1253 réponses à ce sujet

[EmperorSahlertz]

The Circle mages were conspiring with a rebel Templar to overthrow the Knight-Commander....

[TEWR]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The Circle mages were conspiring with a rebel Templar to overthrow the Knight-Commander....

And that isn't cause for calling a Right of Annulment. If it were, Elthina would've allowed Meredith to call for one after that quest. But she said "No". As she is the Chantry authority in Kirkwall, she knows what constitutes calling for a Right of Annulment more than you do.

The Circle Mages conspired with Thrask and the other Templars in order to remove a lunatic Templar from the position of Knight Commander for various reasons:

1) She has become a tyrant to the mages
2) She has political power when Templars are not legally allowed to.
3) Her measures have driven mages to insanity.

and so on and so forth. Diplomatic attempts at a solution had failed time and time again.

They were rebelling against a woman. Not the Circle, not the Chantry, and not even the Templars as a whole. One woman and whatever like-minded cronies supported her. They were separating who they were fighting against. They were fighting against men and women who abused their position, and so they are no longer deserving of that position. At that moment, despite Meredith and her cronies holding the position of Templar, they weren't worthy of being called Templars.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 10 septembre 2011 - 11:26 .

[Foolsfolly]

@ The Ethereal Writer Redux:

I agree that plotting to bring down Meredith doesn't constitute Annulling the Circle.

As best seen in Origins Annulling is a last resort when the Circle is lost.... OR as DA2 shows us when a third party commits a terrorist attack and you just really want to kill the Circle instead. Hilariously, she doesn't even kill the guy who DID blow up the Chantry.

[The Xand]

That's because Anders is hardcore. Still, what springs to mind in regards to Kirkwall's Templars and their mage prisoners is that guards and prisoners psychological experiment where the guards became ever more abusive of their powers and the prisoners became more agitated and intent to escape and rebel. I honestly think that Bioware might have based the whole scenario on that and the results on what were to happen should it have gone on long enough.

http://en.wikipedia....ison_experiment

[TEWR]

Foolsfolly wrote...

@ The Ethereal Writer Redux:

I agree that plotting to bring down Meredith doesn't constitute Annulling the Circle.

As best seen in Origins Annulling is a last resort when the Circle is lost.... OR as DA2 shows us when a third party commits a terrorist attack and you just really want to kill the Circle instead. Hilariously, she doesn't even kill the guy who DID blow up the Chantry.

This brings back memories:

[DPSSOC]

The Xand wrote...
It's nothing like that at all. By not siding with mages and by not giving the go ahead for the Right of Annulment she was reigning Meredith in.

 
No she didn't.  Again you're saying that not allowing the police to eradicate a minority while still allowing them to visciously assault without provocation is reigning in police brutality.  The Chantry has rules, the Templars weren't following those rules, nothing short of ordering them to follow said rules (in part or full) qualifies as reigning them in.

The Xand wrote...
That isn't usually the case, especially according to the Chantry. Granting mages greater freedom just to appease them goes against the grain for them.

 
We aren't talking about giving anything to the mages, we're talking about forcing the Templars in general and Meredith in particular to follow the rules they agreed to when they joined the Templars.  Enforcing rules of war, and punishing those who break them, is not siding with the enemy.  It is upholding a code of conduct that those under your command have agreed to follow.

The Xand wrote...
Meredith wasn't technically breaking any laws, she was just being overly zealous in her duties, whereas Orsino seemed to be the more dangerous seemingly pressing a revolutionary agenda.

 
What revolutionary agenda?  That Meredith shouldn't step outside the bounds of her authority and that the wheels of government should be allowed to turn again?  And Meredith was breaking laws.  Anders says, both in DA2 and Awakenings, that it goes against Chantry law to make a Harrowed mage Tranquil; that's why, despite Anders numerous escapes, he had only been imprisoned and he was only going to be executed because it was believed he killed the Templars assigned to bring him in.  Exceptions can be made, as with any law, but Meredith went beyond that by leaps and bounds.

The Xand wrote...
As the highest ranking agent of the Chantry Elthina couldn't very well openly rail against Meredith for her pursuit of blood mages, however harsh her methods.

 
How about privately?  How about meeting Meredith in private and explaining that if she didn't start abiding by Chantry Law she would be replaced?

The Xand wrote...
She might admittedly have been a good deal more diplomatic about it but she was well within her rights as a Templar to hunt down and deal with suspected blood mages.

 
Yes she was, and as I pointed out she had two options available (prison or death) neither of which involved Tranquilling mages who had passed their Harrowing.

The Xand wrote...
Her usurpation of political power was somewhat iffy,

 
No it wasn't.  She forceably held and refused to relinquish governance of the city to the proper channels.  That is not iffy.

The Xand wrote...
but given the troubled nature of the times it's understandable that as the head of the most powerful political entity in Kirkwall it was her right to take the helm, rather than cede it to bickering powerless nobles.

And the troubled times were over when the Qunari left and the damage of the attack had been dealt with.  Like I said when I suggested Seneschal Bran as a replacement; months, a year tops.

Modifié par DPSSOC, 11 septembre 2011 - 12:43 .

[The Xand]

Again, look to that earlier guards and prisoners experiment I cited. When you give people as much power over others as the Templars had over the mages then that is just asking for trouble. As for the Right of Annulment, it's already been performed 17 times, and in the case of Kirkwall it should very well have been performed sooner given that there were abominations and blood mages on the loose everywhere, with a secret mage underground helping them escape and templars being kidnapped and attacked, not to mention templars secretly aiding them. The Chantry doesn't look well on mage Circles becoming quite so porous and rebellious.

Harrowed mages *can* be made Tranquil if it seems like they are unable to contain themselves and seem like a threat and likely to transform into an abomination, which the mages of kirkwall proved time and time again was often the case so it's no surprise that Meredith was taking actions to prevent that since they seemed so incapable of conrolling themselves. Even Orsino himself needlessly lost control and morphed into an abomination. Prison in this case seemed ineffective at best given how many mages managed to break out and how many templars were suspect.

Meredith took control because the city was teeming with unrest, renegade mages and blood mages and given that the templars already held too much power she deemed herself the only one capable of ruling, since she was the head of the most powerful faction. It might not have been legal but she was no less a tyrant than most of the other Viscounts, the majority of whom would have been unelected.

[dragonflight288]

We have plenty of blood mages and abominations among the apostates we see running around Kirkwall. Meredith does NOT give Hawke any evidence that proves the Circle is irredeemable and needs to be Annulled.

The situation in Ferelden was far worse because blood mages were attacking everyone and abominations were running wild.

[Shadow Fox]

^ really all that does is make the Kirkwall Templars look even more incompetent

...Maybe I should start a theard asking if Templars will continue to be protrayed as insane and stupid?

Modifié par Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke, 11 septembre 2011 - 04:29 .

[IanPolaris]

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

^ really all that does is make the Kirkwall Templars look even more incompetent

...Maybe I should start a theard asking if Templars will continue to be protrayed as insane and stupid?

Many of them are, but you at least get to meet Ser Thrask and even (to a much lesser degree) Ser Cullen, who seem to have passing aquaitances with human beings at least enough to act like one.  That better than I can say about how the mages are protrayed in DA2.  I think everyone knows it was overkill and overboard to the detriment of the game.

-Polaris

[Shadow Fox]

IanPolaris wrote...

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

^ really all that does is make the Kirkwall Templars look even more incompetent

...Maybe I should start a theard asking if Templars will continue to be protrayed as insane and stupid?

Many of them are, but you at least get to meet Ser Thrask and even (to a much lesser degree) Ser Cullen, who seem to have passing aquaitances with human beings at least enough to act like one.  That better than I can say about how the mages are protrayed in DA2.  I think everyone knows it was overkill and overboard to the detriment of the game.

-Polaris

Everyone except Varric acted like a complete imbecile during most parts of the game I hardly see how Mages alone are entitled to several theards where Bioware and those who chose to support the Templars in the game are accused non too subtlety of being freedom hating racists.

[Foolsfolly]

^ really all that does is make the Kirkwall Templars look even more incompetent

...Maybe I should start a theard asking if Templars will continue to be protrayed as insane and stupid?

I feel more Templars were portrayed in a positive light than mages were. In the Mage category there's only Bethany and possibly Hawke while everyone else is a blood mage or abomination.

So while your suggestion is made of liquid lulz I feel the Templars were better handled in this game. No doubt that both sides were handed the idiot ball and both sides have their complete monsters. But the Templars have a slight bit less mud on them from the whole ordeal.

[EmperorSahlertz]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The Circle mages were conspiring with a rebel Templar to overthrow the Knight-Commander....

And that isn't cause for calling a Right of Annulment. If it were, Elthina would've allowed Meredith to call for one after that quest. But she said "No". As she is the Chantry authority in Kirkwall, she knows what constitutes calling for a Right of Annulment more than you do.

The Circle Mages conspired with Thrask and the other Templars in order to remove a lunatic Templar from the position of Knight Commander for various reasons:

1) She has become a tyrant to the mages
2) She has political power when Templars are not legally allowed to.
3) Her measures have driven mages to insanity.

and so on and so forth. Diplomatic attempts at a solution had failed time and time again.

They were rebelling against a woman. Not the Circle, not the Chantry, and not even the Templars as a whole. One woman and whatever like-minded cronies supported her. They were separating who they were fighting against. They were fighting against men and women who abused their position, and so they are no longer deserving of that position. At that moment, despite Meredith and her cronies holding the position of Templar, they weren't worthy of being called Templars.

That is up to the individual Grand Cleric and Knight-Commander to decide. Meredith did think it constituted an annulment, Elthina didn't. There isn't a clear cut law for when the annullment can be called. Only that the Circle must be deemed irredeemable.

[DreGregoire]

You know I've been thinking about this thread over the last few days and I have determined that I'm not in a position to decide the mages are acting insane or stupid in Dragon Age 2 because I've never lived in that type of situation. I have never been completely and utterly repressed or ostracized at any point in time in my life. Essentially I'm saying that I personally have no basis for understanding/comphrehending the situation. I can sit here and imagine for endless hours what I might do, how I might react, etc, etc., you know what? Knowing the me of now, if I was suddenly treated as mages are being treated in DA2 I think I might turn to what most would determine insane actions. Just figured I would share my babble on this thread since it was cluttering up my head.

[TEWR]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The Circle mages were conspiring with a rebel Templar to overthrow the Knight-Commander....

And that isn't cause for calling a Right of Annulment. If it were, Elthina would've allowed Meredith to call for one after that quest. But she said "No". As she is the Chantry authority in Kirkwall, she knows what constitutes calling for a Right of Annulment more than you do.

The Circle Mages conspired with Thrask and the other Templars in order to remove a lunatic Templar from the position of Knight Commander for various reasons:

1) She has become a tyrant to the mages
2) She has political power when Templars are not legally allowed to.
3) Her measures have driven mages to insanity.

and so on and so forth. Diplomatic attempts at a solution had failed time and time again.

They were rebelling against a woman. Not the Circle, not the Chantry, and not even the Templars as a whole. One woman and whatever like-minded cronies supported her. They were separating who they were fighting against. They were fighting against men and women who abused their position, and so they are no longer deserving of that position. At that moment, despite Meredith and her cronies holding the position of Templar, they weren't worthy of being called Templars.

That is up to the individual Grand Cleric and Knight-Commander to decide. Meredith did think it constituted an annulment, Elthina didn't. There isn't a clear cut law for when the annullment can be called. Only that the Circle must be deemed irredeemable.

and yet you've said before (a couple times on this thread and on other threads) that the rebellion which doesn't make the Circle irredeemable is enough to call for a Right of Annulment when the RoA is only to be used when the Circle becomes irredeemable.

The Circle of Kirkwall was never once irredeemable in DAII.

[Quething]

DPSSOC wrote...

The Xand wrote...
As the highest ranking agent of the Chantry Elthina couldn't very well openly rail against Meredith for her pursuit of blood mages, however harsh her methods.

 
How about privately?  How about meeting Meredith in private and explaining that if she didn't start abiding by Chantry Law she would be replaced?

Actually, how do we know she isn't doing this? It's not like she'd tell Hawke about it if she were.

I mean, she does tell Meredith to sit down and shut up in the Act III opener. I don't think she'd ever have gone so far as to tell Meredith "do your job right or lose it," because I think she's afraid of Meredith, and worried that if she tries too hard to exert control, all she'll do is prove she never actually had any (and I think she's really good at lying to herself about how bad it's gotten). But I do think she was probably regularly remonstrating with Meredith in private that she needed to use a gentler touch.

[Sinuphro]

dragonflight288 wrote...

We have plenty of blood mages and abominations among the apostates we see running around Kirkwall. Meredith does NOT give Hawke any evidence that proves the Circle is irredeemable and needs to be Annulled.

The situation in Ferelden was far worse because blood mages were attacking everyone and abominations were running wild.

....in ferelden, blood mages werent attacking everyone. And its been known that even the chantry in ferelden was abusing its mages. that's y there was a mage rebellion at the circle tower in ferelden. sure there were bloodmages in ferelden but most times they used their skills to control weak willed politicians.

[Vicious]

This discussion is definetly indicative of the impossible place Hawke is put into in the final moments of the game.

Let's see, you can side with the Mages, protect them, good or bad, [and you know from experience there are plenty of bad ones hiding among them.] Sounds noble, but to what end? The good ones aren't going to stay in the circle, while the bad ones are going to rampage all over the place.

Or you can side with the Templars. Yes you are wiping out the Circle, many of which did absolutely nothing wrong, at the behest of a nutjob Templar who can't come off as any more EVIIIIIIIIIIIL than if she grew a moustache to twirl, but at the same time you are protecting the people [the common folk] and trying to stop the coming war before it starts.

It is a pretty good shade of grey, almost brilliant, but the problem DA2 has is It's too late both ways, and your actions are completely meaningless. Which is, probably, the game's most damning failure.

I'll never understand what the point of making a 'You became Viscount!" achievement was.

[Xilizhra]

but at the same time you are protecting the people [the common folk]

Incorrect. The town guard does that regardless, while the templars ignore the demons popping up looking for more mages to kill.

[TEWR]

Sinuphro wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

We have plenty of blood mages and abominations among the apostates we see running around Kirkwall. Meredith does NOT give Hawke any evidence that proves the Circle is irredeemable and needs to be Annulled.

The situation in Ferelden was far worse because blood mages were attacking everyone and abominations were running wild.

....in ferelden, blood mages werent attacking everyone. And its been known that even the chantry in ferelden was abusing its mages. that's y there was a mage rebellion at the circle tower in ferelden. sure there were bloodmages in ferelden but most times they used their skills to control weak willed politicians.

1) Caladrius and Loghain struck an actual agreement as two men. Blood magic was not involved in that agreement, as that would've involved sacrificing numerous people to be able to control Loghain as well as other people, which would've eventually drawn the attention of people. 

"Why the **** is Denerim so..... dead? Wait a minute....."

Even a simple nudge wouldn't be enough to keep him from wondering why he's doing that. It's not like Avernus getting Teyrn Cousland to consider siding against Arland the Tyrant, where he may have done that on his own if Avernus wasn't involved. Loghain defends selling the elves into slavery, claiming it was necessary. Even if you kill Caladrius, he still defends it. And blood magic doesn't work from beyond the grave, so it was his own decision to do so.

2) The blood mage hideout attacked people on sight and used them as sacrifices. All of that red stuff on the altars and in the rooms wasn't just for show. It was blood. And there were the corpses.

3) Uldred's rebellion had nothing to do with the Chantry being pricks to mages. Uldred has been a very vocal Libertarian and a blood mage for a long time. That's why he's able to pick out the apprentices that practice blood magic. He knows the signs and I'm guessing purposely leads them to practice it. I'm even willing to bet he led Jowan to practicing blood magic. His status as a Libertarian and Loghain's promise to free the Circle is what prompted the rebellion.

Not saying that the Chantry is nice to the mages in Ferelden. They aren't.

"We won't trust any lives to your spells, mage!"

"Get out of my sight, heathen!"

****ing harpies....

[EmperorSahlertz]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The Circle mages were conspiring with a rebel Templar to overthrow the Knight-Commander....

And that isn't cause for calling a Right of Annulment. If it were, Elthina would've allowed Meredith to call for one after that quest. But she said "No". As she is the Chantry authority in Kirkwall, she knows what constitutes calling for a Right of Annulment more than you do.

The Circle Mages conspired with Thrask and the other Templars in order to remove a lunatic Templar from the position of Knight Commander for various reasons:

1) She has become a tyrant to the mages
2) She has political power when Templars are not legally allowed to.
3) Her measures have driven mages to insanity.

and so on and so forth. Diplomatic attempts at a solution had failed time and time again.

They were rebelling against a woman. Not the Circle, not the Chantry, and not even the Templars as a whole. One woman and whatever like-minded cronies supported her. They were separating who they were fighting against. They were fighting against men and women who abused their position, and so they are no longer deserving of that position. At that moment, despite Meredith and her cronies holding the position of Templar, they weren't worthy of being called Templars.

That is up to the individual Grand Cleric and Knight-Commander to decide. Meredith did think it constituted an annulment, Elthina didn't. There isn't a clear cut law for when the annullment can be called. Only that the Circle must be deemed irredeemable.

and yet you've said before (a couple times on this thread and on other threads) that the rebellion which doesn't make the Circle irredeemable is enough to call for a Right of Annulment when the RoA is only to be used when the Circle becomes irredeemable.

The Circle of Kirkwall was never once irredeemable in DAII.

Again, it is not for you, or I, to decide whena  Circle is to be deemed irredeemable. That is the job of the Knight-Commander and Grand Cleric.

[TEWR]

Actually, it's the decision of only the Grand Cleric of the region (or the Divine, as she's akin to a nationwide Grand Cleric).

Divine Galatea, responding to the catastrophe in Nevarra and hoping to prevent further incidents, granted all the grand clerics of the Chantry the power to purge a Circle entirely if they rule it irredeemable. This Right of Annulment has been performed 17 times in the last 700 years.

From the codex entry on the RoA. The Knight Commander cannot decide when a Circle is irredeemable unless there is no Grand Cleric, at which point the Knight Commander assumes the role of something like a Grand Cleric substitute (which is kinda weird for male Knight Commanders outside of Tevinter)

[Zanallen]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Actually, it's the decision of only the Grand Cleric of the region (or the Divine, as she's akin to a nationwide Grand Cleric).

Divine Galatea, responding to the catastrophe in Nevarra and hoping to prevent further incidents, granted all the grand clerics of the Chantry the power to purge a Circle entirely if they rule it irredeemable. This Right of Annulment has been performed 17 times in the last 700 years.

From the codex entry on the RoA. The Knight Commander cannot decide when a Circle is irredeemable unless there is no Grand Cleric, at which point the Knight Commander assumes the role of something like a Grand Cleric substitute (which is kinda weird for male Knight Commanders outside of Tevinter)

And thus Anders put the fate of the mages in Meredith's hands when he killed Elthina. What a stupid, stupid man.

[Dave of Canada]

Zanallen wrote...

And thus Anders put the fate of the mages in Meredith's hands when he killed Elthina. What a stupid, stupid man.

I think that's what he wanted.

[Zanallen]

Dave of Canada wrote...

I think that's what he wanted.

He wanted to cause the right of annulment? He wanted Meredith to start killing innocent mages in order to force them into a fight or die situation, basically removing their choice and forcing the mages into rebellion? We gotta tell the Anders thread people. They will want to know.