1008 réponses à ce sujet

[EmperorSahlertz]

DA2 wasn't an attempt at swaying already mage-supporters to become Templar-supporters, or vice versa for that matter. It simply showed a different scenario entirely, within the same setting. It tried to show the absolute worst both sides had to offer. It most certainly weren't an attempt at making the Templars look favorable.

[TEWR]

DA2 wasn't an attempt at swaying already mage-supporters to become Templar-supporters, or vice versa for that matter. It simply showed a different scenario entirely, within the same setting. It tried to show the absolute worst both sides had to offer. It most certainly weren't an attempt at making the Templars look favorable.

And what does that accomplish when the devs and marketing -- more so the latter, but the former did play a part -- made DAII out to be something where new players could be introduced to the world in an appropriate manner?

If you want the players to take a real vested interest in a story, then it can't just be a slapdash of "Evil Templars! Evil Mages! Evil everyone kills the good everyone! Look at our moral dilemma!".

Gaider's comments indicate -- from where I'm sitting -- that DAII was supposed to do exactly what you say it wasn't made for. That people should re-examine what they believe and realize it isn't so simple as "Mages be completely free sans restrictions" or "Mages be slaves with no rights whatsoever".

Not that anyone has actually said the former, from what I've seen.

Gaider's said that he doesn't want the Templars to be painted as the villains. But then DAII goes ahead and does this anyway.

That defeats the purpose of everything he's said, because when we play as Hawke he doesn't know what Ferelden's Templars were like. But he does know what Kirkwall's are like.

And they're 95% ****s and only 5% decent upstanding people.

So how he can say "Don't make the Templars out to be the bad guys" when the game goes ahead and does this anyway is mind-boggling.

New players need to know that while the Templar Order -- and by extension the Chantry -- is seriously flawed, it also is worth siding with.

You need to show the good and the bad of the Order and of the Mages in the same game, fairly and equally.

This is partially why DAO wasn't all that successful in the Mage-Templar area. We see plenty of good Templars from our limited interactions with them, but we only hear about some bad ones. We don't even see a bad Templar until Awakening.

Another reason is that you can save the mages and have nothing bad happen as a result. No maleficarum left within the Circle that makes the player question whether saving the Mages was the correct option.

Thankfully, DAO wasn't as bad as DAII.

If the Mage-Templar conflict in DA3 is handled the same way that DAO and DAII handled it, then I can safely say that I will want no part in it. It'll also make me question Bioware's writing. They're undoubtedly good/great writers, but I don't think they really know how to handle something on this scale.

All of this is IMO mind you.

[Xilizhra]

This is partially why DAO wasn't all that successful in the Mage-Templar area. We see plenty of good Templars from our limited interactions with them, but we only hear about some bad ones. We don't even see a bad Templar until Awakening.

I have to contest this. Greagoir was a bastard and Irving was a suckup, and then we have those templars rather callously discussing Jowan's impeding Harrowing. And, of course, nutsCullen. The Ferelden Circle was pretty bad.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 29 février 2012 - 05:18 .

[TEWR]

I have to contest this. Greagoir was a bastard and Irving was a suckup, and then we have those templars rather callously discussing Jowan's impeding Harrowing. And, of course, nutsCullen. The Ferelden Circle was pretty bad.

I found Gregoir to be a moderate. Firm in his duty, but a moderate.

Granted, a comic tried to paint him as a woman-beater. Frankly, that just disappoints me for Bioware to have done that. Not only does that further the case that the Templars are continuously being painted as evil and that Bioware really doesn't know what they're doing (IMO), but Gregoir shows no signs of being a woman-beater in the games so it contradicts everything about his character.

Irving I won't contest. He's a suckup -- albeit a wily one -- but also a clueless idiot. He didn't even suspect that the reason Uldred was so great at weeding out blood mages was because Uldred himself was one. Were I a First Enchanter, I'd be suspicious of anyone who keeps racking up success after success for finding blood mages. Finding a few here and there? Nothing suspicious about that.

But finding so many that it seems like he's just gifted at doing it? There's something wrong with that picture.

And in my mind, Uldred deliberately handed mage apprentices blood magic tomes so that he could hand the mages over to the Templars and increase his own standing.

I don't remember the Templars discussing Jowan's fate. It's been a while since I did the Mage Origin.

And Cullen wasn't really nuts. Traumatized, but he did make a good case for why the Mages should be killed. Abominations were running rampant and it was a gamble -- one worth taking IMO -- when you opted to spare them.

But as the Warden said -- I'd rather spare maleficarum then kill innocent mages.

And afterwards, he's normal.

Since DAII presents him as a man that's coping fairly well with what he's endured -- unlike Meredith -- the epilogues where he goes nuts can be stricken from the record. Granted, he's a moderate amongst Kirkwall's Templars. How I'd compare him among Templars outside of Kirkwall I'm not sure. I'm certain that he'd be a moderate in the other Circles. Not my ideal Templar, but enough of one.

Now he does have some lines that don't cast him in a great light, 'tis true. Like "Mages are weapons" and all that.

But he does tell Meredith that he would gladly bear any blame for letting maleficarum live in the endgame -- if there were any -- as he sees that as being part of what being a Templar is about.

He knows what it means to be a Templar.
He doesn't abuse his position.
He's shown to be smart enough to know when something is wrong with a member of the Order.

His only flaws were Bioware's horrific portrayal of him as oblivious to Hawke being a mage and how he doesn't take issue with Meredith a bit more.

That last one is -- as always -- imo. I don't think he was present when Meredith called for the Annulment, but he does take issue with it when the mages are spared -- to be made Tranquil later on.

Now, he doesn't take enough issue with it imo. Nor does he show much of an evolution prior to that, from moving from a Templar believing in Meredith to questioning the Order.

He shows some change as the game progresses, but IMO not enough to really do his character much justice.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 29 février 2012 - 05:44 .

[Xilizhra]

I found Gregoir to be a moderate. Firm in his duty, but a moderate.

Moderate templars are evil. Radical templars are really evil. Only the seditious ones are decent.

Granted, a comic tried to paint him as a woman-beater. Frankly, that just disappoints me for Bioware to have done that. Not only does that further the case that the Templars are continuously being painted as evil and that Bioware really doesn't know what they're doing (IMO), but Gregoir shows no signs of being a woman-beater in the games so it contradicts everything about his character.

He's the leader of an inherently abusive prison camp. It's totally within character, certainly within possibility.

[TEWR]

Xilizhra wrote...

Moderate templars are evil. Radical templars are really evil. Only the seditious ones are decent.

I disagree. So long as they fight alongside the mages, they are good. Which in turn makes them somewhat seditious.

Though wouldn't all the Templars be considered seditious now for breaking away from the Chantry and fighting the Mages? I'd call the ones that go to the Mages side from the Templar side not seditious, but Chantry supporters.

Remember that the Templars were willing to kill the Divine for being pro-mage. That means that the Mages have a vested interest in safeguarding the Divine if they want to win the war. Those Templars that side with the mages are not seceding from the Chantry, but supporting it. They're supporting reformation of the system.

Were I a key part of the Bioware team and working on the Mage-Templar conflict, Ferelden would bring the Templars under the authority of the state and Gregoir would agree to the terms King Alistair and Queen Anora would set forth.

The Divine would have a base of operations within Ferelden.

Basically, I'd make Ferelden the stepping stone towards true reform of the entire system on a global scale. Kirkwall would come next as being the second step towards reform, though that would also have required my ideas for DAII having been used.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 29 février 2012 - 06:03 .

[CrimsonZephyr]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

(btw, Anders was doing his terror action with the assistance of the mage Underground IIRC. And that Underground had contacts and members within the Circle.)

Meredith completely wiped out the Mage Underground, Anders even admits so, and he plants his bomb in the Chantry, where no ordinary apostate would dare to venture. Karl, being the exception, was a trap, only there to lure Anders.

[Xilizhra]

I disagree. So long as they fight alongside the mages, they are good. Which in turn makes them somewhat seditious.

So far, the only ones who've done so are opportunistic ones like Cullen and templar!Carver (selfish little ****, that one) fighting a lyrium abomination. Only Thrask and company actually did so in a principled manner, and I wouldn't call them moderate.

Though wouldn't all the Templars be considered seditious now for breaking away from the Chantry and fighting the Mages? I'd call the ones that go to the Mages side from the Templar side not seditious, but Chantry supporters.

The Chantry's power support needs to be completely broken and any control it has over the Circles disappeared. This is the only outcome I'll accept.

[TEWR]

Xilizhra wrote...

So far, the only ones who've done so are opportunistic ones like Cullen and templar!Carver (selfish little ****, that one) fighting a lyrium abomination. Only Thrask and company actually did so in a principled manner, and I wouldn't call them moderate.

I would. They're moderates in my book.

They're also subject to death by plot stupidity.

The Chantry's power support needs to be completely broken and any control it has over the Circles disappeared. This is the only outcome I'll accept.

Ideally, yes I would like for the Chantry to have absolutely no control over the Circles and possibly even the Templars. I definitely don't want them to be politically involved anymore after the Mage-Templar conflict. Right now, it's a necessity for the Chantry to be involved to help the mages win their rights. And in reality, I doubt the Chantry will ever relinquish control of the Circles.

I'd prefer that the Circles be run by just the Mages and Templars combined, sans any ties to the Chantry. But as I said, I doubt it'll happen.

At the very least, Justinia V needs to set forth reforms that cannot be changed ever. No Divine succeeding her can try and take away rights given to the mages in those reforms. Nor can any Divine after her try and change the Templar's reforms either.

And she would make it her greatest effort to ensure that the mages get enough rights that they absolutely deserve by virtue of being human/elven beings.

The only one I'm iffy on is mages being politically involved, but even then that's solely dependant on not who rules, but how he/she rules.

But the Mages need to have more freedom.

1) Families
2) Interactions with society
3) allowed to live in villages or cities (but I'd also make it so that they have to have Templars present and the mage needs to check in with the Templars every few days)

I'm sure I could come up with my ideal Reformation of the Circle system if I really thought it out. One of the key things though is to get rid of the desire for zealotous Templars over morally sound Templars.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 29 février 2012 - 06:19 .

[Xilizhra]

I would. They're moderates in my book.

They're also subject to death by plot stupidity.

They're traitors to the spirit of the Order. It's an evil spirit and deserves to be betrayed, but traitors nonetheless, and not moderate.

At the very least, Justinia V needs to set forth reforms that cannot be changed ever. No Divine succeeding her can try and take away rights given to the mages in those reforms.

Impossible if not forced by arms. Or magic.

[TEWR]

They're traitors to the spirit of the Order. It's an evil spirit and deserves to be betrayed, but traitors nonetheless, and not moderate.

The spirit of the Order is partly that the Templars exist to protect the populus from Abominations and maleficarum and protect the Mages from the populus that -- at one point feared -- them. They seem to not be as afraid of magic these days.

The Order was founded on some noble ideals, but those ideals got corrupted down the line and now the Order is the equivalent of the police in our society. They are a fraternity consisting primarily of people that enjoy abusing their power towards the little guy. The police get guns. The Templars get swords. And they think that entitles them to abusing their authority and makes them above the law.

Thrask and company were rebelling against Meredith and her like-minded cronies. Not the Templars themselves nor the Chantry. Simply those people that proved that they were undeserving of the title Templar.

Thrask was intent on reforming the Circle. I wouldn't call him a traitor at all. He's a true Templar.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 29 février 2012 - 06:30 .

[Xilizhra]

The Order was founded on some noble ideals, but those ideals got corrupted down the line and now the Order is the equivalent of the police in our society. They are a fraternity consisting primarily of people that enjoy abusing their power towards the little guy. The police get guns. The Templars get swords. And they think that entitles them to abusing their authority.

I disagree. I think the ideals are exactly what they always were from the beginning: inherently corrupt and abusive, with a few misguided idealists to make it more palatable.

And you're right, Thrask didn't go nearly far enough.

[TEWR]

I disagree. I think the ideals are exactly what they always were from the beginning: inherently corrupt and abusive, with a few misguided idealists to make it more palatable.

I guess it depends on what the rights of mages were like back when the Circle was formed. IIRC, the Inquisition was assimilated into the Chantry and became the Templars prior to the Circle ever being formed at all. Which would mean that the Templars were in fact founded on noble ideals. Protect the populus from the dangers of magic.

At one point after Tevinter's downfall, mages were free but society didn't collapse nor become another Imperium. Mages were used for the Chantry's needs.

It consisted of menial labor -- like lighting candles and dusting the high areas of a building -- that made the mages rightfully pissed, but they were free at one point.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 29 février 2012 - 06:37 .

[Xilizhra]

The Inquisition were bloodthirsty marauders whom the Chantry feared, so it reined them in; they remained vicious beasts, of course, so it was rather convenient when they got the Circle to be sicced on.

[TEWR]

The Inquisition were bloodthirsty marauders whom the Chantry feared, so it reined them in; they remained vicious beasts, of course, so it was rather convenient when they got the Circle to be sicced on.

I don't disagree that the Inquisition was something horrific. It's why I call the renegade Templars of the Dragon Age the New Inquisition.

But I do think that the Order -- after abandoning the title of The Inquisition -- was at one point something good. We'll have to agree to disagree on this though.

[Rorschachinstein]

Xilizhra wrote...

The Inquisition were bloodthirsty marauders whom the Chantry feared, so it reined them in; they remained vicious beasts, of course, so it was rather convenient when they got the Circle to be sicced on.

They were hunting power hungry Malificar. Not whatever the hell you're thinking

[TEWR]

They were hunting power hungry Malificar. Not whatever the hell you're thinking

Maleficar, Abominations, cultists, and people that just didn't believe in the Maker.

They may have done good deeds by hunting those first 3 groups -- though we don't know how successful they were. Just that those were their targeted groups -- but I believe their methods were cruel and horrific in trying to get those groups.

[EmperorSahlertz]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

They were hunting power hungry Malificar. Not whatever the hell you're thinking

Maleficar, Abominations, cultists, and people that just didn't believe in the Maker.

They may have done good deeds by hunting those first 3 groups -- though we don't know how successful they were. Just that those were their targeted groups -- but I believe their methods were cruel and horrific in trying to get those groups.

And why do you believe that? Because that fits into your preconceptions? I believe that the Inquisition was doing a lot of good work back then. And frankly, all we hvae is one lousy codex entry on the matter, which doesn't go into enough detail about their methods, so perhaps we should refrain all in all, from discussing wether or not the Inquisition was a force of good or evil, and merely stick to recognize their task?

[TEWR]

And why do you believe that? Because that fits into your preconceptions? I believe that the Inquisition was doing a lot of good work back then. And frankly, all we hvae is one lousy codex entry on the matter, which doesn't go into enough detail about their methods, so perhaps we should refrain all in all, from discussing wether or not the Inquisition was a force of good or evil, and merely stick to recognize their task?

It's just a feeling I've got. It may be wrong, but as of right now it's simply what my gut is telling me.

EDIT: Seems I misremembered the interview in question.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 29 février 2012 - 02:34 .

[dragonflight288]

To Emperor, what would you do to improve the situation? I know you're a templar supporter, and we have had some interesting debates in the past, and I've watched you debate others. But I can't recall (granted, I have a short-term memory at the moment. Just woke up) if you ever said how you would improve the situation.

How would you appease the mages that call templars brutal tyrants and abusive power seekers over their charges? Or how would you get rid of the corruption within the templars?

To Xilizhra, You are a mage supporter. And I have seen you argue the destruction of the entire chantry, and even the crown of each country so you can get mages their freedom. How would you protect the common man from blood mages and abominations? How would you remove the thousands of years of prejudice (including the time the Imperium ruled everything, I doubt that made people mage-friendly) to show that mages aren't bad?

How would you support the people whose entire foundation of belief is destroyed in your quest to free mages? And what would stop them from hating you because of this destruction? Non-mages outnumber actual mages by...a lot.

[Xilizhra]

To Xilizhra, You are a mage supporter. And I have seen you argue the destruction of the entire chantry, and even the crown of each country so you can get mages their freedom.

To clarify: the only thing I want to be completely destroyed is the Templar Order. The Chantry can stay intact, I just want to break its power over mages. Revolting against the monarchies is just general principle because I detest the governmental form.

How would you protect the common man from blood mages and abominations? How would you remove the thousands of years of prejudice (including the time the Imperium ruled everything, I doubt that made people mage-friendly) to show that mages aren't bad?

I think there should be warriors with templaresque abilities to do this, but not under the control of the Chantry. Either be part of the same institution as the Circle itself or possibly be controlled by national governments, but I don't like any of them, so I'm not sure.

[dragonflight288]

I think there should be warriors with templaresque abilities to do this, but not under the control of the Chantry. Either be part of the same institution as the Circle itself or possibly be controlled by national governments, but I don't like any of them, so I'm not sure.

Ah yes. Having the guardians part of the same institution of the watched. That's a card pyramid right there. And I do acknowledge that you don't like either, but that one route is the one most likely to be riddled with corruption on the mages side. Who watches the watchers in that case?

I'm not criticizing....okay I am. But I hope its constructive criticism. Without a solid case on that side, the safest bet is having templars, or those with templar abilities loyal to the crown of the country. Things can go wrong there, but at least the watchers have some oversight that doesn't come from those they watch.

I know you don't like that option either, but there are actually not a lot of choices unless you wish to destroy everything the entire population has ever known throughout their lives, and then tell them to have another form of government that they aren't ready for.

[CrimsonZephyr]

Xilizhra wrote...

To Xilizhra, You are a mage supporter. And I have seen you argue the destruction of the entire chantry, and even the crown of each country so you can get mages their freedom.

To clarify: the only thing I want to be completely destroyed is the Templar Order. The Chantry can stay intact, I just want to break its power over mages. Revolting against the monarchies is just general principle because I detest the governmental form.

Mages have to work with the hand that they're dealt. Crusading against monarchies helps no one while the templars are still around, and likely won't help the people, since no other government has existed in Thedas, except the dictatorship of the Qunari. Even the Dalish keepers, being tribal leaders, are monarchs. Ones chosen for their skill in magic, but still monarchs. They have no tradition of democracy and likely lack the requisite level of education for it to be functional anyway.

Mages need to be realists, not idealists.

[Xilizhra]

I'm not criticizing....okay I am. But I hope its constructive criticism. Without a solid case on that side, the safest bet is having templars, or those with templar abilities loyal to the crown of the country. Things can go wrong there, but at least the watchers have some oversight that doesn't come from those they watch.

I'll accept this provided we can deal with the elven bigotry issue at the same time.

Mages have to work with the hand that they're dealt. Crusading against monarchies helps no one while the templars are still around, and likely won't help the people, since no other government has existed in Thedas, except the dictatorship of the Qunari. Even the Dalish keepers, being tribal leaders, are monarchs. Ones chosen for their skill in magic, but still monarchs. They have no tradition of democracy and likely lack the requisite level of education for it to be functional anyway.

Mages need to be realists, not idealists.

Acceptable for the time being. I suppose we can work on superior governmental forms later.

[dragonflight288]

All right. That works. But if you want to deal with the elven bigotry, that goes beyond the Chantry. Most humans take it as a matter of course that elves are inferior. Even most city elves believe they are inferior and don't want to make any effort at all to improve their lives. Then we have the City Elf Origin, and most of his friends that he grew up with (or she) wants to drag them down because they blame the one person willing to stand up for his or her own self for the problems that followed afterwards.

That issue is not just limited to humans, but the elves have to want to be helped. If they don't want humans helping them help themselves, then it won't happen.