626 réponses à ce sujet

[LobselVith8]

What I noticed is that the mage and templar debate threads seem to have people provide some intelligent and thought-out arguments for both sides, but it seems to be that the same level of thought that's put into the debates by either side seems to be missing from Dragon Age 2. Instead of having a debate between Charles Xavier and Erik Lensherr over their schism of what's the right course of action, where each side can be given weight to the argument that divides them, we seem to have a plethora of insane mages who do nothing to advance the story, except to be insane antagonists. We have insane mages in Acts I, II, and III, and all of them seem to be as boring and pointless as the next one.

From Tarohne with the purple lips to Quentin playing Frankenstein's Monster, we have mages who are simply insane. In a storyline that seems to explore the division between the templars and mages, we're given insane caricatures instead of fleshed out characters. Wouldn't the divide between the mages and the templars be better if both sides were allowed to demonstrate that they were intelligent, fleshed out characters that Hawke would need wit and intellect to deal with, instead individuals of falling to insanity that only provides Hawke with a wave of enemies to slaughter? Doesn't it deny Hawke the chance to use his brain to think of solutions to solve dilemmas if he's facing antagonists who will never act rationally?

Throughout the seven year story arc of Hawke in Kirkwall, we deal with a number of mage antagonists, but virtually all seem to be insane. Starkhaven mages Decimus, Grace, and Quentin all seem to have lost their mind, and Tarohne seems to be as insane as her Starkhaven counterparts. First Enchanter Orsino ends up losing his mind at the end of Act III and turns into the GoA Harvester, while Kirkwall mage Huon is insane and Evelina has become an abomination. Rather than being a nuanced dichotomy between two opposing sides that hold different views, it seems to present us with mages who have lost their minds. Can there really be a debate over mages and templars when the storyline only provides us with insane mages?

[Fidget6]

Yeah, it is kind of bizarre how most of the mages you see end up being lunatics (including one that kills your mother, surely that would have an impact on your viewpoint.) It seems like the game tries to portray siding with the mages as the "right" thing to do, while at the same time completely contradicting itself. If I had gone through everything Hawke had with the mages (ESPECIALLY after one happily slaughtered my mother for his own sick desires) it would definitely change my tune. I still always find myself siding with the mages for some reason.....

[Vit246]

Blame Bioware. Or the writers. Or Gaider / Laidlaw. I forget which.

Modifié par Vit246, 22 juin 2011 - 11:40 .

[TJPags]

You know my thoughts on it, I think.

In brief - DA2 is not actually about the mage/templar conflict. It's really not relevant until Act 3, so it gets kind of lost earlier.

That said, yes, the game gives us tons of insane mages running wild in the streets. Do they have a point other than to simply be there, someone to fight? Dunno. All it does it make me think every mage in the entire city must be insane, and therefore, I think the Circle should be annulled.

[RangerSG]

TJPags wrote...

You know my thoughts on it, I think.

In brief - DA2 is not actually about the mage/templar conflict. It's really not relevant until Act 3, so it gets kind of lost earlier.

That said, yes, the game gives us tons of insane mages running wild in the streets. Do they have a point other than to simply be there, someone to fight? Dunno. All it does it make me think every mage in the entire city must be insane, and therefore, I think the Circle should be annulled.

DG has as much as admitted they went overboard in their attempt to show the dangers of the Kirkwall Circle. But the intent was always to make Anullment a believable choice, given the situation. And Orsino's Circle is lost, there's no two ways about it, and he wasn't nearly as innocent as he acts.

[Tommyspa]

You have to consider the templar pressure when you debate the mages sanity. And when being locked in prison cells and the constant threat having everything that makes you an individual stripped away from you. Also judging the mages in Kirkwall as being a grand scheme of mage behavior throughout Thedas is not logical either. Consider reading the Enigma of Kirkwall as a basis for Kirkwall's history with Tevinter Magisters and the lengths they went, and it's lasting effect on magic in Kirkwall to those who are susceptible to it.

http://dragonage.wik...gma_of_Kirkwall

[RangerSG]

Tommyspa wrote...

You have to consider the templar pressure when you debate the mages sanity. And when being locked in prison cells and the constant threat having everything that makes you an individual stripped away from you. Also judging the mages in Kirkwall as being a grand scheme of mage behavior throughout Thedas is not logical either. Consider reading the Enigma of Kirkwall as a basis for Kirkwall's history with Tevinter Magisters and the lengths they went, and it's lasting effect on magic in Kirkwall to those who are susceptible to it.

http://dragonage.wik...gma_of_Kirkwall

I don't think any of us are saying there aren't mitigating circumstances or reasons to be sympathetic to the mages. Just that the mages have earned, by the letter of the law, the Right of Anullment, and that Orsino did not help things with his refusal to accept blame even when it was clear.

[TJPags]

Tommyspa wrote...

You have to consider the templar pressure when you debate the mages sanity. And when being locked in prison cells and the constant threat having everything that makes you an individual stripped away from you. Also judging the mages in Kirkwall as being a grand scheme of mage behavior throughout Thedas is not logical either. Consider reading the Enigma of Kirkwall as a basis for Kirkwall's history with Tevinter Magisters and the lengths they went, and it's lasting effect on magic in Kirkwall to those who are susceptible to it.

http://dragonage.wik...gma_of_Kirkwall

Well, yes and no here.

See, there are mages out in the streets of Kirkwall.  I've heard it argued repeatedly that they are apostates, not Circle mages.  Now, I don't know which they are.  But if they are NOT Circle mages, then this templar pessure issue doesn't apply to them.
 
As for actual Circle mages - ones we KNOW are from the Circle, we really see few.  Of those, 2 (Grace and the other one who's name escapes me) came from Starkhaven already blood mages.  Grace's vendetta against Hawke begins before she gets to the Gallows.  Ella and Bethany seem fine.  Karl is tranquil.  2 escapees are nuts, one is normal.  Orsino is  . . .well, Orsino.  So we have 3 normal, 2 nuts, and 1 Orsino.  Actually, we have more normals, since most of those with Grace and Thrask seem normal.  So, while I don't disagree that the templars in Kirkwall - some, at least - are themselves running amok, it's certainly not making a majority of Circle mages nuts.

Maybe it's Kirkwall, what with the thin veil.  Maybe it's coincidence that nut mages tend to gather in Kirkwall.  Either way, most of the nut mages we see are apparently not associated with the Circle, so the templar pessure theory shouldn't apply to them.  If they are Circle mages, well . . . when you have a rabid dog, you put it down, even if you're the one who gave it rabies.

[Amagoi]

I always found it pretty silly how all the mages were insane, even though we were given a lore reason behind it with the Engima. But from what I hear, the majority of people side with mages in Act 3 anyway, so perhaps Bioware just decided the mage side didn't need as much emphasis and got lazy with it.

[IanPolaris]

RangerSG wrote...

I don't think any of us are saying there aren't mitigating circumstances or reasons to be sympathetic to the mages. Just that the mages have earned, by the letter of the law, the Right of Anullment, and that Orsino did not help things with his refusal to accept blame even when it was clear.

Knight-Captain Cullen disagrees with you, and if there is any templar less likely to be "soft" on mages without being clearly clinically insane, I don't know who that would be.  The fact is we see and are only allowed to see a very small and extremely skewed sub-sample of the mages, many of which aren't even under the authority of the circle.  To say that all must die is an overreaction of the most extreme sort especially when the reason for the annulment is a crime that the circle did not commit!

-Polaris

Edit PS: As for "earning" the Right under the "Letter of the Law", per DG, if Knight Commander Meredith woke up and had a bad hair day (which seems to be every day frankly), she could legally order the mages slaughtered just because as long as there is no Grand Cleric to contravene her.  The DAO lore disagrees with this (making the Right a Clerical power not a Templar one) but DG did an ass-pull and retconned it so she does.  Which amounts to mages have no legal rights EVEN TO LIVE which is sort of the point.....

Modifié par IanPolaris, 23 juin 2011 - 01:56 .

[DOYOURLABS]

I think they purposely did that, as a "do you still believe in the ideals of freedom even though you've seen the frequency in which it goes wrong?" kind of thing.

They did way too much of it though, they should have had more mages like Alain. Running from the templars, not trying to tame demons to take over the world.

[DreamerM]

TJPags wrote...

All it does it make me think every mage in the entire city must be insane, and therefore, I think the Circle should be annulled.

Except very few of the insane mages are Circle mages. And the circle mages who ARE insane usally talk about the harsh treatment, torture, and long hours spent locked up in their rooms drugged, not to mention watching people being Made Tranquil for dubious reasons.

It's enough to make anyone desperate.

But yes. Too many blood mages. Way too many. Sheesh, sometimes I wonder if the only reason I was so hard on Jowen in DA:O was he was the first confirmed Blood Mage you could interact with. He looks positively cuddly next to all the blood mages hanging around Kirkwall...

[IanPolaris]

As for Lob's original point, yes, it lazy and bad writing. Even the Devs have all but admitted they went waaay overboard protraying almost all of the mages you meet in DA2 as raving lunatics. My take on it is the Devs wanted more people to side with the Templars and figured the best way to do it was to demonize mages.

-Polaris

[Fidget6]

IanPolaris wrote...

As for Lob's original point, yes, it lazy and bad writing. Even the Devs have all but admitted they went waaay overboard protraying almost all of the mages you meet in DA2 as raving lunatics. My take on it is the Devs wanted more people to side with the Templars and figured the best way to do it was to demonize mages.

-Polaris

Really? I've always felt they wanted us to think that siding with the mages was the "good" thing to do, but also wanted to show there are two sides to every story. They just went overboard with that part and caused a lot of people to despise mages as a result. Also, consider most of our party members are pro-mage. Just Fenris, Carver, and Aveline (who seemed neutral) weren't.

Modifié par Fidget6, 23 juin 2011 - 02:35 .

[TEWR]

yes.



I have rough ideas bouncing around in my head constantly for quests in DA2 that would've made sense and connected to the Mage/Templar debate.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 23 juin 2011 - 03:29 .

[IanPolaris]

Fidget6 wrote...
Really? I've always felt they wanted us to think that siding with the mages was the "good" thing to do, but also wanted to show there are two sides to every story. They just went overboard with that part and caused a lot of people to despise mages as a result. Also, consider most of our party members are pro-mage. Just Fenris, Carver, and Aveline (who seemed neutral) weren't.

Based on DG's comments here and elsewhere, I have concluded that whateve the original intend the Devs of DA want us to hate mages and I've said so before and why many times before (possibly in reaction to the fact that "lazy, ungrateful, and flabby western gamers can't appreciate DG's fine moral point" (OK I am exaggerating but DG did essentially make that charge). 

Also our companions are not particularly pro-mage.  Anders is obviously as is Merrill (also obviously), but no one else is.  The closest would be Isabella who is pro-freedom but hardly pro-mage.  Varric when push comes to shove is inclined to side with the Templars as does Fenris (duh) and Avaline.  Sebastian is also pro-templar.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

Filament wrote...

Sebastian is pro-Chantry in general but he agrees with you about the injustice of Annulment if you side with the mages (and kill Anders).

It is the only time he does though and ONLY after you sided with the mages.  During "Faith" is attitude towards mages is not fit it be printed.  He consistantly blames Mages and Orsino for the problems Kirkwall has.  Listen to him.

-Polaris

[TEWR]

I always thought of Varric as indifferent. While he does say he doesn't like the idea of dangerous people running amok, he also says he's tired of mages and Templars. plus he does say at one point that he has friends in the mages, the templars, the guard, and pretty much everywhere.

[IanPolaris]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I always thought of Varric as indifferent. While he does say he doesn't like the idea of dangerous people running amok, he also says he's tired of mages and Templars. plus he does say at one point that he has friends in the mages, the templars, the guard, and pretty much everywhere.

Varris tries to protray himself as neutral for as long as possible, but in the end he shows his cards.  If you side with the mages, he will wonder if we should be "aiding dangerous people" but if you side with the Templars he says, "protecting others is worth doing".  Pretty clear where Varric stands when the chips are down.

-Polaris

[TEWR]

hmmm... I can't see Varric as being pro-templar even with that. It just doesn't sit well with me. I'm gonna choose to see him as saying "You're all a bunch of sodding idiots."

[tmp7704]

Somewhat from the left field, but... maybe the discomforts associated with being the mage (demons' attempts to possess them and whatever else is there, or simply just whatever it is that makes the mages able to do magic) actually do drive most of the mages insane over time, and that's the reason why there's so many of them in DA2? This thread presumes it's lazy writing and that majority of mages should be perfectly sane, but what if the writing plain portays the things the way they *are*?

Modifié par tmp7704, 23 juin 2011 - 06:25 .

[DKJaigen]

tmp7704 wrote...

Somewhat from the left field, but... maybe the discomforts associated with being the mage (demons' attempts to possess them and whatever else is there, or simply just whatever it is that makes the mages able to do magic) actually do drive most of the mages insane over time, and that's the reason why there's so many of them in DA2? This thread presumes it's lazy writing and that majority of mages should be perfectly sane, but what if the writing plain portays the things the way they *are*?

"are "they in DAO? the answer is no. its just lazy writing. you meet so many idiots in the game (non-ages included) that i just wish i could nuke kirkwall and then burn it fire to be safe. Many things make no damn sense in the game.

[EmperorSahlertz]

The insane mages do however present the dangers magic pose. They are a picture of what any mage might become. They should serve to temper the arguments for mage freedom. And while DA2 didn't present many sane circle mages, or really much of an argument for mages at all, DA:O did just that, so it is rather even now, if you ask me.

[EmperorSahlertz]

DKJaigen wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

Somewhat from the left field, but... maybe the discomforts associated with being the mage (demons' attempts to possess them and whatever else is there, or simply just whatever it is that makes the mages able to do magic) actually do drive most of the mages insane over time, and that's the reason why there's so many of them in DA2? This thread presumes it's lazy writing and that majority of mages should be perfectly sane, but what if the writing plain portays the things the way they *are*?

"are "they in DAO? the answer is no. its just lazy writing. you meet so many idiots in the game (non-ages included) that i just wish i could nuke kirkwall and then burn it fire to be safe. Many things make no damn sense in the game.

Didn't half the Ferelden circle turn into demon worshipping lunatics?