359 réponses à ce sujet

[IanPolaris]

AlexXIV wrote...

Well she [Aveline] sides with the mages if Hawke does.

Which means she can't feel that wrong about it.

As for the second point, I think you're right.  I thought it was fair to point out that she was married to a Templar for many years and so starting out (when you first meet her), she would be distrustful of mages by default (and when you do your conversation companion quests, she rather explicitly shows she doesn't like mages when you call her out on 'like they control mages'...it earns you a lot of rivalry.  That said, she is no templar, and (if you play pro-mage) over time I think she changes her mind because of Hawke and because of just how brutish and arrogant the Templars have become to even ordinary people (who she interacts with as a guardsman) by Act 3.

As for the second point, she doesn't always side with the mages if Hawke does.  If Fenris defects, she won't.  I think that's hard-coded to keep a minimum number of fighters in your group for the final battle.  However, if Fenris does not defect and you haven't gotten sufficient friendship./rivalry (doesn't have to be maxxed out) she will defect.  She won't ever fight you though.  If she defects, she basically says, "Pox on both your houses"  {Wish I had that choice!)

-Polaris

[AlexXIV]

In Exile wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
I can't hide that I am a bit disappointed that so many people think that the templars are the morally better option. I am not an unreasonable or stubborn person in general. I have read many threads and posts on the topic. I always end up thinking the mages are the morally higher ground. Not because I think the mages should be free as birds, but because I think in this Annullment situation the templars are doing everything wrong. I am not anti templar or anti chantry in general. But there are alot of things that need improving. And this sepecial situation in Kirkwall shows to me everything that is wrong with the chantry and the circles.

Thinking that the templars are not monsters is not equivalent to thinking they are the morally better option. I think that systematic killing, to that extent, can't be excused. But they are not all mustache twirling villains bent on murder and torture and mayhem.

Some templars (like Alrik) are absolute scum. But mages like Decimus are scum of a different sort.

Personally, I wouldn't be able to justify standing against the mages for any Hawke's on moral grounds (templars are justified) versus vindictive ones (bloodmages killed my mother). But that being said I don't think portraing the mages as victims is entirely justified. They are victims when it comes to the Right of Annulment as it is invoked by Anders... but many of them (including Orsino) is criminal.

And remember that we just had a mage revolt prior to Orsino taking to the streets (templars and mages, though).

Well we are on the same page mostly.

Just thinking that I would have to kill 50 innocents out of 100 of which half are criminals does not sit well with me. And they had the option to arrest them. And maybe test them. I know Merrill did have a way to test if people's blood is corrupted. They could, for all I care, have tranqulized all bloodmages for their stupidity to turn to bloodmagic I don't think bloodmagic is inherently evil, neither am I supporter of the tranquil solution, but it would have been a compromise. Meredith didn't leave place for compromises, so my Hawke was showing her the middle finger.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 13 avril 2011 - 08:15 .

[LobselVith8]

IanPolaris wrote...

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

Lets not forget Aveline doesn't care much for siding with the mages. Clearly she'd rather keep order.

Aveline was married to a Templar for many years and if it weren't for the darkspawn and the fact that Wesley was injured, she wouldn't have had an issue with helping him kill Bethany (and Hawke) when they first meet.

That means that Aveline is not a fair measure by which to make a moral judgement for the same reason that Fenris isn't (although less extreme).

-Polaris

I don't know about that. I'd agree that Wesley's condition did play a part in how she handled the situation (since she clearly had the brains to realize three against one and a half wasn't in their favor), but Aveline didn't need to keep Bethany's status as an apostate secret when they arrived in Kirkwall, but she did (and the same would be true of an apostate Hawke if the story remembered that he was an illegal mage). I don't think the same would be true of Wesley, since he admits as much when Hawke confronts him on the issue ("that... is for another day"), but they are clearly different people.  Aveline doesn't even believe in the Maker or the Chant of Light. I think that Aveline has reservations about mages based on her disapproval over certain actions involving mages and her dialogue with Bethany, but she also shows approval when you call Meredith out for the templars being at fault at the end of "On the Loose."

[AlexXIV]

Maybe good place to mention that I am really disappointed that siding with the mages makes Hawke a supporter of the mages in the war. Since as I have pointed out several times in this thread, I am not really against the chantry and templars in general. Just in this specific situation. Also my mage supporter Hawke could still have become Viscount since she was not against the templars or Cullen. Just against Meredith's Anullment. All in all my Hawke could probably have prevented the war from happening to begin with if it hadn't been for Meredith's plot armor ...

[Asdara]

AlexXIV wrote...

Asdara wrote...

snip

So we kill people because they are powerful? We treat them like criminals because others of their race or culture are are? Witches were not killed because they knew something other's didn't. They were killed because they were supposed to be evil. Mages are dangerous. But seeing how the templars wiped them out even if Hawke sided with the mages makes it hard for me to believe that they were such a big threat. I mean they never had a chance.

Witches didn't actually have an ability to menace people, that was a made-up reason for people to fear them.  People died and it was wrong.  However, mages aren't witches, and they can menace people, control thoughts, enslave, kill, maim, ect. if they choose to.  They have an ever-present option to just unleash themselves on others who have no where near their capabilities - I am talking about common folk here, not our hero-type band of exceptions.  I cannot stress enough the difference between a made-up reason to consider someone dangerous and different and a real one.  

Also, they were not "killed because they were supposed to be evil" they were killed because they were dangerous and the community they were a part of in this story had been contaminated by at least a handful of "bad seeds" that went rampant around the city sufficiently to cause a general increase in the danger that others would follow them.  

[In Exile]

AlexXIV wrote...
Well we are on the same page mostly.

Just thinking that I would have to kill 50 innocents out of 100 of which half are criminals does not sit well with me.

The question, though, would whether we are killing 50 innocents out of 100 or 10 innocents out of 100. To the extent that Meredith says Anulment, I think the debate ceases to be about whether it is justified to do it (since she will make it happen) but rather about what the least immoral outcome is.

The citizens will demand the death of mages for what happend to the Chantry. The mages committed sacrilege and they will want blood. What happened there looked clearly like magic (it was a damn orbital laser!). Even if it was pure gunpowder, in that world and to the average person, it would still look like magic.

Even if you could defeat Meredith, you could still argue that the citizens of Kirkwall will rush the mages anywhere outside of the gallows out of abject fear or loathing.

There will be death. And if the mages win the Chantry might well call an Exalted March on the city.

I think that even with all that, in the end, the moral choice is to stand for the mages because systematic killing cannot be justified. But I think the choice is hard, and I think the innocent lives aren't just mage lives, but the lives of all the poor and downtrodded in Kirkwall who don't have a voice.

As Champion of Kirkwall, I argue that Hawke has an obligation to them.

And they had the option to arrest them. And maybe test them. I know Merrill did have a way to test if people's blood is corrupted. They could, for all I care, have tranqulized all bloodmages for their stupidity to turn to bloodmagic I don't think bloodmagic is inherently evil, neither am I supporter of the tranquil solution, but it would have been a compromise. Meredith didn't leave place for compromises, so my Hawke was showing her the middle finger.

Meredith is nuts. But a naive or optmistic Hawke might think that Meredith could be removed for this insanity by speaking to Cullen (since there was an anti-Meredith templar movement) and some lives would be saved (i.e. the mage children).

In the end, though, I just think there are more reasons that are moral for abeting a bad end. Like I said: I can't see it being enough. But it's at least something.

[AlexXIV]

Asdara wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Asdara wrote...

snip

So we kill people because they are powerful? We treat them like criminals because others of their race or culture are are? Witches were not killed because they knew something other's didn't. They were killed because they were supposed to be evil. Mages are dangerous. But seeing how the templars wiped them out even if Hawke sided with the mages makes it hard for me to believe that they were such a big threat. I mean they never had a chance.

Witches didn't actually have an ability to menace people, that was a made-up reason for people to fear them.  People died and it was wrong.  However, mages aren't witches, and they can menace people, control thoughts, enslave, kill, maim, ect. if they choose to.  They have an ever-present option to just unleash themselves on others who have no where near their capabilities - I am talking about common folk here, not our hero-type band of exceptions.  I cannot stress enough the difference between a made-up reason to consider someone dangerous and different and a real one.  

Also, they were not "killed because they were supposed to be evil" they were killed because they were dangerous and the community they were a part of in this story had been contaminated by at least a handful of "bad seeds" that went rampant around the city sufficiently to cause a general increase in the danger that others would follow them.  

Humankind has no habit of killing potentially dangerous people. Just of killing supposed evil people. Everyone who wields any power or knowlege would be dangerous. A soldier is probably more dangerous than a vegetable merchant. A doctor is probably more dangerous than janitor. Simply because some people would have an easier time to kill you or get rid of you. So killing powerful people doesn't make sense in a society that is based on power. Being evil though means that whatever power they will possess they will use it for evil, hence they must die.

We don't fear the Tevinter Empire because it was led by powerful mages. We fear it because it was led by powerful evil mages. I mean the Maker Himself is probably the most powerful being ever. Does the Chantry demand to kill Him? I don't think so.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 13 avril 2011 - 08:40 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

AlexXIV wrote...

Asdara wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Asdara wrote...

snip

So we kill people because they are powerful? We treat them like criminals because others of their race or culture are are? Witches were not killed because they knew something other's didn't. They were killed because they were supposed to be evil. Mages are dangerous. But seeing how the templars wiped them out even if Hawke sided with the mages makes it hard for me to believe that they were such a big threat. I mean they never had a chance.

Witches didn't actually have an ability to menace people, that was a made-up reason for people to fear them.  People died and it was wrong.  However, mages aren't witches, and they can menace people, control thoughts, enslave, kill, maim, ect. if they choose to.  They have an ever-present option to just unleash themselves on others who have no where near their capabilities - I am talking about common folk here, not our hero-type band of exceptions.  I cannot stress enough the difference between a made-up reason to consider someone dangerous and different and a real one.  

Also, they were not "killed because they were supposed to be evil" they were killed because they were dangerous and the community they were a part of in this story had been contaminated by at least a handful of "bad seeds" that went rampant around the city sufficiently to cause a general increase in the danger that others would follow them.  

Humankind has no habit of killing potentially dangerous people. Just of killing supposed evil people. Everyone who wields any power or knowlege would be dangerous. A soldier is probably more dangerous than a vegetable merchant. A doctor is probably more dangerous than janitor. Simply because some people would have an easier time to kill you or get rid of you. So killing powerful people doesn't make sense in a society that is based on power. Being evil though means that whatever power they will possess they will use it for evil, hence they must die.

We don't fear the Tevinter Empire because it was led by powerful mages. We fear it because it was led by powerful evil mages. I mean the Maker Himself is probably the most powerful being ever. Does the Chantry demand to kill Him? I don't think so.

No. People fear tevinter because it is led by mages. That is the long and short. A mage is a terrifying person on its own, as likely to heal your wounds as he is to immolate you. A mage is an unknown threat. A  normal human being you can look at, and make a reasonable assessment of their potential threat. A mage you can never be sure of. Now imagine a nation led by mages. It must be a terrifying prospect to the common man.

[caridounette]

AlexXIV wrote...

Maybe good place to mention that I am really disappointed that siding with the mages makes Hawke a supporter of the mages in the war. Since as I have pointed out several times in this thread, I am not really against the chantry and templars in general. Just in this specific situation. Also my mage supporter Hawke could still have become Viscount since she was not against the templars or Cullen. Just against Meredith's Anullment. All in all my Hawke could probably have prevented the war from happening to begin with if it hadn't been for Meredith's plot armor ...

In the end, if you side with the mages only against the Rite, even you killed on sight every abomination and bloodmage you encontered (other then our dear merril and anders of course) and never encouraged rebellion then you are concidered a revolutionnaire by all the mages who want to revolt. Its poetic no? I guess thats how historical figures are created. You think the guy who created the atomic bomb cried himself to sleep over the used we had of it ?

And i guess a protemplar Hawke whose action pushed all circles to rebel around Thedas ends up with a pretty similar feeling of <WTF? You guys got my intent all wrong>

Its like the Endgam/Epilogue tells you <You wanted to be a hero hey? No interest in minding your business and becoming a merchant? Fine have it your way: you just screwed Thedas ! > 
For all the problems in the game ( most of act 3 ><)  This is still some great storytelling on the dangers of playing heroes

[Asdara]

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Humankind has no habit of killing potentially dangerous people. Just of killing supposed evil people. Everyone who wields any power or knowlege would be dangerous. A soldier is probably more dangerous than a vegetable merchant. A doctor is probably more dangerous than janitor. Simply because some people would have an easier time to kill you or get rid of you. So killing powerful people doesn't make sense in a society that is based on power. Being evil though means that whatever power they will possess they will use it for evil, hence they must die.

We don't fear the Tevinter Empire because it was led by powerful mages. We fear it because it was led by powerful evil mages. I mean the Maker Himself is probably the most powerful being ever. Does the Chantry demand to kill Him? I don't think so.[/quote]
No. People fear tevinter because it is led by mages. That is the long and short. A mage is a terrifying person on its own, as likely to heal your wounds as he is to immolate you. A mage is an unknown threat. A  normal human being you can look at, and make a reasonable assessment of their potential threat. A mage you can never be sure of. Now imagine a nation led by mages. It must be a terrifying prospect to the common man.[/quote]

This.  

Yes, it may be somewhat irrational to kill people based on power level (a hilarious image of Vegeta just sprang to mind) but we're not talking about someone who's good with a sword or who has political connections, we're talking about people who can pull fire and ice out of the air and boil peoples blood in their own veins.  Rather different, I would say, than worrying about a renegade soldier or mercenary (who, by the way, would likely be hunted down and killed if they became a significant enough threat on an individual basis).  If these people ever rose up en masse then they would be capable (note: they could not they would for sure) of enslaving the world... which, as I understand it, they pretty much did at some point until a nice lady who sang songs went on a crusade.

Also... no offense intended, but the point you bring up about the Maker and power is not really relevant considering the fact that it isn't now nor probably will ever be an option for anyone in the game universe.

And, facing facts, if they do become abominations, they pretty much are evil.  Until that point its certainly a matter of personal habit and behavior, but after that... yeah evil, sorry, and dangerous and deadly.

Edits: damnation I keep either quoting myself in the whole post or quoting no one... 

Modifié par Asdara, 13 avril 2011 - 09:47 .

[IanPolaris]

caridounette wrote...

. You think the guy who created the atomic bomb cried himself to sleep over the used we had of it ?

As a matter of fact, he did.  Dr. Oppenheimer never forgave himself for his role of making the atomic bomb as project head of Manhattan, and Einstein was very hard on himself during his last years for his letter to FDR which spurred the US on to the making of the atomic bomb.

I think both are too hard on themselves, but both had a lot of guilt over it IRL as a matter of record.

-Polaris 

[caridounette]

sometimes i think both my promage and protemplar Hawkettes would cry themselves to sleep for a while seeing the outcome of their actions. Whats done cant be undone.

[Asdara]

caridounette wrote...

sometimes i think both my promage and protemplar Hawkettes would cry themselves to sleep for a while seeing the outcome of their actions. Whats done cant be undone.

I agree with this.  Whatever my Hawkes do for the Templars or the Mages, it is a bloodbath that could have been avoided, possibly, if I had just been more aware of my own backyard, so to speak, with Anders.  Or if I had the option to be, but that's a player perspective.  "What could I have done to prevent this?" is a question that should haunt a lot of minds when all is said and sifted on this matter.

[AlexXIV]

Reason I brought up the Maker was to support my point that people are not generally against powerful beings watching over them or giving them rules to follow. A real life example: god. Or gods. Or spirits. Whatever people believe in. Or take Gandalf in Lord of the Rings. I don't see alot of people demanding that he is locked up in a tower. Despite the fact that his colleague isn't exactly as nice. Granted there are not many mages in Middle Earth and people may think DA is 'more realistic'. Anyway I refuse to accept 'realism' being equal to being a pessimistic jerk about everything.

Anyway. People probably wouldn't have a problem with mages ruling over men if there wasn't abuse or major tragedies like the blights or what happened in the ferelden circle with abominations on the loose. Not that I support this idea. But in my view people don't fear magic. They fear the corruption of it. It being used for evil things. Which has happened in the past, and which is the main reason for the mage situation in Thedas. The mages never had a chance to prove that they have learned from the past though. The chantry took control and holds it in iron grip ever since. And by law any mage can be killed whenever the chantry feels like it.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 13 avril 2011 - 10:38 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

AlexXIV wrote...

Reason I brought up the Maker was to support my point that people are not generally against powerful beings watching over them or giving them rules to follow. A real life example: god. Or gods. Or spirits. Whatever people believe in. Or take Gandalf in Lord of the Rings. I don't see alot of people demanding that he is locked up in a tower. Despite the fact that his colleague isn't exactly as nice. Granted there are not many mages in Middle Earth and people may think DA is 'more realistic'. Anyway I refuse to accept 'realism' being equal to being a pessimistic jerk about everything.

Anyway. People probably wouldn't have a problem with mages ruling over men if there wasn't abuse or major tragedies like the blights or what happened in the ferelden circle with abominations on the loose. Not that I support this idea. But in my view people don't fear magic. They fear the corruption of it. It being used for evil things. Which has happened in the past, and which is the main reason for the mage situation in Thedas. The mages never had a chance to prove that they have learned from the past though. The chantry took control and holds it in iron grip ever since. And by law any mage can be killed whenever the chantry feels like it.

Of course if there were no downside to mages, alot of people wouldn't mind. But then again, if there weren't any downside to alot of things, people would do those things more often.

[LobselVith8]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Of course if there were no downside to mages, alot of people wouldn't mind. But then again, if there weren't any downside to alot of things, people would do those things more often.

Not everyone shares the Andrastian view of mages, though. We have the Dalish clans (who suffered because of the Tevinter Magisters), the Avvar tribes, the Chasind Wilders, the kingdom of Rivain, and the morally bankrupt town of Haven that worshipped a different sect of Andraste than Emperor Drakon I promopted but still had mages with non-mages.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Both the Chasind and the Avvar fears and respects their shamans. And the Keepers don't cast magic infront of their clanmates. The Rivaini seers let themselves become possessed, so I can't imagine they got an all positive view of them either.
Magic is feared and respected everywhere in Thedas. For good reason.

[LobselVith8]

Asdara wrote...

Witches didn't actually have an ability to menace people, that was a made-up reason for people to fear them.  People died and it was wrong.  However, mages aren't witches, and they can menace people, control thoughts, enslave, kill, maim, ect. if they choose to.  They have an ever-present option to just unleash themselves on others who have no where near their capabilities - I am talking about common folk here, not our hero-type band of exceptions.  I cannot stress enough the difference between a made-up reason to consider someone dangerous and different and a real one.  

Which is why Wynne stressed that mages are killed in Andrastian socieities where the people blame them for things they aren't responsible for.

Asdara wrote...

Also, they were not "killed because they were supposed to be evil" they were killed because they were dangerous and the community they were a part of in this story had been contaminated by at least a handful of "bad seeds" that went rampant around the city sufficiently to cause a general increase in the danger that others would follow them. 

Contaminated? Meredith invokes the Right of Annulment because Anders murdered Grand Cleric Elthina. While she clearly wanted to invoke it sooner, we have no idea whether her claims were justified, considering how Meredith was going insane because of the Lyrium Idol that was possessing her.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 13 avril 2011 - 11:51 .

[LobselVith8]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Both the Chasind and the Avvar fears and respects their shamans.

The Shaman are the leaders of the Chasind Wilders and the Avvar tribes. They don't have the same views on mages that the Chantry preaches in Andrastian societies.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

And the Keepers don't cast magic infront of their clanmates.

Merrill mentions she was warned against using her magic at certain times to avoid the templars, because they sometimes hunt the Keepers since they are apostates under Chantry law. The difference between the Dalish and the Andrastians is that the Dalish don't fear mages because they're mages - part of their history is that all of the elves of Arlathan were mages. A member of Zathrian's clan was none other than Aneirin the Healer, who used to be with the Circle of Ferelden.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The Rivaini seers let themselves become possessed, so I can't imagine they got an all positive view of them either.

Except Genitivi explains that the people of Rivain defy the Chantry because they refuse to be parted from their seers, and have done so for a millennia.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Magic is feared and respected everywhere in Thedas. For good reason.

Again, other cultures have very different views on mages than the Andrastian nations.

[Asdara]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Asdara wrote...

Witches didn't actually have an ability to menace people, that was a made-up reason for people to fear them.  People died and it was wrong.  However, mages aren't witches, and they can menace people, control thoughts, enslave, kill, maim, ect. if they choose to.  They have an ever-present option to just unleash themselves on others who have no where near their capabilities - I am talking about common folk here, not our hero-type band of exceptions.  I cannot stress enough the difference between a made-up reason to consider someone dangerous and different and a real one.  

Which is why Wynne stressed that mages are killed in Andrastian socieities where the people blame them for things they aren't responsible for.

Asdara wrote...

Also, they were not "killed because they were supposed to be evil" they were killed because they were dangerous and the community they were a part of in this story had been contaminated by at least a handful of "bad seeds" that went rampant around the city sufficiently to cause a general increase in the danger that others would follow them. 

Contaminated? Meredith invokes the Right of Annulment because Anders murdered Grand Cleric Elthina. While she clearly wanted to invoke it sooner, we have no idea whether her claims were justified, considering how Meredith was going insane because of the Lyrium Idol that was possessing her.

Contaminated.  Orsino was passing notes with a blood mage murderer years before the annulment was called for.  That annoying blood mage woman who kidnaps your companion lived there - in the Circle - for the same years, working directly with templars all the while, and was never detected.  Anders and his team of freedom fighters have been sneaking mages out to freedom at an alarming rate - Anders boasts of 3 or 5 (I can't remember) taken out personally.  Not to mention the whole mage-templar alliance that goes demon-form the minute you roll up - regardless of your previous pro-mage / pro-templar stance (yes I know it's a bug, but still, it makes an impression).

I acknowledge that ignorant peasantry might react violently to the unknown, maybe even causing extraneous casualties among people only suspected of being a mage, innocents entirely, bystanders.  It is a fact, historically.  

That does not directly result from a policy being in place regarding a group of people.  Multiple other factors come into play - education, religious distortions that stem inevitably from a cellular structure as the Chantry, local mortality rates, harvest yields, natural disasters, ect.  

[LobselVith8]

Asdara wrote...

Contaminated.  Orsino was passing notes with a blood mage murderer years before the annulment was called for.  

I don't see how the actions of one man should condemn an entire Circle of men, women, and children to execution simply because he's their representative.

Asdara wrote...

That annoying blood mage woman who kidnaps your companion lived there - in the Circle - for the same years, working directly with templars all the while, and was never detected.  

You mean Grace? She's from the Circle of Starkhaven.

Asdara wrote...

Anders and his team of freedom fighters have been sneaking mages out to freedom at an alarming rate - Anders boasts of 3 or 5 (I can't remember) taken out personally.  

Out of the same Gallows where Ella was threatened with rape by Alrik, Alain is raped by Kerras, the templars tortured a len (child) of the Dalish, Karl was illegally made tranquil despite going through the Harrowing, Bethany is avoiding templars like Kerras and Alrik, and Meredith is losing her mind because of a Lyrium Idol. I can see why some mages would want to leave.

Asdara wrote...

Not to mention the whole mage-templar alliance that goes demon-form the minute you roll up - regardless of your previous pro-mage / pro-templar stance (yes I know it's a bug, but still, it makes an impression).

It's a bug? I thought it was simply bad writing.

Asdara wrote...

I acknowledge that ignorant peasantry might react violently to the unknown, maybe even causing extraneous casualties among people only suspected of being a mage, innocents entirely, bystanders.  It is a fact, historically. 

That does not directly result from a policy being in place regarding a group of people.  Multiple other factors come into play - education, religious distortions that stem inevitably from a cellular structure as the Chantry, local mortality rates, harvest yields, natural disasters, ect.  

We know that other cultures don't treat mages with distain or kill them simply for being mages - the Chasind Wilders, the Avvar tribes, and the people of the kingdom of Rivain to name a few. Killing mages in Andrastian societies is tied to how the religion preaches that mages are "cursed" and responsible for the Thedas form of original sin.

[Gongsun Zan]

I didn't really feel I had a choice in the final decision. Ignoring the usual genocide is bad argument, here's why:

There's a major theme that runs through most of the quests in this game: Family.

The game begins with you protecting your family. Immediately, you lose Carver, and Aveline loses Wesley. You come to Kirkwall because Mother wants to. Almost every quest from then on has got something to do with family. Fenyriel's mother wants to protect him. Thrask has an apostate daughter. Grace was in love with Decimus. Almost everybody in the game is looking for a son/brother/cousin/husband etc. Much of Varric's storyline is about conflict with his brother. Fenris is betrayed by his sister. Aveline loves Donnic. The Keeper treats Merril like a daughter. Isabella, if romanced, chooses to return the relic and stick with Hawke instead of running away. Anders, uhm...maybe he was in a relationship with Karl. And then there's the whole Gamlen and his daughter, Mother getting murdered, the emphasis on Sandal and Bodahn's relationship, and so on.

Now, I had taken a pro-Templar stance the entire game. But supporting them further would mean condemning Bethany death -- the only immediate family member I have left alive in the game, the sister who said "she would never betray us". I felt that keeping her alive was the obvious decision in terms of the way the game was progessing, so it was a pretty straightforward decision. Now, if she herself was a bloodmage, and had committed some vile act (like maybe helping Anders blow up the chantry), it would have been a much harder decision. But she's probably the nicest mage in the whole game, so I had to side with them.

It just makes a better story if played out that way.

[TJPags]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Asdara wrote...

Contaminated.  Orsino was passing notes with a blood mage murderer years before the annulment was called for.  

I don't see how the actions of one man should condemn an entire Circle of men, women, and children to execution simply because he's their representative.

What I find funny about the whole "mage or templar" argument is the constant use of the phrase "you can't condemn everyone because of one person"  I see it a lot from pro mage people, as in the above (sorry, Lob, it was in your post - not really trying to single you out here).

We have Orsino, leader of the mage cricle, helping a known killer/blood mage.  But we can't condemn all mages for him.

We have Grace, blood mage and murderer of Trask, who tried to kill you - after you saved her.  But we can't condemn all mages for that.

We have what's her name, the one in the Pearl - errr, the Blooming Rose - mind-raping templars.  But we can't condemn all mages because of her.

We have Decimus - blood mage.  Can't condemn all mages because of him.

We have what's her name, that was helping demons possess templars.  But we can't condemn all mages for that.

We have the elf who kills his wife, and attacks you.  But we can't condemn everyone for him.

We have the third blood mage (the elf, Emile, and this one) from that quest.  Can't condemn every mage for that.

We have every insane blood mage who attacks you in the street.  Can't condemn all mages for that.

In contrast, on the Templar side, we have Alrik.  We have maybe Kerras.  Can we condemn all templars because of them?

Look at the weight of the evidence here.  Can we really blame every single one of those blood mages on the Templars?  Even the ones who were blood mages BEFORE they got to Kirkwall?

Modifié par TJPags, 14 avril 2011 - 01:45 .

[Asdara]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Asdara wrote...

Contaminated.  Orsino was passing notes with a blood mage murderer years before the annulment was called for.  

I don't see how the actions of one man should condemn an entire Circle of men, women, and children to execution simply because he's their representative.

Asdara wrote...

That annoying blood mage woman who kidnaps your companion lived there - in the Circle - for the same years, working directly with templars all the while, and was never detected.  

You mean Grace? She's from the Circle of Starkhaven.

Asdara wrote...

Anders and his team of freedom fighters have been sneaking mages out to freedom at an alarming rate - Anders boasts of 3 or 5 (I can't remember) taken out personally.  

Out of the same Gallows where Ella was threatened with rape by Alrik, Alain is raped by Kerras, the templars tortured a len (child) of the Dalish, Karl was illegally made tranquil despite going through the Harrowing, Bethany is avoiding templars like Kerras and Alrik, and Meredith is losing her mind because of a Lyrium Idol. I can see why some mages would want to leave.

Asdara wrote...

Not to mention the whole mage-templar alliance that goes demon-form the minute you roll up - regardless of your previous pro-mage / pro-templar stance (yes I know it's a bug, but still, it makes an impression).

It's a bug? I thought it was simply bad writing.

Asdara wrote...

I acknowledge that ignorant peasantry might react violently to the unknown, maybe even causing extraneous casualties among people only suspected of being a mage, innocents entirely, bystanders.  It is a fact, historically. 

That does not directly result from a policy being in place regarding a group of people.  Multiple other factors come into play - education, religious distortions that stem inevitably from a cellular structure as the Chantry, local mortality rates, harvest yields, natural disasters, ect.  

We know that other cultures don't treat mages with distain or kill them simply for being mages - the Chasind Wilders, the Avvar tribes, and the people of the kingdom of Rivain to name a few. Killing mages in Andrastian societies is tied to how the religion preaches that mages are "cursed" and responsible for the Thedas form of original sin.

I fail at parsing quotes.  I will answer in order instead.  /shame.

The man in charge of the mages being associated with a blood mage outside the Circle who kills people as his hobby horse and happens to be manically insane is significant.  It doesn't damn them all, but it throws into question ANY monitoring value he MIGHT have had.  To paraphrase Anders: How could he be the voice of justice for mages if he was the worst thing they could become?  Orsino pulled that Harvester ritual out very quickly.  

Grace is from Starkhaven, and since even if you let her go she is captured and brought to the Kirkwall Circle to live for 3 years; you see her in Act 2, then 3 years pass, enter Act 3.  I reiterate: years spent in the Circle working closely with templars, a sadistic bloodmage with a vengeance complex.

Mages would want to get out of the Gallows for all of the reasons you listed, I completely agree.  Fact remains that they are not supposed to be able to just escape in the numbers that are implied over the years that pass without some kind of response being generated - tightening of rules, restrictions of privileges, attempts to ferret out conspirators or collaborators.  I suppose they are not to be blamed for wanting their freedom at the cost of their fellow's situation worsening - it's only human to self-preserve.  Which is, coincidentally, why so many of them turn to demons and such in the final battle.  I do understand - they weren't pushed, they were shoved.  Still.  The other side of the arguments exists.

From what I understand from other threads, yes people seem to believe it may be a bug.

We could fit what we know about other cultures in Thedas into a thimble - and many of our "sources" are discarded papers, book pages rather than whole books, and snatches of conversation.  All of what you said is accurate, according to all of that, but it hardly gives us a complete picture.  

Additionally: part of the cult of Andraste is the legend of her battle against the mages.  Of course they are pre-disposted to distrust of mages after how many hundred years?  And they look to convert people - which makes it worse.  I'm not denying the cultural factors involved - but they shore up the case for justification as a deeply held belief system that had become wide spread among people.  The Templar's stance would be normative in Chantry lands.

[LobselVith8]

TJPags wrote...

What I find funny about the whole "mage or templar" argument is the constant use of the phrase "you can't condemn everyone because of one person"  I see it a lot from pro mage people, as in the above (sorry, Lob, it was in your post - not really trying to single you out here).

That's because people say they wipe out the Circle of Kirkwall because of what Anders did, or because of what Orsino did. People address that the actions of that particular individual shouldn't condemn every mage living in the Gallows.

TJPags wrote...

We have Grace, blood mage and murderer of Trask, who tried to kill you - after you saved her.  But we can't condemn all mages for that.

Grace, from the Circle of Starkhaven, who was working with Ser Thrask and other templars and mages when Hawke's sibling or lover is kidnapped. Isn't that like asking if we should condemn all the templars who helped kidnap Bethany or Merrill because Ser Thrask thought Hawke was working for Knight-Commander Meredith?

TJPags wrote...

We have what's her name, the one in the Pearl - errr, the Blooming Rose - mind-raping templars.  But we can't condemn all mages because of her.

Idunna is an apostate and we have nothing to indicate she's from the Circle of Kirkwall. She's not brought up because people are addressing why the Circle of Kirkwall shouldn't be condemned at the conclusion of the storyline in Dragon Age 2 when discussing the Right of Annulment.

TJPags wrote...

We have Decimus - blood mage.  Can't condemn all mages because of him.

Decimus is from the Circle of Starkhaven. I have no idea whether the Starkhaven Circle was as bad as the Circle of Kirkwall. Hawke only has a limited amount of information.

TJPags wrote...

We have what's her name, that was helping demons possess templars.  But we can't condemn all mages for that.

Tarohne's background is unknown to us. All we know is that she is an apostate. What pushed her is unknown to us from the perspective of Hawke.

TJPags wrote...

We have the elf who kills his wife, and attacks you.  But we can't condemn everyone for him.

You mean Huon, who was sane when he was in the Alienage, and insane because of his time in the Gallows?

TJPags wrote...

We have the third blood mage (the elf, Emile, and this one) from that quest.  Can't condemn every mage for that.

Emile isn't even a blood mage, and Evelina was sane when she was part of the Circle of Ferelden and insane after her time in the Gallows.

TJPags wrote...

We have every insane blood mage who attacks you in the street.  Can't condemn all mages for that.

You mean the mages who are apostates because they aren't in the Circle of Magi? We have no idea why they are antagonists.

TJPags wrote...

In contrast, on the Templar side, we have Alrik.  We have maybe Kerras.  Can we condemn all templars because of them?

We have Knight-Commander Meredith, who orders an act of genocide against an entire population because of the actions of an apostate. We have the templars who follow orders and kill men, women, and children who are not responsible for what Anders did. Despite that, I wouldn't condemn all templars for the actions of those like Ser Alrik or Ser Kerras. I thought Ser Thrask was a good person, and there were plenty of good templars who we met as the Warden in Origins.

TJPags wrote...

Look at the weight of the evidence here.  Can we really blame every single one of those blood mages on the Templars?  Even the ones who were blood mages BEFORE they got to Kirkwall?

Considering we know next to nothing about them? I'm not certain an argument can be made either way for the mages we know little about.