35 réponses à ce sujet

[Morroian]

TobiTobsen wrote...

The Seekers are the policeforce of the templars. They are to the templars, what the templars are to the mages. They are still part of the military forces of the chantry. Thats the reason why Varric doesn't makes a difference, if you ask me.

They're part of the military wing of the chantry but not part of the templars. They have power over the templars because their organisation is higher in the chantry hierarchy than the templars.

[TobiTobsen]

Morroian wrote...

TobiTobsen wrote...

The Seekers are the policeforce of the templars. They are to the templars, what the templars are to the mages. They are still part of the military forces of the chantry. Thats the reason why Varric doesn't makes a difference, if you ask me.

They're part of the military wing of the chantry but not part of the templars. They have power over the templars because their organisation is higher in the chantry hierarchy than the templars.

Yes. I choose my words poorly.
Part of the military wing, like the Templars. Yes.
Part of the Templar Order. No.

[RavenB]

TobiTobsen wrote...

Sure. Just look at Meredith or Ser Alrik. It's the job of the Seekers to sort these kind of people out of the templar ranks. Somebody must have failed at their job. Hard.

And the codex entry explicitly states that the templars fear and despise the Seekers. I think my comparison was pretty fitting

I have no doubt that the seekers are employed to be the police force of the templars by Chantry decree, but the point as to whether the templars are observing that if they're not observing the Chantry is the issue. If the templars fear and despise the seekers, that's not exactly support that they'd jump at following them in a more involved sense. Just like the mages are in large part rebelling from the templars.

[TobiTobsen]

Sure thing. But since it's the Mage vs Templar conflict, that's probably serving as the foundation for DLC's or even DAIII, im pretty sure that it's save to say that most of the templars are going rogue and are fighting the mages. Otherwise there would be no conflict, or it would be called differently.

[RavenB]

TobiTobsen wrote...

Sure thing. But since it's the Mage vs Templar conflict, that's probably serving as the foundation for DLC's or even DAIII, im pretty sure that it's save to say that most of the templars are going rogue and are fighting the mages. Otherwise there would be no conflict, or it would be called differently.

I think that assuming "mage vs templar conflict" seems like a bit of an assumption, also. We don't really know who will be fighting who in the upcoming content, if sources not involved in II will become so. The world is on the "brink of war", but the sides could be anyone. The mage conflict has put a lot of nations in a state of instability. That doesn't necessarily make them the focal point they're discussing.

I think the Dragon Age team wants to paint both factions as sympathetic in their own way, also. Turning the templars into a a big, blood thirsty, juggernaut of MURDER is not painting them as a reasonable force in position to protect mages from themselves and others, as what they're supposedly meant to be and what makes them sympathetic. It seems like it would be a rather odd place to take them, like suddenly making the mages as a whole turn into the greatest feared "Tevinter magister" picture.

And the standpoint doesn't make much sense to me, because what you're saying the templars want doesn't seem like what Cassandra wants, but you say they're in league. Cassandra doesn't seem to want to "kill all mages". She seems to want Hawke (or maybe the warden, as he's also mentioned) to try to barter peace.

[Melca36]

There are non Templars who support the mages.....

You saw that in the beginning of the game where people wanted to protect the healer/Anders.

[Astranagant]

I think the point of Anders' actions is that he's created a situation in which the Chantry/Templars are going to try to Annul all mages, even the ones who surrender. So if they want to survive they have to either flee or fight, even if they're lawful and pious and so on.

Modifié par Astranagant, 08 avril 2011 - 11:20 .

[Raiil]

TobiTobsen wrote...

Sure thing. But since it's the Mage vs Templar conflict, that's probably serving as the foundation for DLC's or even DAIII, im pretty sure that it's save to say that most of the templars are going rogue and are fighting the mages. Otherwise there would be no conflict, or it would be called differently.

Mage v. templar is really just a taste of what could come. Personally, I'm hoping that Ferelden versus Orlais with an overriding arch of some looming threat. 

[IanPolaris]

RavenB wrote...

And the standpoint doesn't make much sense to me, because what you're saying the templars want doesn't seem like what Cassandra wants, but you say they're in league. Cassandra doesn't seem to want to "kill all mages". She seems to want Hawke (or maybe the warden, as he's also mentioned) to try to barter peace.

I think based on that that the Templars as a whole DO want to kill all mages but there are a few with the Seekers that are still allied with Justina that are desperately trying to stop a war they think no one will win and the Chantry will lose no matter what.  My take anyway.

-Polaris

[RavenB]

IanPolaris wrote...

RavenB wrote...

And the standpoint doesn't make much sense to me, because what you're saying the templars want doesn't seem like what Cassandra wants, but you say they're in league. Cassandra doesn't seem to want to "kill all mages". She seems to want Hawke (or maybe the warden, as he's also mentioned) to try to barter peace.

I think based on that that the Templars as a whole DO want to kill all mages but there are a few with the Seekers that are still allied with Justina that are desperately trying to stop a war they think no one will win and the Chantry will lose no matter what.  My take anyway.

-Polaris

My guess was basically like Valentia's, that the templars were likely pretty scattered in their aliances. Honestly, I see a lot of the templars being sympathetic to the mages before the Chantry, but that might just be my inherent bias at work. I'm not a fan of the Chantry, but I can sympathize with a decent portion of the templars. Sort of like how one can disagree with a war, but sympathize with it's soldies. The leadership is a bit harder to look past. In a way, I suppose I just WANT the templars to come across as more easily relatable and sympathetic than the Chantry, but there's no real basis. It's just wild speculation at this point.

[saintratchet]

I would venture a guess that this will definetley be a storyline in DA3