359 réponses à ce sujet

[ddv.rsa]

IanPolaris wrote...
Just for starts, Templars are not permitted to tranquil harrowed mages. That's been against Chantry Law for centures...yet Elthina does nothing about it.

Here's a dev post showing that although morally murky, harrowed mages can be legally tranquilled.

As far Karl being made Tranquil after
being a mage, THAT I can agree would be cause for concern. After all,
that is "against the rules" 

That's incorrect.
The Rite of Tranquility is not only performed before the Harrowing. The
use of it as a punishment or potentially as a control over unruly
mages, however, does venture into territory that borders on abuse...
but that was the entire point of the adventure.

Edit: see social.bioware.com/%5Burl=%5Burl=http%3A/social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/304/index/7058889&lf=8

Modifié par ddv.rsa, 17 avril 2011 - 09:33 .

[IanPolaris]

I am sorry but the only time a mage can be made tranquil when already harrowed LEGALLY is if that mage is captured during a Rite of Annulment.

The Lore is very clear on that and has been clear for over a year. Harrowed mages may NOT be legally tranquiled for any reason.

-Polaris

[ddv.rsa]

Ian, a dev comment is, in effect, the lore. They know it better than us.

Modifié par ddv.rsa, 17 avril 2011 - 09:34 .

[IanPolaris]

I don't know who that Dev was, but I know he was overruled by the other writers. Even the game itself makes it crystal clear, harrowed mages may not legally be tranquiled (with the sole exception outlined by none other than DG himself).

-Polaris

Edit:  A Dev comment isn't lore if it's overrided by other Devs.  I read the link and this is a clear retcon.  I also point out that unless you are going to tell me that Orsino approved every one of those harrowed mages being traquiled (which we both know he wouldn't), then in fact it's STILL illegal even per your own link.  There is simply no way that Orsino would go along and without Orisino signing off (which DG says is the legal requrement), it's illegal to tranquil harrowed mages.

Modifié par IanPolaris, 17 avril 2011 - 09:38 .

[ddv.rsa]

The dev was DG, see the link.

Modifié par ddv.rsa, 17 avril 2011 - 09:35 .

[IanPolaris]

ddv.rsa wrote...

The dev was DG, see the link.

Anders is still right even with this clear (and stealth) retcon....unless you are willilng to tell me that Orsino would cooperate with Meridith on the time of day let alone tranquilling harrowed mages.

KC Meredith was clearly flouting the law and per your own link, this is a justifiable complaint by the first enchanter to the Grand Cleric which SHOULD have got KC Meredith kicked out years ago.  If you confront Elthina about the tranquil solution, she turns away and shuts up in a hurry.  She knows what the Templars are doing, she clearly finds it disgusting and wrong, but doesn't have the moral courage to do her DAMN JOB and do something about it!

-Polaris

[ddv.rsa]

I'm not discussing the Kirkwall situation specifically, although I see no proof that Orsino did or did not agree. I'm just pointing out that it is sometimes legal to tranquil a harrowed mage.

[Paeyne]

IanPolaris wrote...

KC Meredith was clearly flouting the law and per your own link, this is a justifiable complaint by the first enchanter to the Grand Cleric which SHOULD have got KC Meredith kicked out years ago.  If you confront Elthina about the tranquil solution, she turns away and shuts up in a hurry.  She knows what the Templars are doing, she clearly finds it disgusting and wrong, but doesn't have the moral courage to do her DAMN JOB and do something about it!

-Polaris

Flouting of the law requires contempt or scorn of that law.   I don't particularly agree with your interpretation that Meredith had contempt for the Chantry laws but I can see where your opinion is comming from.

However using this line of thinking we must also conclude that Elthina also had contempt for the law as she also knew what was going on and she also did nothing.

[ddv.rsa]

Does Orsino actually ever complain about mages being tranquillized? I don't recall him mentioning the issue.

Modifié par ddv.rsa, 17 avril 2011 - 10:31 .

[Paeyne]

ddv.rsa wrote...

Does Orsino actually ever complain about mages being tranquillized? I don't recall him mentioning the issue.

He didn't that I know of.

Anders suspected that people were being Tranquiled.  Certainly Karl was Tranquiled.  Several others were Tranquiled by Ser Alerik (sp?) .  It was being done.  How wide spread it was is a matter of debate.

[IanPolaris]

ddv.rsa wrote...

Does Orsino actually ever complain about mages being tranquillized? I don't recall him mentioning the issue.

We don't know.  Orisino wouldn't talk about that to a Kirkwall noble no matter how highly regarded.  That would be internal matters settled between himself, the KC, and the Grand Cleric.

However, I think I can appeal to some bloody common sense here people.  Orisino would not agree with Meredith about the time of day let alone tranquil (and this is a bloody obvious retcon by DG...shame on him)....so it doesn' change Ander's point one iota.  Honestly the game itself reflects the lore of the world until DG decided to arbitarily change it four days ago.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

Paeyne wrote...

However using this line of thinking we must also conclude that Elthina also had contempt for the law as she also knew what was going on and she also did nothing.

I actually would tend to agree, but I think ultimately Elthina's contempt was rooted in fear rather than scorn.  Not fear for her personal safety, but fear about her public perception.  Elthina strikes me as the sort of person that is afraid to offend anyway and thus in the end offends everyone because decision making paralysis.  Certainly that seems to be the case here.

-Polaris

[EmperorSahlertz]

Wait what.. Are we seriously discussing wether or not Meredith had respect for the law? She had the utmost respect for the law, she also had an undying to her duty, which may sometimes have lead her to ignore some aspects of the law. But she was certainly not flouting.

Also, you can't tranquilize a mage without the First Enchanter giving permission.

[IanPolaris]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Wait what.. Are we seriously discussing wether or not Meredith had respect for the law? She had the utmost respect for the law, she also had an undying to her duty, which may sometimes have lead her to ignore some aspects of the law. But she was certainly not flouting.

Also, you can't tranquilize a mage without the First Enchanter giving permission.

Since when?  Are you even sure we are talking about the same Meredith?  The one who instigated an overthrow of the prior Viscount...but only after he threatened to toss the Templars out.  The same one who openly is blocking and taking (per the Seneschal) unprecended political power after the Viscount's death that no templar is entitled to?  The same Templar that overlooks obvious violations of Chantry law by her subordinates?

No.  Meridith doesn't respect anything except her own power and the sharp end of the stick....and in Act 3 she's brutally honestly about why she doesn't have you arrested as an apostate.  You as Champion are too politicially and personally powerful to take out at the moment...but if you watch her at the end of Act 2, she makes it very clear that Kirkwall isn't big enough for the two of you...and that's regardless of whether you are pro-mage or pro-templar.

-Polaris

Edit PS:  Per the latest from DG (which is a clear retcon), the First Enchanter only has a say if the mage has been harrowed.  The Templars can (per DAO/Jowan) tranquil an apprentice mage for any or no reason (and the Templars in Kirkwall do that a lot if you listen to the various conversations in the Gallows).

Modifié par IanPolaris, 17 avril 2011 - 11:18 .

[ddv.rsa]

IanPolaris wrote...

ddv.rsa wrote...

Does Orsino actually ever complain about mages being tranquillized? I don't recall him mentioning the issue.

We don't know.  Orisino wouldn't talk about that to a Kirkwall noble no matter how highly regarded.  That would be internal matters settled between himself, the KC, and the Grand Cleric.
-Polaris

Every time you see Orsino he's complaining about some or other injustice the mages are suffering. He's extremely vocal. If something so blatantly illegal as tranquilizing harrowed mages without his consent was happening I don't think he'd ever shut up - he'd shout it in the streets.

Modifié par ddv.rsa, 17 avril 2011 - 11:23 .

[Nightwriter]

caridounette wrote...

As a player roleplaying a mage, i found it difficult to understanding how hard it was not to turn to blood magic. I was backed in corners many times in the game but never did it felt hard to resist demons and blood magic.

Well, that's the thing. How do they make you feel tempted by blood magic and demons? Most good mages turn to blood magic out of desperation, and since you are the protagonist (and by default, nigh undefeatable) you will never feel that desperation. You win every fight.

Aside from that, I totally agree with everything you said. I was unsatisfied with their portrayal of mages and my ability to interact with the issue.

[lobi]

Dev Retcon = The new lore is the lore because we are the law. (except when caught out by red shirt guy)

[ddv.rsa]

IanPolaris wrote...

Since when?  Are you even sure we are talking about the same Meredith?  The one who instigated an overthrow of the prior Viscount...but only after he threatened to toss the Templars out.

You can blame Meredith for a lot of things, but not that. At the time she had no real power within the order - she was just an ordinary templar. She led the group that killed the viscount after he hanged her predeccessor, but she wasn't involved in starting the hostilities. She never instigated anything. She responded to a deadly attack against her order. What would you have done in her place?

[EmperorSahlertz]

IanPolaris wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Wait what.. Are we seriously discussing wether or not Meredith had respect for the law? She had the utmost respect for the law, she also had an undying to her duty, which may sometimes have lead her to ignore some aspects of the law. But she was certainly not flouting.

Also, you can't tranquilize a mage without the First Enchanter giving permission.

Since when?  Are you even sure we are talking about the same Meredith?  The one who instigated an overthrow of the prior Viscount...but only after he threatened to toss the Templars out.  The same one who openly is blocking and taking (per the Seneschal) unprecended political power after the Viscount's death that no templar is entitled to?  The same Templar that overlooks obvious violations of Chantry law by her subordinates?

No.  Meridith doesn't respect anything except her own power and the sharp end of the stick....and in Act 3 she's brutally honestly about why she doesn't have you arrested as an apostate.  You as Champion are too politicially and personally powerful to take out at the moment...but if you watch her at the end of Act 2, she makes it very clear that Kirkwall isn't big enough for the two of you...and that's regardless of whether you are pro-mage or pro-templar.

-Polaris

Edit PS:  Per the latest from DG (which is a clear retcon), the First Enchanter only has a say if the mage has been harrowed.  The Templars can (per DAO/Jowan) tranquil an apprentice mage for any or no reason (and the Templars in Kirkwall do that a lot if you listen to the various conversations in the Gallows).

The Templars are fully capable of taking the power of the city, as the largest military might left in the city, they can and will take over if they deem neccesary. You don't even know if what they did was illegal. Perhaps it is fully legal for them to take over control of the city, until a successor has been chosen. THis successor can then only be chosen once the Templars deem the city stable. Meredith was unwilling to do so, while the magic problem was still running like a wildfire.

Modifié par EmperorSahlertz, 17 avril 2011 - 11:40 .

[Wulfram]

Nightwriter wrote...

Well, that's the thing. How do they make you feel tempted by blood magic and demons? Most good mages turn to blood magic out of desperation, and since you are the protagonist (and by default, nigh undefeatable) you will never feel that desperation. You win every fight.

Perhaps you should have been able to save your mum if you made a deal with a demon?

[0Sion0]

-- Warning; long post incoming! ---

Personal two cents here about the Mages versus Templars debate that's been going for a good 14 pages. Not even going to bother counting the endless topics before - seems Bioware at least succeeded in making it a grey area; wouldn't be this much discussion if it wasn't. 

Obviously this isn't a simple matter. I've seen the lenghty posts about genocide, justified killing, protect and serve and the likes. To me, personally, it remains a grey area. Even after reading all that - even after having picked both side of the fence throughout playthroughs. Heck, might even be more of a grey area to me (personally) then before I started reading all your posts.

Why?

Because it comes down - for me - to either siding with a group of largely innocent people (assuming for a moment, in my RP, that the Circle houses more then the few mages we encounter/see in and around the Gallows - the size alone of the Gallows could point to evidence of that.). People that had nothing to do with the actions of a terrorist mage, but are now (after years of proven oppression and abuse) condemned. This is wrong, to me, from a moral standpoint. You can't justify killing the many over the mistakes of a few - let alone the actions of some lone terrorist. 

It doesn't mean those who then resort to (blood)magic and use it to hurt/harm/threaten others should be given any slack because 'you understand that they had no other choice'. That, to me, is bull. If you're a good person(or want to be), don't do the bad things. You always have a choice. Be it in our modern day society or the Thedas universe. Deciding to resort to something that could then likely cause innocent people to get hurt is bad in my book. Not worth it. So that little group of ruckus causing nitwits... get put down, no matter what side of the fence I decide to land (Mage or Templar).

Besides, they(Mages) do deserve a better system. I think everyone can agree that is has to change to  at least some extent. The current system placed by the Chantry obviously has it flaws - things need to change if you at the very least want to prevent a 'Kirkwall Gallows 2' after the big ol' war has settled. This to me, is another valid point why one would side with the mages - to change the system. To show, once and for all - that it should be different. (It's been states a few times that things would go back to the old ways if you side with the Templars). No oppression, no abuse, but something else (control, better co-op, understanding, blablabla - we can discuss those finer points when DA3 or 4 comes along).


Back on track; The other option is siding with the only body of power capable of putting the chaos down. The only group capable (Guards, as much as I loved them and wished they played a more visibly active role, wouldn't stand a chance) of restoring order and restoring it fast  - before the chaos would spread and possibly (perhaps even most likely) cause innocent victims amongst the people of Kirkwall.

You have walking and talking nukes running around fighting in the streets. Chaos everywhere. Your position, as Champion of Kirkwall, has the most meaning here... when you side with Kirkwall. You are the Champion of the people - not just Mages or Templars, but to (almost) everyone living in and around Kirkwall. When you pick the side of the Templars you can do so to restore order and keep Kirkwall safe. You don't have to agree with them all the way - but you could see that their way is the only path leading to a swift solution of the situation. Something that's for the greater good.

Then again, you can just say '[PRESS F] all mages, let's murder them bloody' and side with the Templars for that.

So yeah, my two cents? Still a grey, grey area... with no happy outcome. Not saying that one side is right over the other - both have their flaws/horrible consequences. Merely stating you can see the right in both sides if you choose to. Love/Hate it, not being able to pick a side.

- Josh

(Also - English isn't my native language, apologies for the mistakes in grammar and/or spelling I no doubt made!)

Modifié par 0Sion0, 17 avril 2011 - 12:07 .

[Wulfram]

Benchmark wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

It's worth noting that for all the talk of magic as a curse, the Chant of Light itself calls it a gift

Oh ho ho. Gimme a quote. If true, this opens up more possibility for a moderate path that reconciles the two groups. Just needs a little more common sense and a Templar Internal Affairs. TIA division.

Sorry, missed this

"Magic exists to serve man, and never to rule over him.
Foul and corrupt are they
Who have taken His gift
And turned it against His children.
They shall be named Maleficar, accursed ones.
They shall find no rest in this world
Or beyond."
(My Emphasis)

Not generally a very cheerful verse, but the implication is clear.  Magic is a gift given by the Maker to serve man, the problem is when people use it wrongly.

Modifié par Wulfram, 17 avril 2011 - 12:08 .

[darrylzero]

IanPolaris wrote...

Orisino would not agree with Meredith about the time of day let alone tranquil (and this is a bloody obvious retcon by DG...shame on him)....so it doesn' change Ander's point one iota.  Honestly the game itself reflects the lore of the world until DG decided to arbitarily change it four days ago.

-Polaris

I agree with you about Orsino, but how do we know this is a retcon?  The standard DG sets out is pretty demanding, and reasonable.  Here's the quote:

David Gaider wrote...

It's against the rules to perform the Rite of Tranquility without both significant provocation (provocation in this case meaning the mage in question either cannot control their magic or has shown no signs of a willingness to do so) AND the agreement of the First Enchanter (who is present as a sort of ombudsman on behalf of the mages). The system will fall out of balance anywhere where the First Enchanter is either weak or ignored.

Mages don't generally elect to become Tranquil after their Harrowing, but it's not impossible-- and with the agreement of the First Enchanter, as mentioned, could certainly happen.

So, I'm not sure what kind of events in-game would let us know that it's illegal for a mage who's either:

A) Lost the ability to control his or her magic, or
Shows no interest in controlling it

To be made tranquil.  I mean, what's the alternative?  Kill them?

Modifié par darrylzero, 17 avril 2011 - 02:41 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

Well... Anders said it was illegal to tranquilize a harrowed mage, that must be true then!!11one

[Le Diable]

Paeyne wrote...

ddv.rsa wrote...

Does Orsino actually ever complain about mages being tranquillized? I don't recall him mentioning the issue.

He didn't that I know of.

Anders suspected that people were being Tranquiled.  Certainly Karl was Tranquiled.  Several others were Tranquiled by Ser Alerik (sp?) .  It was being done.  How wide spread it was is a matter of debate.

Orsino was more concerned with the outcome of the loss of control on the truce between the Mages and the Templars of Kirkwall. Kirkwall being an Imperium dominion once could have the Templars on a high suspicion all the time about mages praticing Blood Magic, born from a Tyrannical Nation that worships nothing but Magic, and even more trying to evolve from a nation of slaves to a nation of free souls seemed to me is "what the main plot and the concern" is all about.

Orsino might or might not have known about the templars activity as he himself was not away from the circle much, unlike the case of Anders who has witnessed a lot of the actions and atrocities the templars cause the mages in the circle to go through. The templars have irked me a lot in the gameplay as i found them unconvincing in their decisions to execute mages or tranquilising them and I do have to add I did miss the true templar authority and responsibility, that I witnessed in Knight Commander Greagoir, so was Irvin a much wiser first enchanter than Orsino.

Something else that boggles me out of my wits is that Anders had a lot to do about this than the Champion him/her self, I cannot deny my thoughts about the role of the Champion after Act 2 with Arishok ending, there is hardly anything that the champion could contribute in terms of the story line, the ending with either siding ended up on the same outcome unlike DAO where the life of quite a few people is put on to test including the Hero's own life through sacrifice. Was Hawke's importance likely felt as the Champion of Kirkwall comes to me as the eventual question and thus once playing I have to admit it was duly unremarkable in all standards to have been a reckoning and beckoning force for 10 years before the end is eventually made inevitable. This is what Varric narrates to Cassandra(by far the second favorite warrior female NPC I seem to like after Ser Cauthrien in DAO) in his own words.

Assuming Hawke did not exist post act 2, I somehow cant see the reason for the story to end in an outcome that is pinned on a storyline sans choice. in my viewpoint, if Hawke had not funded the deeproads and somehow found a parallel line to raise to a Noble in Kirkwall, i am sure Bartrands' crew would have been slayed by the Rock Wraiths and then triggering Varic to ask Noble Hawke to help him find out and then given the choice to bring that artifact back home or not. This would have in many ways to invoke and push some sense into Meredith and have a much different outcome for the story that should be spanning 10 whole years.

Hawke had no role in his choice to act in the entire Act 3 except for slaying or saving Anders from death. Hawke was just the person needed for these events to happen on a trigger happy direction rather than with consideration of diplomacy or understanding of choices available on the table. Hawke was the catalyst that caused all this and perhaps the end would have been superior with diplomatic decisions carried out by a much more sensible Meredith and a wiser Orsino.

Having played the game twice as a mage and once as a rogue, I have always found myself siding with the Mages on the choice perspective. My respect for templars seemed lost once I see the end of game Meredith. Even Knight Captain Cullen who is a rank higher than Meredith failed to have an impression on my character who was a sturdy Fereldan with a rags to riches story behind in an entirely foreign land with an apostate in the family (with either hawke or bethany as the mage).

In the end, my thoughts somehow seem to question my personal belief of deserving the title of a Champion as the only epicness I felt came out of ending the Qunari invasion with choices of a peaceful retreat with Isabela being handed over to them or with the blood of the Arishok. In my way it did not matter much to me to hand Isabela into their custody but what seemed intolerable for the character of my Hawke is the murder of many innocents in the Keep and mercilessly murdering the Viscount who always sought a calm and diplomatic dealings with the Qunari residing in their city. Always keep thinking "is this what made me the Champion and ruined it all?". I feel Hawke has been denied his/her destiny as a Champion.