404 réponses à ce sujet

[Ryzaki]

Saving the lives that would've been lost by the mages and templars fighting one another.

And no DG didn't say that. He said in a normal RoA (which Kirkwall RoA WASN'T let's not forget that) it would occur. He very specifically did not mention Kirkwall in that statement. Which could mean it applies but by the same token it might not apply. Cullen might cancel said anullment the second Meredith is dead. There's no way of knowing because the game leaves that out the second Meredith's dead. 

Except that's not the situation Hawke had to deal with. Meredith had all the cards. He had 2 choices, draw the fighting out by siding with the mages or try to get it over quickly as possible.(A third option involving telling f*ck you to both sides would've been nice but we didn't get that) 2 mayhave saved more lives (civilians lives not mage lives) because the influx of demons and abominations would've been gone once the mages were killed.

And I know Meredith caused far more damage than she prevented that's not what I'm arguing. I'm debating the situation Hawke has to deal with not some fairytale scenario that you cook up.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 04 août 2011 - 05:48 .

[nitefyre410]

Rifneno wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Hawke didn't murder any kids. The templars did fine on their own.

It's hard to tell you're actually defending the templars.  And I thank you for that.

Sepewrath wrote...

Well you don't need to take out the Templar's, but they should serve solely as a police force, not prison guards and at a whim, executioners. That last part is probably the worst, the fact that one person has the power to pass judgement on hundreds whenever they feel like it. Its like someone mentioned X-Men, a powerful mutant going crazy could not be stopped by a regular police force. So having things like Sentinels for those situations make sense, but you cant blanket the actions of the few over everyone and have Sentinels putting people in cages.

I'm not familiar with X-Men.  But I don't mean that there shouldn't be some policing of mages.  Certainly there needs to be.  I just say that the Chantry goes way too far.  And in the case of Kirkwall's Order...  well, Nickelback's "Burn It To the Ground" finally has a reason to exist.

 

The Mage  Templar conflict is basical  a mirror of the Mutant/human conflict  matter of fact you can draw many simularities between  characters  in  X men and DA  2.   Anders - Magneto,  Fenris -  Wolverine,  etc etc.  

[GavrielKay]

Ryzaki wrote...

And no DG didn't say that. He said in a normal RoA (which Kirkwall RoA WASN'T let's not forget that) it would occur. He very specifically did not mention Kirkwall in that statement. Which could mean it applies but by the same token it might not apply. Cullen might cancel said anullment the second Meredith is dead. There's no way of knowing because the game leaves that out the second Meredith's dead. 

I am also speaking of the decision we're actually asked to make.  At the time Hawke is supposed to choose, there's no way to know that:

1) Someone will offer to spare a few mages, including possibly Bethany
2) Orsino has decided to play stupid and help the Chantry make its point
3) Meredith will turn on Hawke and finally force Cullen to oppose her.

So the choice you make is to help Meredith and the Templars kill all the mages.

Role playing is fun and it's your Hawke to play.

However, saying that I was creating my own fairy tale while you were metagaming isn't a great argument.

[Sepewrath]

Ryzaki wrote...
Saving the lives that would've been lost by the mages and templars fighting one another.

And no DG didn't say that. He said in a normal RoA (which Kirkwall RoA WASN'T let's not forget that) it would occur. He very specifically did not mention Kirkwall in that statement. Which could mean it applies but by the same token it might not apply. Cullen might cancel said anullment the second Meredith is dead. There's no way of knowing because the game leaves that out the second Meredith's dead.

I don't think you can stop an annulment once its starts, think about if you were a mage and these people were running through the tower, killing everything in a robe, would you just stop and go back to normal if someone said it was over? In the complete chaos of the situation, it would take a long time for word to spread that it is in fact over and the fragile trust between the two groups would be shattered. A Templar couldn't just say "OK its over, go back to your room, bacon and eggs in the morning" That time is over. Once the RoA started, the situation was completely out of control, which is to be expected.

And whether Hawke decided to participate or not, the fight was going to happen, the city would have fallen to hell with or without Hawke's involvement. If Hawke wanted to save people, the best way to do it, would have been to stop the fight as quickly as possible.

[Ryzaki]

GavrielKay wrote...
I am also speaking of the decision we're actually asked to make.  At the time Hawke is supposed to choose, there's no way to know that:

1) Someone will offer to spare a few mages, including possibly Bethany
2) Orsino has decided to play stupid and help the Chantry make its point
3) Meredith will turn on Hawke and finally force Cullen to oppose her.

So the choice you make is to help Meredith and the Templars kill all the mages.

Role playing is fun and it's your Hawke to play.

However, saying that I was creating my own fairy tale while you were metagaming isn't a great argument.

Except I specifically excluded the mages from the "lives saved" count. Try again.   Or better yet keep up with my arguement. 

Siding with the templars saves more civilian (non-mages) lives because the demons and the like tend to go away when there's no mages to possess. (not to mention some mages are summoning them). 

After siding with them Hawke sees that he/she can spare some mages. So he/she does so. The more lives saved the better. 

They *might* be turned tranquil (which really makes little sense given how Meredith is acting.) or they might simply be watched. Hawke's not sure which. 

Meredith then goes bonkers and has to be put down. Cullen is now in command. Not such a stretch that he defintely wouldn't tranquilze the mages especially when he changed his mind about the anullment being correct. And has told Hawke to his face that the Rite is always a last resort. I'm pretty sure he doesn't see those mages who begged for their lives as unsalvageble. 

Sepewrath wrote...
I don't think you can stop an annulment once its starts, think about if you were a mage and these people were running through the tower, killing everything in a robe, would you just stop and go back to normal if someone said it was over? In the complete chaos of the situation, it would take a long time for word to spread that it is in fact over and the fragile trust between the two groups would be shattered. A Templar couldn't just say "OK its over, go back to your room, bacon and eggs in the morning" That time is over. Once the RoA started, the situation was completely out of control, which is to be expected.

And whether Hawke decided to participate or not, the fight was going to happen, the city would have fallen to hell with or without Hawke's involvement. If Hawke wanted to save people, the best way to do it, would have been to stop the fight as quickly as possible.

Uh I'm talking about after all combatants are dead and only the mages who surrendered (and weren't fighting) are left. Not talking about the complete chaos. At the point where Meredith goes bonkers the situation is under control. The mages wouldn't have been able to be made tranquil until after the Right was completed. 

Which is siding with the templars considering Hawke has the backing of an army and doesn't have to hold out and then face another army and the fighting only ends because (again) Meredith goes bonkers. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 04 août 2011 - 06:29 .

[Sepewrath]

Siding with the Templar's wouldn't have ended it any quicker, the mages clearly weren't defenseless, the battle would have dragged on regardless of the side of chose. But the reality is, the mages would be the better choice. Having the Champion on their side, might have saved some from giving in to desperation right away.

On top of that, I would think you would have a better chance of talking down the Templar's, then you would a bunch of scared mages, when you show up backing the people, trying to cut them in half. If you want to cite logic as what governs the choice you make, logic dictates siding with the mages.

[TexasToast712]

 I am not convinced.

[Ryzaki]

Sepewrath wrote...

Siding with the Templar's wouldn't have ended it any quicker, the mages clearly weren't defenseless, the battle would have dragged on regardless of the side of chose. But the reality is, the mages would be the better choice. Having the Champion on their side, might have saved some from giving in to desperation right away.

On top of that, I would think you would have a better chance of talking down the Templar's, then you would a bunch of scared mages, when you show up backing the people, trying to cut them in half. If you want to cite logic as what governs the choice you make, logic dictates siding with the mages.

Siding with the templars wouldn't have ended the battle quicker? Why do you say that? It's clear the only reason most of the mages make it out alive and that they last so long is because Hawke's helping them on the mage ending. 

And...why would you have a better chance taking down a fully trained army equipped to fight mages with a bunch of scared...mages who can't fight other than using magic than taking out mages with a fully trained army equipped to fight them and make their powers worthless? That doesn't even make any sense. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 04 août 2011 - 07:31 .

[Sepewrath]

Because that fully trained army is not invincible and rooms full of abominations, demons and blood mages would tear them apart, just like they did in Ferelden. And when their done with the Templar's who do you think is next? Everyone in the city, the point is to avoid that outcome, not increase the chances of that happening. The more pressure you put on them, the more likely they are to turn to blood magic and such. That's why it makes sense.

[Ryzaki]

Sepewrath wrote...

Because that fully trained army is not invincible and rooms full of abominations, demons and blood mages would tear them apart, just like they did in Ferelden. And when their done with the Templar's who do you think is next? Everyone in the city, the point is to avoid that outcome, not increase the chances of that happening. The more pressure you put on them, the more likely they are to turn to blood magic and such. That's why it makes sense.

Except for the part where they're trained to deal with thatright? That must've gone completely unnoticed.  And the demons bloodmages and abominations in Fereldan only tore the templars apart because it came as a suprise. And even then those mages would've been torn apart the second the templars got leave to use the RoA. Or did you forget the part where the anullment was never called? <_< The mages are powerful sure, but they're gonna buckle under the weight of a highly trained army that has them backed into a corner. (as seen in DA2). The bloodmages and abominations aren't tearing the templars apart. Some of them fall to it, just like some of the mages fall to the templars. Annullments aren't some new things. Each one was successfull no bloodmages managed to survive to run rampant. So yes I'd go with the highly trained army that has proven itself capable of anulling the circle time and time again. 

Not to mention any remnants of bloodmages can be taken out by Hawke. 

So no it doesn't make sense to side with the mages if you want it over with as soon as possible. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 04 août 2011 - 08:03 .

[Ryzaki]

...blargh let me see my post damnit.

[Sepewrath]

They are trained for dealing with surprises, blood mages and abominations aren't going to announce their intentions I would believe. So that's not an excuse, they are suppose to be capable of dealing with these things, problem is like I said, they cant deal with anything thrown at them.

And did you forget the reason the annulment wasn't called in Ferelden is because they couldn't have possibly done it without massive reinforcements because they couldn't handle all the demons, abominations and blood mages. They sealed the tower, because they could not stop them, this situation isn't any different, remember what Gregiore said about how they were ready for one or two, but not the flood of abominations; throw a wall of abominations at Templar's and I don't like their chances. These are the things that one can destroy a town, put 10 in a room and you got problems.

[Ryzaki]

Sepewrath wrote...

They are trained for dealing with surprises, blood mages and abominations aren't going to announce their intentions I would believe. So that's not an excuse, they are suppose to be capable of dealing with these things, problem is like I said, they cant deal with anything thrown at them.

And did you forget the reason the annulment wasn't called in Ferelden is because they couldn't have possibly done it without massive reinforcements because they couldn't handle all the demons, abominations and blood mages. They sealed the tower, because they could not stop them, this situation isn't any different, remember what Gregiore said about how they were ready for one or two, but not the flood of abominations; throw a wall of abominations at Templar's and I don't like their chances. These are the things that one can destroy a town, put 10 in a room and you got problems.

Right let's ignore the game evidence because it doesn't fit your view eh? 

And it wasn't just that. You cannot do an anullment without the Divine's/Grand Cleric's approval. Meredith was only allowed to do it because with Elthina's death the power fell to her. That's why the letter was sent to Denerim and they were waiting for people to pay attention to them. Let's not forget that unlike Kirkwall Fereldan's circle wasn't locked down utterly and their KC wasn't waiting for any excuse to use the RoA and Orsino hadn't been planning his rebellion for months if not years. The Fereldan circle sealed the tower because they had no authority to purge it and wanted to make sure nothing could get out. One or two wouldn't be enough for an annullment (at least I would guess.) And you honestly believe every single mage is gonna turn into an abomination? (most of them tended to but again Hawke took them out quickly enough). And the mage's power didn't affect anyone other than the templars and mages since they never was able to make it out of the tower. Huh. Can't be that inferior to mages if they managed to keep rampaging bloodmages and abominations under lock and key. "We were prepared for maybe one or two abominations. But not the horde that fell upon us." wheres Meredith is anticipating that horde. But let's ignore the obvious differences in KC attitudes as well. Pretty sure Meredith also has a lot more templars..but none of that matters over the overwhelming power of the mages. Nevermind that they get defeated by those templars that are weaker than them unless Hawke's protagonist powers come to the rescue. 

That said both mages and templars are shown as laughably incompetent. Mages can't use enough sense to use a funnel to their advantage. And the precident is on the side of the templars. If annullments were so straining on their numbers I'm pretty sure they wouldn't do them as often. But by all means keep pretending the mages would curbstomp the templars even though the reverse is what happened in Kirkwall and every other RoA.  Heck even in Origins if the Warden chooses to anull the circle it's done with little fuss. 

That said. I'm tired. Believe what you will. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 04 août 2011 - 09:03 .

[jamesp81]

Something occurred to me.

The devs, I think, were going for a situation where there was no right or wrong choice, only a difficult one.  Working from modern day value systems, I can say they succeeded.  The endeavor utterly failed where I'm concerned, however, as I don't subscribe to common modern day value systems.  In this storyline, there very much is a right and wrong choice.

Anyone who's read my posts on this site might've seen me mention at some point that I feel I was 'born in the wrong century'.  This game, of all things, sort of confirms that.

[GavrielKay]

Ryzaki wrote...

GavrielKay wrote...
I am also speaking of the decision we're actually asked to make.  At the time Hawke is supposed to choose, there's no way to know that:

1) Someone will offer to spare a few mages, including possibly Bethany
2) Orsino has decided to play stupid and help the Chantry make its point
3) Meredith will turn on Hawke and finally force Cullen to oppose her.

So the choice you make is to help Meredith and the Templars kill all the mages.

Role playing is fun and it's your Hawke to play.

However, saying that I was creating my own fairy tale while you were metagaming isn't a great argument.

Except I specifically excluded the mages from the "lives saved" count. Try again.   Or better yet keep up with my arguement. 

Siding with the templars saves more civilian (non-mages) lives because the demons and the like tend to go away when there's no mages to possess. (not to mention some mages are summoning them). 

After siding with them Hawke sees that he/she can spare some mages. So he/she does so. The more lives saved the better. 

They *might* be turned tranquil (which really makes little sense given how Meredith is acting.) or they might simply be watched. Hawke's not sure which. 

Meredith then goes bonkers and has to be put down. Cullen is now in command. Not such a stretch that he defintely wouldn't tranquilze the mages especially when he changed his mind about the anullment being correct. And has told Hawke to his face that the Rite is always a last resort. I'm pretty sure he doesn't see those mages who begged for their lives as unsalvageble. 

So you're still metagaming.

My point is that when Hawke is asked to either oppose or assist in the RoA there is no evidence that more lives will be saved.  No evidence that any mages will be spared.  No evidence that Meredith will reveal herself to be truly crazed and the Templars will revolt.  The Gallows is an isolated area and fighting there is unlikely to injure civilians unless they purposely go there.

So Hawke's choices are to support a bloodthirsty zealot or oppose her.  Meredith is so far in the wrong on this that my Hawke doesn't trust anything she says.  Her motives are lousy and her mental state is questionable and I simply can't support anything she does at that point.  If a few extra townsfolk pay the price for having supported the Chantry and this madwoman all this time then so be it.

[Ryzaki]

DP

Modifié par Ryzaki, 04 août 2011 - 07:13 .

[Ryzaki]

Ryzaki wrote...

GavrielKay wrote...
I am also speaking of the decision we're actually asked to make.  At the time Hawke is supposed to choose, there's no way to know that:

1) Someone will offer to spare a few mages, including possibly Bethany
2) Orsino has decided to play stupid and help the Chantry make its point
3) Meredith will turn on Hawke and finally force Cullen to oppose her.

So the choice you make is to help Meredith and the Templars kill all the mages.

Role playing is fun and it's your Hawke to play.

However, saying that I was creating my own fairy tale while you were metagaming isn't a great argument.

Except I specifically excluded the mages from the "lives saved" count. Try again.   Or better yet keep up with my arguement. 

Siding with the templars saves more civilian (non-mages) lives because the demons and the like tend to go away when there's no mages to possess. (not to mention some mages are summoning them). The original belief of my Hawke. Notice that he's not thinking of saving any mages. 

After siding with them Hawke sees that he/she can spare some mages. So he/she does so. The more lives saved the better.  AFTER SIDING WITH THEM it's not difficult to understand. 

They *might* be turned tranquil (which really makes little sense given how Meredith is acting.) or they might simply be watched. Hawke's not sure which. They might be turned he doens't know. He knows they're still alive for the moment. 

Meredith then goes bonkers and has to be put down. Cullen is now in command. Not such a stretch that he defintely wouldn't tranquilze the mages especially when he changed his mind about the anullment being correct. And has told Hawke to his face that the Rite is always a last resort. I'm pretty sure he doesn't see those mages who begged for their lives as unsalvageble. - This is after Meredith goes bonkers. So he's gonna know she goes bonkers because SHE DOES

Since you obviously don't want to bother reading I'll simplify it. 

I said CIVILIAN Lives. I was not including mages in the original statement.  As time went on my Hawke's view changed. Thus the changing lines. I suppose "after siding with them" is too hard to understand? Or "then Meredith goes bonkers." or do you not know the words "after" and "then" usually signify an action happened you know...later on than the original statement? 

The mages are causing demons to run rampant trying to get to them. Or did you miss Lowtown/The Docks and all the demons and dead civilian bodies? Hm? And Hawke's well aware of mage summoning demons when they're in danger because it's happened the entire time he's at Kirkwall. 

All the mages aren't in the gallows which you'd know if you played the games. Hawke has to kill several mages on his way *to* the gallows. Most mages were locked in the gallows though not all. 

As I said before try again. 

And Meredith being a madwoman and...? That has nothing to do with siding with her ending the battle quicker. She's attacking the mages regardless. If Hawke defends them he/she is now fighting an army (and slowing them down but they're still advancing). If Hawke atacks with them they're an overwhelming force. 

It's not complicated. It has nothing to do with how bloodthristy Meredith is so stop trying to change the subject. It would be no different than if Hawke was sided with the Qunari. Hawke could choose to fight the templars and mages (a much larger force) along side the Qunari (a much much smaller force albeit more disciplined than the mages) he'd lose. But if the Qunari had Hawke on their side they would've held out a hell of a lot longer. It's that simple. And if you choose to misunderstand this I'm done because this isn't complicated and has no emotional "OMG she's killing innocents!" to make it invalid. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 04 août 2011 - 07:15 .

[GavrielKay]

Ryzaki wrote...
It's not complicated. It has nothing to do with how bloodthristy Meredith is so stop trying to change the subject.

I'm not interested in a combatative debate here.  You said you point and I said mine.  I was explaining how me and my Hawke thought of the situation.  That happens to be the subject, so I didn't change anything.

I said that you played your Hawke how you wanted to, fine. 

My Hawke doesn't trust that b*tch Meredith in any matter at all.  And even less so where the lives of mages are concerned.  My Hawke thinks supporting Meredith in anything she wants to do is evil and she won't abide by it.  My Hawke thinks that if a few extra civilians die because Meredith is a raving lunatic then so be it. My Hawke thinks any extra deaths are on the heads of Meredith, her Templars and the Chantry in general.  My Hawke won't participate in any RoA for any reason ever.  My Hawke (and I, for that matter) feel the RoA is a crime against humanity and a huge piece of evidence of the utter corruption that is the Chanty and their policies regarding mages.

Your Hawke doesn't.  I don't care. 

But you using metagaming knowledge to make it seem different AT THE TIME your Hawke has to decide is a bad debating tactic.

[Rahelron]

Night Prowler76 wrote...

You still end up having to dice up the leader of the Templars and Mages, seems inconsequential to me.

This deserves a quote.

[Ryzaki]

GavrielKay wrote...
But you using metagaming knowledge to make it seem different AT THE TIME your Hawke has to decide is a bad debating tactic.

Except of course I'm not using metagaming. You keep using that word. I don't think you know what it means. 

Saying how my Hawke's viewpoint changed is a bad debating tactic?  Riight.

Each of those points (that you keep ignoring) are based off information that my Hawke has at the time. That's not metagaming. You may not like the conclusions he reached but they're information that Hawke (and not me) will always have. No metagaming necessary. Stop using terms if you don't understand them. 

Metagaming (in RPGs specifically): In general, it refers to any gaps between player knowledge and character knowledge which the player acts upon.

So let's see...Mages turning to demons and abominations and them rampaging in the streets? ...Huh has happened on SEVERAL occassions before the decision. Hawke is well aware that is a likely occurance. All the mages aren't in the gallows? Well no sh*t considering there's a small group right in front of his face when he makes the decision. After siding with the templars the mages beg to have their lives spared and Cullen backs him up...huh I guess it's somehow unknown to Hawke that he can spare those lives then eh? Meredith shoving her lyrium sword in his face and Cullen backing him up...I guess it's unknown to Hawke that at that moment Cullen takes over the RoA since he was the second in command even though Cullen takes care to tell her he's relieving her o command? Riiiight. 

None of what you quoted has said gaps. So stop trying to throw around metagaming when it's not occuring. You not liking an argument doesn't make it metagaming. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 04 août 2011 - 08:38 .

[TEWR]

you could not change my mind.



because I always side with the mages. Templars can go to hell. They're necessary yes, but they don't need to be dictators to do their job.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 04 août 2011 - 08:30 .

[naledgeborn]

I think all mages should be isolationists in the traditional, fantastical sense. But then half the fun would be gone. I also think it's implied by Sandal in an easter egg that everybody used to have magic and that it's going to happen again. This could be the 'big' change Morrigan refers to in Witch Hunt.

[DarkDragon777]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

you could not change my mind.



because I always side with the mages. Templars can go to hell. They're necessary yes, but they don't need to be dictators to do their job.

Yes, they do. When you're dealing with untrusthworthy, unstable beings, a stable order is necessary.

[dragonflight288]

And when that stable order becomes corrupt and invites some pretty sadistic people because it gives them power over others who can't resist, and if they do are punished?

Codex Entry: Templars

Often portrayed as stoic and grim, the Order of Templars was created as the martial arm of the Chantry. Armed with the ability to dispel and resist magic in addition to their formidable combat talents, the templars are uniquely qualified to act as both a foil for apostates-mages who refuse to submit to the authority of the Circle-and a first line of defense against the dark powers of blood mages and abominations.

While mages often resent the templars as symbols of the Chantry's control over magic, the people of Thedas see them as saviors and holy warriors, champions of all that is good, armed with piety enough to protect the world from the ravages of foul magic. In reality, the Chantry's militant arm looks first for skilled warriors with unshakable faith in the Maker, with a flawless moral center as a secondary concern. Templars must carry out their duty with an emotional distance, and the Order of Templars prefers soldiers with religious fervor and absolute loyalty over paragons of virtue who might question orders when it comes time to make difficult choices.

The templars' power derives from the substance lyrium, a mineral believed to be the raw element of creation. While mages use lyrium in their arcane spells and rituals, templars ingest the primordial mineral to enhance their abilities to resist and dispel magic. Lyrium use is regulated by the Chantry, but some templars suffer from lyrium addiction, the effects of which include paranoia, obsession, and dementia. Templars knowingly submit themselves to this "treatment" in the service of the Order and the Maker.

It is this sense of ruthless piety that most frightens mages when they draw the templars' attention: When the templars are sent to eliminate a possible blood mage, there is no reasoning with them, and if the templars are prepared, the mage's magic is all but useless. Driven by their faith, the templars are one of the most feared and respected forces in Thedas.

--From Patterns Within Form, by Halden, First Enchanter of Starkhaven, 8:80 Blessed.

Please look at the bolded part and especially the underlined part. The Chantry doesn't care about the intelligence or morality of its templars. Only in their military might and belief in the maker.

Modifié par dragonflight288, 04 août 2011 - 08:50 .

[Rifneno]

Ryzaki wrote...

Except of course I'm not using metagaming. You keep using that word. I don't think you know what it means.

Funny, I thought the same thing when you said "civilian."

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Templars can go to hell.

How did Shepard put it?  "Go to hell.  I'll send you there myself." I think? 

DarkDragon777 wrote...

Yes, they do. When you're dealing with untrusthworthy, unstable beings, a stable order is necessary.

Were you being ironic, or did you not realize that completely describes the templars as well?