifiable, that's really debatable.

And it's very obvious that the mages haven't set up a new Imperium because as Cassandra and Varric clearly state, the war is still going.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 06 avril 2011 - 03:21 .

[RolandX9]

Mages. Because blaming the innocent (and before we get into "what is innocence?", I'm just going to call it not guilty of the crimes you're complaining about) for the actions of the criminal is not remotely morally ambiguous, in spite of Bioware's "efforts" at ambiguity. This is Ethics 101. A Hawke who helps Meredith kill mages who's only crime is being born a mage is a murderer, pure and simple. (Note: Yes, so is Vengeance-Anders. No double-standards, thank you. Bye-bye, Vanders.)

[TheAwesomologist]

I side with mages 100% of the time. Even when I think I should at least see the Templar ending... nope, can't do it. There are a few very simple reasons:

1) Ander's is an idiot. Even Sebastion notes that you can kill the guy guilty for the crime right then and there. Forget the other mages.
2) Nearly every blood mage in Kirkwall turned to blood magic BECAUSE OF THE DAMNED TEMPLARS! The only exceptions are the serial killer and Merrill.
3) Blood Magic isn't evil. Wait what? Thats right. Play a mage. Then at level 7 or 14 take the Blood Magic specialization. Guess what. The game doesn't end, you don't turn into an abomination, if anything the game becomes EASIER. In fact no one even cares if you practice blood magic. It's just a means to end with no corruption or madness. Turns out Merrill was right...
4) Every Templar is EVIL (except for Thrask and the one you save in Act 1). Thats right even Cullen is EVIL. Maybe less so than the others. My favorite thing about Cullen is that he obviously learned nothing when the damned Grey Warden saved his sorry ass with an apostate and a circle mage in tow. Oh and they saved all the non-abomination mages as well. Okay so maybe Cullen isn't evil but we can agree he's at least a tool. All the other templars are just cops on power trips, without the doughnuts.
5) Last point: The game does NOTHING to show you why siding with the Templars is even remotely the right thing to do.

[sphinxess]

Ealos wrote...

Well, Meredith's not happy with you spoiling her Annulment party, which is why Cullen is the one to let them off - he doesn't think Annulment is justified. In any case, Meredith needs a Grand Cleric's authority for it (I think), which she should have sent for.

DG established in another thread that after the death of the Grand Cleric the Knight-Commander has the authority to call for the Right of Annulment

And the ones you save will be made tranquel
"So therefore the order is "kill everyone". At the end of the day if any mages are still alive for whatever reason....then, yes. I imagine they could theroretically be made Tranquel as opposed to being executed outright..
DG on the "Why is the Right of Annulment" thread today

Modifié par sphinxess, 06 avril 2011 - 05:34 .

[AshenEndymion]

TheAwesomologist wrote...

2) Nearly every blood mage in Kirkwall turned to blood magic BECAUSE OF THE DAMNED TEMPLARS! The only exceptions are the serial killer and Merrill.

Other exceptions:  Grace, Alain, the apostitute, the blood mage who was holding Karren, Orsino... Hrm.  That list seems to be growing longer and longer the more I remember the specific mages we meet.

3) Blood Magic isn't evil. Wait what? Thats right. Play a mage. Then at level 7 or 14 take the Blood Magic specialization. Guess what. The game doesn't end, you don't turn into an abomination, if anything the game becomes EASIER. In fact no one even cares if you practice blood magic. It's just a means to end with no corruption or madness. Turns out Merrill was right...
4) Every Templar is EVIL (except for Thrask and the one you save in Act 1). Thats right even Cullen is EVIL. Maybe less so than the others. My favorite thing about Cullen is that he obviously learned nothing when the damned Grey Warden saved his sorry ass with an apostate and a circle mage in tow. Oh and they saved all the non-abomination mages as well. Okay so maybe Cullen isn't evil but we can agree he's at least a tool. All the other templars are just cops on power trips, without the doughnuts.

If being able to specialize in blood magic makes blood magic not evil, then Templars aren't evil because warrior-Hawke can specialize it.

5) Last point: The game does NOTHING to show you why siding with the Templars is even remotely the right thing to do.

Honestly?  I haven' t seen a legitimate reason in the game for me to side with the mages in their rebellion against the law.  So, to each his own.  I'm rather happy that the mages of Kirkwall die.  They are less of a threat to the people of Kirkwall when they are dead than when they are alive.

[DAFerelden91]

Mages,because I believe every man have the right to be freed from being caged.How can you blame the mages for being born with the gift the Maker gave?You can't just paint all the mages with the same colour just because most apostates you met are corrupted blood mages and maleficar.
And besides,Meredith and Elthina are the two who should be blamed for this chaos.Meredith being so damn paranoid and psychotic till she pushed Orsino and the other mages to the edge and jump off the cliff for Blood Magic,while Grand Cleric did only nothing but pray for non-existing and surreal peace.How dare she said she favors peace while she is the one who isn't doing her job!