443 réponses à ce sujet

[WhiteKnyght]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Then mages would be prisoners. I don't think they are all dangerous, but I'm glad they are behind bars.

Doubt you would think that way if you were a mage.  Being a mage isn't even a choice, either you are a mage or you are not.

True, you don't see how bad it really is until you or someone you love experiences it firsthand. Its easy to talk and spout sanctimonies when its not you that its happening to.

[TJPags]

Sharn01 wrote...

TJPags wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

I think there's a saying about it only taking 1 stupid person to start a war in this case Anders.

In this case you'd be wrong.  It took two.  Anders and Meredith.  If Meredith hadn't gone off the deep end and told the Templars to impose martial law and WAIT for word from the Divine, none of this had to happen.  IMHO that's what a sane KC would have done.  Lock down the mages and the city and await further instructions since there was no immediate emergency at the time aside from a search and rescue within the Cathedral.

-Polaris

Actually, didn't Meredith at some point - might even have been in that finale - want to order the mages into house arrest and interrogate them?  And Orsino refused her?  Wasn't that what prompted her to go to Elthina just before Anders went all bomby?

So, yea, she tried that.  Had, in fact, tried it most of DA2.  And has been called insane for it.

Actually no, it was Orsino who suggested putting all the mages under house arrest to Merideth, saying they would comply willingly and he would help however she wished, she refused him and continued the RoA.

I remember it backwards.  I suppose I could be wrong, or thinking of a different section - it's been a long while since I bothered to play this POS game - but I'll defer to your memory.

I still feel that Kirkwall had a mage problem, and a blood mage problem - two separate things, both poblems.  Mage undergrounds being assisted by apostates, blood mages everywhere you turn.  To me, this justified the RoA.

I did side with the mages in my completed game, on the same thought so many here trumpet - the Circle mages didn't blow up the Chantry.  Yet in defending the mages, I ran into and had to kill more blood mages and abominations than I did templars, it seemed.  I really feel like I got duped when I accepted that argument.

[Sharn01]

TJPags wrote...

Sharn01 wrote...

TJPags wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

I think there's a saying about it only taking 1 stupid person to start a war in this case Anders.

In this case you'd be wrong.  It took two.  Anders and Meredith.  If Meredith hadn't gone off the deep end and told the Templars to impose martial law and WAIT for word from the Divine, none of this had to happen.  IMHO that's what a sane KC would have done.  Lock down the mages and the city and await further instructions since there was no immediate emergency at the time aside from a search and rescue within the Cathedral.

-Polaris

Actually, didn't Meredith at some point - might even have been in that finale - want to order the mages into house arrest and interrogate them?  And Orsino refused her?  Wasn't that what prompted her to go to Elthina just before Anders went all bomby?

So, yea, she tried that.  Had, in fact, tried it most of DA2.  And has been called insane for it.

Actually no, it was Orsino who suggested putting all the mages under house arrest to Merideth, saying they would comply willingly and he would help however she wished, she refused him and continued the RoA.

I remember it backwards.  I suppose I could be wrong, or thinking of a different section - it's been a long while since I bothered to play this POS game - but I'll defer to your memory.

I still feel that Kirkwall had a mage problem, and a blood mage problem - two separate things, both poblems.  Mage undergrounds being assisted by apostates, blood mages everywhere you turn.  To me, this justified the RoA.

I did side with the mages in my completed game, on the same thought so many here trumpet - the Circle mages didn't blow up the Chantry.  Yet in defending the mages, I ran into and had to kill more blood mages and abominations than I did templars, it seemed.  I really feel like I got duped when I accepted that argument.

Its not your fault for feeling that way, Gaider has even said they went way over top with the evil mage thing so that siding with them at the end of the game would not be the clearly good choice to 99% of the players.

[WhiteKnyght]

TJPags wrote...

Sharn01 wrote...

TJPags wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

I think there's a saying about it only taking 1 stupid person to start a war in this case Anders.

In this case you'd be wrong.  It took two.  Anders and Meredith.  If Meredith hadn't gone off the deep end and told the Templars to impose martial law and WAIT for word from the Divine, none of this had to happen.  IMHO that's what a sane KC would have done.  Lock down the mages and the city and await further instructions since there was no immediate emergency at the time aside from a search and rescue within the Cathedral.

-Polaris

Actually, didn't Meredith at some point - might even have been in that finale - want to order the mages into house arrest and interrogate them?  And Orsino refused her?  Wasn't that what prompted her to go to Elthina just before Anders went all bomby?

So, yea, she tried that.  Had, in fact, tried it most of DA2.  And has been called insane for it.

Actually no, it was Orsino who suggested putting all the mages under house arrest to Merideth, saying they would comply willingly and he would help however she wished, she refused him and continued the RoA.

I remember it backwards.  I suppose I could be wrong, or thinking of a different section - it's been a long while since I bothered to play this POS game - but I'll defer to your memory.

I still feel that Kirkwall had a mage problem, and a blood mage problem - two separate things, both poblems.  Mage undergrounds being assisted by apostates, blood mages everywhere you turn.  To me, this justified the RoA.

I did side with the mages in my completed game, on the same thought so many here trumpet - the Circle mages didn't blow up the Chantry.  Yet in defending the mages, I ran into and had to kill more blood mages and abominations than I did templars, it seemed.  I really feel like I got duped when I accepted that argument.

Meredith wanted to put all the mages under house arrest and search their belongings to see if they were blood mages. Orsino went to talk to the Grand Cleric to cool Meredith down but Anders blew up the Chantry and the Right was invoked. A little bit later back at the Gallows Orsino offered a comrpromise. He would agree to the house arrest and even help her search if she called off the right and stopped the bloodshed. She refused and continued the slaughter. She'll even go nuts and get suspicious of Hawke even when he helps her.

[Dave of Canada]

Edit: or that ^

TJPags wrote...

Actually, didn't Meredith at some point - might even have been in that finale - want to order the mages into house arrest and interrogate them?  And Orsino refused her?  Wasn't that what prompted her to go to Elthina just before Anders went all bomby?

So, yea, she tried that.  Had, in fact, tried it most of DA2.  And has been called insane for it.

At the start of Act 3: She locked all mages in their rooms and wanted her Templar to search through the rooms and look for signs of evidence of blood magic, which Orsino refused to let the templars search the Gallows and said she'd find evidence that wasn't there to back up her claims.

At the end of Act 3: Orsino storms off because of a continuation of the argument, I think. Willing to drag Elthina into the argument and have her tell Meredith to not search the Gallows. Which is where the explosion occurs and Orsino runs back to the Gallows, fighting until he's cornered by the Templar and then offering Meredith permission to look for her signs of blood magic in each room.

Meredith refuses and essentially says it's too late and Orsino should prepare.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 08 août 2011 - 04:16 .

[TJPags]

Sharn01 wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Sharn01 wrote...

TJPags wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

I think there's a saying about it only taking 1 stupid person to start a war in this case Anders.

In this case you'd be wrong.  It took two.  Anders and Meredith.  If Meredith hadn't gone off the deep end and told the Templars to impose martial law and WAIT for word from the Divine, none of this had to happen.  IMHO that's what a sane KC would have done.  Lock down the mages and the city and await further instructions since there was no immediate emergency at the time aside from a search and rescue within the Cathedral.

-Polaris

Actually, didn't Meredith at some point - might even have been in that finale - want to order the mages into house arrest and interrogate them?  And Orsino refused her?  Wasn't that what prompted her to go to Elthina just before Anders went all bomby?

So, yea, she tried that.  Had, in fact, tried it most of DA2.  And has been called insane for it.

Actually no, it was Orsino who suggested putting all the mages under house arrest to Merideth, saying they would comply willingly and he would help however she wished, she refused him and continued the RoA.

I remember it backwards.  I suppose I could be wrong, or thinking of a different section - it's been a long while since I bothered to play this POS game - but I'll defer to your memory.

I still feel that Kirkwall had a mage problem, and a blood mage problem - two separate things, both poblems.  Mage undergrounds being assisted by apostates, blood mages everywhere you turn.  To me, this justified the RoA.

I did side with the mages in my completed game, on the same thought so many here trumpet - the Circle mages didn't blow up the Chantry.  Yet in defending the mages, I ran into and had to kill more blood mages and abominations than I did templars, it seemed.  I really feel like I got duped when I accepted that argument.

Its not your fault for feeling that way, Gaider has even said they went way over top with the evil mage thing so that siding with them at the end of the game would not be the clearly good choice to 99% of the players.

Oh, I read that quote.  I think it was dumb, actually - but not for the reason many here do.

It was a reaction to people in overwhelming numbers choosing to save the mages during Broken Circle in DAO.  The thing was, in that quest, you had to enter the tower anyway.  The choice was, kill every mage AND every abomination, or just kill the abominations.  Seems a no-brainer to try to save people.  Especially since broken Circle is kind of set up to be one of the first quests you do, when you hardly have any lore or mage interaction yet - unless you played a mage origin,  And even then, having played a mage origin, it seems to lend itself even more to trying to save people.

So, like a lot in DA2, they over-reacted and put blood mages behind every bush and under every rock, to show how evil they are.  But I don't compare one game to the other that way.  I compare one environment to the other.  I see renegade mages roaming the streets, mages escaping the tower at whim, blood mages destroying people left and right in DA2, while in DAO, I saw mages overrun by an invasion occassioned by a small renegade group.

I save one, I kill the other.  If that's playing into BW's hands, so be it.  I can't sit and ignore what I see in some kind of outrage that the deck was stacked intentionally.  I play the hand I'm dealt.

[TJPags]

The Grey Nayr wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Sharn01 wrote...

TJPags wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

I think there's a saying about it only taking 1 stupid person to start a war in this case Anders.

In this case you'd be wrong.  It took two.  Anders and Meredith.  If Meredith hadn't gone off the deep end and told the Templars to impose martial law and WAIT for word from the Divine, none of this had to happen.  IMHO that's what a sane KC would have done.  Lock down the mages and the city and await further instructions since there was no immediate emergency at the time aside from a search and rescue within the Cathedral.

-Polaris

Actually, didn't Meredith at some point - might even have been in that finale - want to order the mages into house arrest and interrogate them?  And Orsino refused her?  Wasn't that what prompted her to go to Elthina just before Anders went all bomby?

So, yea, she tried that.  Had, in fact, tried it most of DA2.  And has been called insane for it.

Actually no, it was Orsino who suggested putting all the mages under house arrest to Merideth, saying they would comply willingly and he would help however she wished, she refused him and continued the RoA.

I remember it backwards.  I suppose I could be wrong, or thinking of a different section - it's been a long while since I bothered to play this POS game - but I'll defer to your memory.

I still feel that Kirkwall had a mage problem, and a blood mage problem - two separate things, both poblems.  Mage undergrounds being assisted by apostates, blood mages everywhere you turn.  To me, this justified the RoA.

I did side with the mages in my completed game, on the same thought so many here trumpet - the Circle mages didn't blow up the Chantry.  Yet in defending the mages, I ran into and had to kill more blood mages and abominations than I did templars, it seemed.  I really feel like I got duped when I accepted that argument.

Meredith wanted to put all the mages under house arrest and search their belongings to see if they were blood mages. Orsino went to talk to the Grand Cleric to cool Meredith down but Anders blew up the Chantry and the Right was invoked. A little bit later back at the Gallows Orsino offered a comrpromise. He would agree to the house arrest and even help her search if she called off the right and stopped the bloodshed. She refused and continued the slaughter. She'll even go nuts and get suspicious of Hawke even when he helps her.

I thought I remembered it like that.   Thank you.

And with that expansion of my memory, let me add that Orsino saying Meredith would find evidence that wasn't there, given his relationship with the mass murderer and his Harvester act, makes me laugh.  His capitulation when cornered is laughable to me, as well.  As Dave of Canada just put it, it was too little, too late.
 
As I said, I really felt duped when I sided with the mages, only to have Orsino go Harvester and have to fight abominations and blood mages around every corner.
 
Sorry, folks, Meredith was right - the Kirkwall Circle was a lost cause, and needed to be anulled.

[dragonflight288]

Hmmm. Let me reiterate the whole scene before the chantry goes up in smoke.

Hawke receives a message to meet Orsino at the Gallows. Upon arriving there, we hear him and Meredith had another argument so Orsino thought to turn to the Grand Cleric to mediate.

We show up at the chantry and Meredith is demanding to search the tower (we find evidence later she was right, but at the time she had none). Orsino accuses her of seeing threats that aren't there and asks when she'll stop searching for theats.

She answers by saying she'll only stop when there are none left. Considering her paranoia, that essentially meant never. Orsino knew she was paranoid and pretty much said "Enough arguing", then started heading up the stairs to talk to Elthina. Meredith forcibly grabs him and demands him to not involve her grace. In my opinion, she looked ready to attack Orsino at that moment.

Now at this point in time, what we do know is that Meredith has actually been trying to get the Right of Annulment for some time. When Elthina said no, Meredith basically ignored the answer and decided to go over the Grand Cleric's head. She petitioned the Divine, completely unable to accept Elthina's response.

Now doing Sebastian's quests, we know that Elthina wants us to outright lie to Leliana and the Divine about how the situation in Kirkwall really is because she is desperately trying to avoid war.

In my opinion, Meredith knew that Elthina would order her to stand down...maybe even remove her from office because she went over Elthina's head.

Then along came an Anders/Justice abomination and BOOOM!!! No more Chantry. Legally, Meredith ordered the Right of Annulment despite Anders turning himself in.

Sebastian himself says that the Circle wasn't responsible.

But no...Meredith has been looking for an excuse to annul the circle. And so she takes it now that she can legally call it.

That about sums it all up.

[IanPolaris]

Eseentially Meredith wanted and was desperately eager (sick puppy but I digress) to slaughter all circle mages no matter what. She wanted any excuse no matter how thin.

Hard to see that as anything OTHER than evil.

-Polaris

Modifié par IanPolaris, 08 août 2011 - 05:00 .

[nitefyre410]

So in the end a mage with a paper cut - given Meredith state of mind would have set her off.

[IanPolaris]

nitefyre410 wrote...

So in the end a mage with a paper cut - given Meredith state of mind would have set her off.

Pretty much.

-Polaris

[Rifneno]

TJPags wrote...

And with that expansion of my memory, let me add that Orsino saying Meredith would find evidence that wasn't there, given his relationship with the mass murderer and his Harvester act, makes me laugh.

I can understand not trusting Orsino. I don't understand trusting Meredith, however. She's completely nuts. If Hawke supports her totally and destroys Thrask's conspiracy to overthrow her, she'll accuse Hawke of being a blood mage thrall if s/he doesn't lie and say Orsino was a part of it. How can you place any trust in her about evidence of wrongdoing?

Of course, there's also the fact she's being controlled by an ancient malevolent force we still don't understand.

Sorry, folks, Meredith was right - the Kirkwall Circle was a lost cause, and needed to be anulled.

Impossible to say. The mages fought outside the Gallows were acting illegally already; law-abiding mages wouldn't be out there to leave an impression on the player. That many of them turned into abominations when they were being systematically slaughtered means nothing because it's a reaction to a unique situation that would make just about anyone crack like an egg.

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

Darius Vir wrote...


What you say actually makes me wonder.  I think based on what we've seen, the Chantry- and I mean those that actually have a great deal of sayso, like the Divine and the Seekers- are a horrid mix of entities that truly believe the terrible things they preach are true, and those who know full well that it's NOT and yet pimp them for institutional gain.   And, of course, those who mix the two in a self-serving cognitive dissonance.  

It's all awful stuff, imo, and personally would still consider it an evil organization. 

perhaps the difference is my definition of "evil". I definie "evil" as someone who conciously causes pain, suffering, destruction, or strife to others for no real purpose other than petty, small minded gains, or for sadistic pleasure. An "evil" person is pretty much just a deranged sociopath on the loose. This description does not fit the Chantry, at least in my opinion. The Chantry has inflicted tons of misery and suffering on many groups (the elves, the mages, the Rivani, or just about anyone on the recieving end of an Exalted March). But the Chantry as an organization did not do so for the lulz, or because it wants to take over the world and suffer. It actually believes itself a force of good, and that those who refuse the Chant or the Chantry are misguided souls who face eternal damnation.

This naturally does not excuse the Chantry in my eyes. However, my opinion, it does not meet my definiton of "evil" as an organization. Now when discussing individual members of the Chantry, there are some who I consider "evil". There are a number of templars I saw in game who were clearly psychpaths who enjoyed torturning and abusing mages or anyone under their supervision because they enjoy doing so for their own personal, demented gratification. But I do not like applying moral labels to organizations as a whole. Like Natheniel, I am not a fan of oversimplifications.

the danger of the Chantry is not that it is "evil". An "evil" organization would be so very easy to bring down, because "evil" is a pretty simple minded concept. What makes the Chantry dangerous is that it is an organization riddled with fanatical superstitous fools that wields the power to spread and enforce its terminal idocy on the world. And the whole time, they actually believe they are doing everyonea favor by doing so.

The Chantry is not dangerous or undesirable because it is "evil", and frankly, such terms as good and evil can't be realistically applied in the real world. They are ideals. But like isabella said, ideals don't quite work the same in the real world. The Chantry rules by delusion and irrational belief, which makes it even more dangerous than if everyone in the organization were "evil".

[Darius Vir]

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

perhaps the difference is my definition of "evil". I definie "evil" as someone who conciously causes pain, suffering, destruction, or strife to others for no real purpose other than petty, small minded gains, or for sadistic pleasure. An "evil" person is pretty much just a deranged sociopath on the loose. This description does not fit the Chantry, at least in my opinion. The Chantry has inflicted tons of misery and suffering on many groups (the elves, the mages, the Rivani, or just about anyone on the recieving end of an Exalted March). But the Chantry as an organization did not do so for the lulz, or because it wants to take over the world and suffer. It actually believes itself a force of good, and that those who refuse the Chant or the Chantry are misguided souls who face eternal damnation.

This naturally does not excuse the Chantry in my eyes. However, my opinion, it does not meet my definiton of "evil" as an organization. Now when discussing individual members of the Chantry, there are some who I consider "evil". There are a number of templars I saw in game who were clearly psychpaths who enjoyed torturning and abusing mages or anyone under their supervision because they enjoy doing so for their own personal, demented gratification. But I do not like applying moral labels to organizations as a whole. Like Natheniel, I am not a fan of oversimplifications.

the danger of the Chantry is not that it is "evil". An "evil" organization would be so very easy to bring down, because "evil" is a pretty simple minded concept. What makes the Chantry dangerous is that it is an organization riddled with fanatical superstitous fools that wields the power to spread and enforce its terminal idocy on the world. And the whole time, they actually believe they are doing everyonea favor by doing so.

The Chantry is not dangerous or undesirable because it is "evil", and frankly, such terms as good and evil can't be realistically applied in the real world. They are ideals. But like isabella said, ideals don't quite work the same in the real world. The Chantry rules by delusion and irrational belief, which makes it even more dangerous than if everyone in the organization were "evil".

Fair enough.  I think we're calling something by different names, but still seeing the exact same thing in the end. 

The Chantry is, indeed, incredibly dangerous precisely because it acts as you described above.

[GavrielKay]

TJPags wrote...

The thing was, in that quest, you had to enter the tower anyway.  The choice was, kill every mage AND every abomination, or just kill the abominations.  Seems a no-brainer to try to save people.

Exactly.  DAO allowed you to go in and kill all the nasties, or go in and kill EVERYONE.  That they were in any way miffed that "kill the nasties" was the overwhelming choice is just odd.  Given there was never any downside to it, it was the obvious choice.  Were they hoping that more players would be psychotic?

I think they could have showcased the dangers of mages using more situations like Connor, rather than paint the streets red with blood mages and expect that to seem realistic.

[GavrielKay]

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

This description does not fit the Chantry, at least in my opinion. The Chantry has inflicted tons of misery and suffering on many groups (the elves, the mages, the Rivani, or just about anyone on the recieving end of an Exalted March). But the Chantry as an organization did not do so for the lulz, or because it wants to take over the world and suffer. It actually believes itself a force of good, and that those who refuse the Chant or the Chantry are misguided souls who face eternal damnation.

You had a well written post, but for myself I disagree on this point.  I think committing atrocities in the name of "good" or being so self righteous that you honestly believe it is better to force others to submit to your dogma rather than let them do their own thing or come to you naturally is at least as "evil" as doing bad things for purely selfish reasons.

We let people off the hook too easily, IMO, when all they have to do is say, "my faith dictates" and then all is, if not forgiven, then somehow understood as well intentioned.

Someone can rob a dozen banks in an evil greedy spree, and just because they have intentions of donating the money to fight cancer doesn't make it "good."

[esper]

The funny thing is in dao I didn't have a problem with the chantry and now I hate it.
One of my main problems with the Chantry is its faith. The Maker seems like a very unpleasant character for me - In dao I wasn't really thinking any longer than the Maker is a just another fantasy deity. But the more I thought about it the worse he gets - he abandons his people, he falls in love with married women and he deals out punishment out of proportion with the crime commited - and the Chantry wants that deity's attention back, because...?
There is no excuse for the method the Chantry uses. It is violence and submission. So for me the chantry has a terrible faith, a violent way of spreading its faith and its charity work is questionable. Da3 really need to do something drastic for me to even consider being even a positive towards the chantry.

[Rifneno]

esper wrote...

The funny thing is in dao I didn't have a problem with the chantry and now I hate it.
One of my main problems with the Chantry is its faith. The Maker seems like a very unpleasant character for me - In dao I wasn't really thinking any longer than the Maker is a just another fantasy deity. But the more I thought about it the worse he gets - he abandons his people, he falls in love with married women and he deals out punishment out of proportion with the crime commited - and the Chantry wants that deity's attention back, because...?
There is no excuse for the method the Chantry uses. It is violence and submission. So for me the chantry has a terrible faith, a violent way of spreading its faith and its charity work is questionable. Da3 really need to do something drastic for me to even consider being even a positive towards the chantry.

Exactly my thoughts.  I viewed the Chantry in a positive light in DAO.  The templars had some abuses but the great majority of them seemed good.  The Circle, while it completely sucked in many ways, appeared well cared for.  Now, in DA2?  I see the Chantry as one of those problems that can only be solved by fire.

[Gervaise]

The main problem is that their is no third option and you are no given the opportunity to challenge certain actions.  So, for example, the RoA is not legal since it should only be called if the Circle is a lost cause.  Cullen knows this, pretty much every Templar knows this but for some strange reason they only get the back bone to stand up to Meredith after the RoA, yet way back in Act 2 Cullen is starting to have doubts about Meredith and he admits in Act 3 that plenty of them are beginning to doubt her.  On the other hand, Meredith's paranoia is not entirely without cause, particularly with the amount of subversion going on behind her back - woman's intuition, you know something is going on, you just can't prove it.  And even if you didn't hand in the incriminating documents after your mother's death, you know that someone inside the Circle has been supplying mages outside the Circle with dangerous material, even if you are willing to give Orsino the benefit of the doubt that "O" doesn't apply to him.  When the two of them are arguing at the end, even if a mage supporter, I can say, "Let her do her job" because whilst I know Orsino is worried about Meredith planting evidence, I also know there is a need to sort out the rotten apples from the rest.  What I would have insisted on was that I accompany the search as an independent witness. 
But really it should have been possible to opt for an ending that allowed you to root out the bad mages without killing the good ones by supporting the Templars.  You could still have had the confrontation with Meredith because clearly she doesn't want you around, simply doing it in reverse, so confront Meredith and then Orsino, who would still transform because you've finally proved that he is corrupt.  And in fact you could still have the mage rebellion result happening, because of Ander's action with the Chantry, not because of what occurred in the gallows.  After all, he says that blowing the Chantry sky high is a symbolic gesture that he will be remembered for, when in fact it would appear that no one remembers the blowing up because it is the events at the gallows and the Champions actions that are quoted.  This is odd because RoAs have occurred in the past without Circles and Templars going wild.  Kirkwall is already a hotbed of subversion  but apparently also a centre of Templar power, symbolised by the Chantry, so it is the bomb that carries the real significance for the wider world.

[esper]

@Gervaise that ending you propose would have not have changed everything, because as I understand it what cause the rebellion is the fact that the circle mages are being put under the right of anulment for a crime the did not commit. (The chantry.) So rooting out the bad apples is not really the issue any longer from the moment the chantry goes boom.

[Rifneno]

Gervaise wrote...

On the other hand, Meredith's paranoia is not entirely without cause, particularly with the amount of subversion going on behind her back - woman's intuition, you know something is going on, you just can't prove it.

I've said it before, I'll say it again...  I never understood how hard it was to understand the concept of cause and effect until I came here.

[Gervaise]

My point is that there are two types of madness.  One has absolutely no foundation in reality.  The other is where there is some logic behind it, just the response to that logic is way out of proportion to what it should be.  In some ways, the lyrium idol is superfluous to the plot.  Meredith has had a mental breakdown as a result of extreme stress.   If it is apparently considered understandable for mages to abominate under stress, why on earth should a similar implosion not be considered "normal" for a Templar in a similar situation, and Meredith does regard herself and everyone else to be under severe threat. Add in lyrium addiction and the surprise is that it took as long as it did for her head to implode.
Why the stress?  Well, considering how rare blood magic is meant to be in Chantry controlled areas, there is an abnormally high head count of blood mages in Kirkwall.  Back in Act 1, blood mages have found a way of infiltrating the ranks of the Templar recruits and getting demons to possess them.  And apparently the only way you can detect this is by threatening them with death or at least giving them a severe beating.   Mages keep disappearing from the Gallows.  Apostates keep cropping up very visibly, instead of keeping their heads down.   By Act 3 everyone seems to be of the opinion that Meredith is losing it but no one is brave enough to call her on the issue.
I have played both endings, as mage and non mage, just for the sheer hell of it and to see what, if anything is different.  However, I eventually concluded that for a mage to support the Templars is the equivalent of the others abominating - faced with certain death, siding with the Templars gives a slim hope of reprieve but essentially you've lost your soul.
For a non-mage it is just about possible to justify siding with the Templars (unless of course you have always been very pro-Templar) but only if your mage sibling is already dead.  Regardless of how I feel about mages, Templars and everything else, bearing in mind that Kirkwall as a whole is a mad house, loyalty to my innocent little sister is the one ideal I have left to cling to, particularly since I have always stressed loyalty to family, even persuading Fenris not to kill his sister even though she did betray him. (And it was satsifying to note that even if you did go the other way and opt for the Templars, Bethany does not abominate, so it is possible for a mage to resist even in the face of death).  So I saved all the mages I could and naturally was only too glad to get away from the hell hole - go back to Ferelden and say, sorry King Alistair, I did my best, but it was a lost cause from day one and then there was that bomb........

[LobselVith8]

Rifneno wrote...

Gervaise wrote...

On the other hand, Meredith's paranoia is not entirely without cause, particularly with the amount of subversion going on behind her back - woman's intuition, you know something is going on, you just can't prove it.

I've said it before, I'll say it again...  I never understood how hard it was to understand the concept of cause and effect until I came here.

Especially considering that the subversion going on is happening because Meredith became a dictator and is holding power illegally.

[Rifneno]

Gervaise wrote...

My point is that there are two types of madness. One has absolutely no foundation in reality. The other is where there is some logic behind it, just the response to that logic is way out of proportion to what it should be.

Ever heard of a self-fulfilling prophecy? Her madness had no basis until reality until it created one itself. It's like if you become paranoid your neighbor is going to kill you, and wind up trying to kill him first. Then he kills you in self-defense. That doesn't mean the paranoia had a shred of truth behind it originally. Same thing with Meredith. The fact people want her dead is a product of the fact she's a paranoid lunatic.

So yeah. Cause and effect.

In some ways, the lyrium idol is superfluous to the plot. Meredith has had a mental breakdown as a result of extreme stress. If it is apparently considered understandable for mages to abominate under stress, why on earth should a similar implosion not be considered "normal" for a Templar in a similar situation, and Meredith does regard herself and everyone else to be under severe threat.

Because mages have demons trying to get into their heads. Templars don't. Obviously.

Add in lyrium addiction and the surprise is that it took as long as it did for her head to implode.

I wish I was an expert on not just psychology but the effects of fictional drugs with very little documentation. That must be handy.

Why the stress? Well, considering how rare blood magic is meant to be in Chantry controlled areas, there is an abnormally high head count of blood mages in Kirkwall. Back in Act 1, blood mages have found a way of infiltrating the ranks of the Templar recruits and getting demons to possess them.

And that has nothing to do with the templar's abuses, I'm sure.

[ApostleinTriumph]

Think about the red lyrium. Meredith was already mad, so whatever happened, she would still find an excuse to kill every mage in the city.

I played both endings just to see how story goes, but I think siding with the mages is the better choice.