55 réponses à ce sujet

[UgandanNinja]

It's pretty obvious that Bioware is heading towards a class struggle that will not only affect Feralden, but also the neighbouring states, as Mages invariably start demanding better rights, but it could have been handled better without every single mage ending up a blood mage.  In other words, basically supporting the Chantry's view that an eventual final solution is needed to deal with the mages... really...?

It feels a bit like the story got away from the writers, or merely DA2 was just a vehicle to pass some time so that Morrigan's God Child can have his own game (enter Beowulf references... yawn). God.. how'd I get so cynical. Please Bioware don't be like other devs..

Yoweri <3

Modifié par UgandanNinja, 31 août 2011 - 04:08 .

[King Minos]

Remove the chantry, enable a police state ran by Templars and trust worthy more experienced mages who must be over a certain age.

[Loain]

It's seams to me that you're leaping to some pretty big conclusions. To put your mind at ease may I point out that almost no one could have predicted the story that took place in DA2 from playing Origins.

[John Epler]

Not every mage was a blood mage in DA2. Even among those who practiced blood magic, there were some who didn't misuse their power - Alain is an example of a mage who, while using blood magic at a particular juncture, never uses his power to dominate or control. It's even arguable that he's not even particularly culpable for 'falling in' with the bad crowd. He's scared, alone and looking for any way out, and when it's offered, he takes it - only to realize exactly who his new bedfellows are.

However, I think saying that 'the blood mages in DA2 tell you that the Chantry is right' isn't really looking at the whole picture. Kirkwall is stuck in a vicious cycle - the Templars tighten their grip on the mages, and some members of the Templar Order use this as justification to treat the mages as pets and/or slaves. Since Meredith isn't doing anything about it, some mages turn to blood magic as their only escape from what is (in many instances) a rather hopeless existence. Meredith sees the blood mages, ignores that, in some cases, her Templars share equal blame and uses it as justification to further tighten her hold.

Couple that with a city that was literally built on a foundation of blood (read the Enigma of Kirkwall Codex entries, or read them on the wiki), and you have a city that, even with a Templar Commander and First Enchanter who were completely cooperative with each other, would see a higher-than-average incidence of mage corruption. Since the two of them are anything -but- cooperative (Meredith's zealotry due to her past, and Orsino's attitude of resignation), it's really just a matter of time before something gives.

[erynnar]

JohnEpler wrote...

Not every mage was a blood mage in DA2. Even among those who practiced blood magic, there were some who didn't misuse their power - Alain is an example of a mage who, while using blood magic at a particular juncture, never uses his power to dominate or control. It's even arguable that he's not even particularly culpable for 'falling in' with the bad crowd. He's scared, alone and looking for any way out, and when it's offered, he takes it - only to realize exactly who his new bedfellows are.

However, I think saying that 'the blood mages in DA2 tell you that the Chantry is right' isn't really looking at the whole picture. Kirkwall is stuck in a vicious cycle - the Templars tighten their grip on the mages, and some members of the Templar Order use this as justification to treat the mages as pets and/or slaves. Since Meredith isn't doing anything about it, some mages turn to blood magic as their only escape from what is (in many instances) a rather hopeless existence. Meredith sees the blood mages, ignores that, in some cases, her Templars share equal blame and uses it as justification to further tighten her hold.

Couple that with a city that was literally built on a foundation of blood (read the Enigma of Kirkwall Codex entries, or read them on the wiki), and you have a city that, even with a Templar Commander and First Enchanter who were completely cooperative with each other, would see a higher-than-average incidence of mage corruption. Since the two of them are anything -but- cooperative (Meredith's zealotry due to her past, and Orsino's attitude of resignation), it's really just a matter of time before something gives.

And give it does! ROFL! Nicely said John.

[craigdolphin]

Fair enough I guess. But I have to admit I too was utterly sick of the constant mage-vs-templar theme by midway through Act 2. One quest in particular (involving lillies) infuriated me in this regard. Could it not have been an 'ordinary' nut-case for a change?

I really don't want to play DA3 if it is going to similarly endlessly bludgeon the same theme to death with darned near every quest and event like DA2 did. Surely there are other stories to tell, other dramas to resolve, that do not involve the conflict between mages and templars.

[John Epler]

craigdolphin wrote...

Fair enough I guess. But I have to admit I too was utterly sick of the constant mage-vs-templar theme by midway through Act 2. One quest in particular (involving lillies) infuriated me in this regard. Could it not have been an 'ordinary' nut-case for a change?

I really don't want to play DA3 if it is going to similarly endlessly bludgeon the same theme to death with darned near every quest and event like DA2 did. Surely there are other stories to tell, other dramas to resolve, that do not involve the conflict between mages and templars.

While I'm not a writer, I'd see it less as 'look, mage/templar war! Now let's talk about that from now on!' as 'look, mage/templar war! Now let's see how this is one more element, combined with what happened in Ferelden, to flavour everything that's happening from now on!' A Blight, followed closely by the partial and (relatively) unprecedented dissolution of an institution that's existed for a very long time will both have an effect on the world as a whole.

[erynnar]

I admit it is not my favorite, and I too felt the that writing on it was a little too heavy handed. I was getting a bloody nose being bludgeoned with the "mages are horrible and can't be free, or the templars are horrible mages should be free."

Maybe it would have worked better without the whole Fade/Enigma of Kirkwall/ city built on blood thing. Like in the tower at Ferelden. It was more subtle, but still there. Did Greagoir abuse his position or look the other way while his templars did? Are there more mages like Uldred who was a snake looking for power (at Ostagar even) and a "ends justify the mean" meme.

It was just too much. I would have felt more conflict on who to support if I didn't get so fed up with both sides with the added craziness of the city's issues. It would have made it more emotionally compelling for me, like the tower in Ferelden (do I let the blood mage chick go or kill her?).

[SpearofUganda]

JohnEpler wrote...

Not every mage was a blood mage in DA2. Even among those who practiced blood magic, there were some who didn't misuse their power - Alain is an example of a mage who, while using blood magic at a particular juncture, never uses his power to dominate or control. It's even arguable that he's not even particularly culpable for 'falling in' with the bad crowd. He's scared, alone and looking for any way out, and when it's offered, he takes it - only to realize exactly who his new bedfellows are.

However, I think saying that 'the blood mages in DA2 tell you that the Chantry is right' isn't really looking at the whole picture. Kirkwall is stuck in a vicious cycle - the Templars tighten their grip on the mages, and some members of the Templar Order use this as justification to treat the mages as pets and/or slaves. Since Meredith isn't doing anything about it, some mages turn to blood magic as their only escape from what is (in many instances) a rather hopeless existence. Meredith sees the blood mages, ignores that, in some cases, her Templars share equal blame and uses it as justification to further tighten her hold.

Couple that with a city that was literally built on a foundation of blood (read the Enigma of Kirkwall Codex entries, or read them on the wiki), and you have a city that, even with a Templar Commander and First Enchanter who were completely cooperative with each other, would see a higher-than-average incidence of mage corruption. Since the two of them are anything -but- cooperative (Meredith's zealotry due to her past, and Orsino's attitude of resignation), it's really just a matter of time before something gives.

But would that be enough to act as a catalyst for wider change? If you say the city itself lended itself towards the corruption of mages then why would the conflict extend beyond the walls of Kirkwall? I think the problem is that Kirkwall feels insular, almost detached from greater Feralden...  

I think for me parallels could be made with the slave trade in Haiti, yet regardless of the eventual slave rebellion/revolution there it didn't make much of an impact on the global trade of slaves...

But I do see your point though John...

Modifié par SpearofUganda, 31 août 2011 - 05:29 .

[blothulfur]

I would have been more involved with the plot if I could have influenced it in a few places rather than having to play an impotent idiot who sits back and watches while others move the world state forward on a setting which I have only just been introduced to. Then again this is a realistic depiction of the bas, so I cannot complain too much.

Though the lies told of the Arishok and qunari by that braggart midget Varric Tethras will not stand.

[John Epler]

SpearofUganda wrote...

But would that be enough to act as a catalyst for wider change? If you say the city itself lended itself towards the corruption of mages then why would the conflict extend beyond the walls of Kirkwall? I think the problem is that Kirkwall feels insular, almost detached from greater Feralden...

Kirkwall was a symbol that, yes, the 'tyranny' of the Templars could be successfully overthrown and the mages could break away from the control of the Circles. Whatever one's feelings on how justified the Chantry is in their control of the mages, if you existed in that situation, even if you spent every day believing that the Templars are there for the greater good and are a necessary precaution - there's still going to be a tiny part of you that realizes you are under the control of another.

And while the events in Kirkwall wouldn't be enough of a catalyst for -everyone-, there are going to be those who are on the edge - who won't resort to blood magic, but who see what happened in Kirkwall as both a symbol and a cautionary tale ('see, this is how bad the Templars can get'). And if there are enough charismatic mages in your Circle who are arguing to break away from the Chantry, well, there will be no shortage of less strong-minded mages who are willing to follow them.

There are certainly sufficient examples in the real world of the domino effect, where one group successfully rebels against an oppressive regime and many other groups follow suit. I don't think it's far fetched to believe the same would be true in Thedas. And whether or not the Templars really -are- unnecessarily oppresive in the majority of cases, if you're a mage, there's going to be part of you (however small) that feels that way.

[RagingCyclone]

I can see where the OP is coming from. Granted it's a little over simplified, but what the story lacked was ambiguity. Where I liked a quest in Act 1 not involving a mage or templar but dealing with a very disturbed individual. But afterwards all the rest of the quests involved mages or templars. If just a few of these had been more akin to the quest I mention, then the Enigma of Kirkwall would have more meaning in that it affected more than mages and templars. Where Act 1 had good signs of this, Act 3 completely departed from that.

Edited to remove spoiler, sorry, forgot I was in a no-spoiler thread. My bad. 

Modifié par RagingCyclone, 31 août 2011 - 05:47 .

[AngryFrozenWater]

I hope that the main parties get a better images. It's too stereotypical now. The mages are characterized as being stupid blood mages who attack anyone on sight. The chantry looks like it has a passive role in which nothing really happens. The templars are the most interesting ones, because there is opposition there. However, because of the bad image of the mages it looks that this opposition has no use at all. The Grey Wardens probably find some underground horror to deal with. The qunari are brainless savages that conquer everything in their path. The elves are the poor bastards that nobody wants. The dwarfs keep doing their thing isolated from the rest.

I think that to make these parties interesting again there has to be a story which goes beyond that. Throw in quests with actions and/or decisions which change the political landscape. A good example would be to have Sebestian serve the chantry or to be crowned. Follow up on it. Make it real quests. Not just hollow talks. Make it have meaningful impact in other parts of the story.

Interesting ideas for mages: Portray them as smart. Make them have power or make the chantry want to maintain the status quo. Allow the PC to play an active role in that. Make blood mages smart. Make them infiltrate powerful positions. Allow the player to actively support either side of the mages or just betray them all. Do the same for the factions within the templars. Make that stuff mutually exclusive to make replayability meaningful. If the player is considered a renegade to one of the parties then treat him that way in the game. Make it have consequences.

[alex90c]

I think Dragon Age 3 really is going to call for a branching storyline if the main theme is going to be the mages and templars against each other. Going through a linear story and then getting to a point where you basically go "I choose mages" would seem a bit ... odd.

[blothulfur]

Well there is a branching storyline alex or you could just invalidate every decision the main character makes so that even if you give Isabellllla to the Arishok she'll escape a few days later, or no matter what side you choose they'll still fight you at the end or even if you kill characters they'll come back because you've played the game wrong and they were meant to live (i've killed Oghren twice so far). However that's not really an interactive game it's a movie or book.

Modifié par blothulfur, 31 août 2011 - 05:58 .

[Salaya]

We can sit and nod to all explanations for controversial points in DA2 plot. I read the secret codex entries from Kirkwall Enigma, but even with that, I found annoying the absurd level of abobinations, blood mages and demons that were present in the city.

The problem, as I see, it's similar to the teleportation mages: that we have an explanation does not make the fact enjoyable.

[KnightofPhoenix]

JohnEpler wrote...
Kirkwall was a symbol that, yes, the 'tyranny' of the Templars could be successfully overthrown and the mages could break away from the control of the Circles. Whatever one's feelings on how justified the Chantry is in their control of the mages, if you existed in that situation, even if you spent every day believing that the Templars are there for the greater good and are a necessary precaution - there's still going to be a tiny part of you that realizes you are under the control of another.

My problem with that, is how the catalyst was portrayed. The mages in the Gallows perform extremily poorly on a military level. In just one night, the Gallows were secured. At best, some mages fled. But they could not hold a highly defensible fortress for more than a few hours.

So I fail to see how it's that inspiring. Had the battle for the gallows lasted for a few days or a week, I could see it being inspiring, even if it resulted in a tactical defeat for mages. But they were being steamrolled with such ease, that while it should increase resentment, that I do not think that's that feasible for them to revolt immediately after such a military debacle.

Not saying it's impossible or completely unfeasible mind you. But I think it could have been done much better.
That, or something more happened in the interim between Kirkwall and the revolt.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 31 août 2011 - 06:47 .

[erynnar]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

I hope that the main parties get a better images. It's too stereotypical now. The mages are characterized as being stupid blood mages who attack anyone on sight. The chantry looks like it has a passive role in which nothing really happens. The templars are the most interesting ones, because there is opposition there. However, because of the bad image of the mages it looks that this opposition has no use at all. The Grey Wardens probably find some underground horror to deal with. The qunari are brainless savages that conquer everything in their path. The elves are the poor bastards that nobody wants. The dwarfs keep doing their thing isolated from the rest.

I think that to make these parties interesting again there has to be a story which goes beyond that. Throw in quests with actions and/or decisions which change the political landscape. A good example would be to have Sebestian serve the chantry or to be crowned. Follow up on it. Make it real quests. Not just hollow talks. Make it have meaningful impact in other parts of the story.

Interesting ideas for mages: Portray them as smart. Make them have power or make the chantry want to maintain the status quo. Allow the PC to play an active role in that. Make blood mages smart. Make them infiltrate powerful positions. Allow the player to actively support either side of the mages or just betray them all. Do the same for the factions within the templars. Make that stuff mutually exclusive to make replayability meaningful. If the player is considered a renegade to one of the parties then treat him that way in the game. Make it have consequences.

Except that the templars are in some instances rapists and slavers while their leader is a paranoic tyrant., they weren't that sympathetic either.

[AngryFrozenWater]

erynnar wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

I hope that the main parties get a better images. It's too stereotypical now. The mages are characterized as being stupid blood mages who attack anyone on sight. The chantry looks like it has a passive role in which nothing really happens. The templars are the most interesting ones, because there is opposition there. However, because of the bad image of the mages it looks that this opposition has no use at all. The Grey Wardens probably find some underground horror to deal with. The qunari are brainless savages that conquer everything in their path. The elves are the poor bastards that nobody wants. The dwarfs keep doing their thing isolated from the rest.

I think that to make these parties interesting again there has to be a story which goes beyond that. Throw in quests with actions and/or decisions which change the political landscape. A good example would be to have Sebestian serve the chantry or to be crowned. Follow up on it. Make it real quests. Not just hollow talks. Make it have meaningful impact in other parts of the story.

Interesting ideas for mages: Portray them as smart. Make them have power or make the chantry want to maintain the status quo. Allow the PC to play an active role in that. Make blood mages smart. Make them infiltrate powerful positions. Allow the player to actively support either side of the mages or just betray them all. Do the same for the factions within the templars. Make that stuff mutually exclusive to make replayability meaningful. If the player is considered a renegade to one of the parties then treat him that way in the game. Make it have consequences.

Except that the templars are in some instances rapists and slavers while their leader is a paranoic tyrant., they weren't that sympathetic either.

Agreed.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 31 août 2011 - 07:12 .

[Wulfram]

JohnEpler wrote...

Kirkwall was a symbol that, yes, the 'tyranny' of the Templars could be successfully overthrown and the mages could break away from the control of the Circles.

Except the Templars won easily, so how does that make any sense?

[Saberchic]

Wulfram wrote...

JohnEpler wrote...

Kirkwall was a symbol that, yes, the 'tyranny' of the Templars could be successfully overthrown and the mages could break away from the control of the Circles.

Except the Templars won easily, so how does that make any sense?

Then maybe Kirkwall becomes a symbol of the injustice endured by mages for the rest of Thedas? hence, the need for the Circle to break away still. 

[Wulfram]

Saberchic wrote...

Then maybe Kirkwall becomes a symbol of the injustice endured by mages for the rest of Thedas? hence, the need for the Circle to break away still. 

What with all the blood mages going around, and the destruction of the Chantry, it's hard to see how it stands out as an injustice from all the other times Circles have been annulled.

[Saberchic]

Wulfram wrote...

Saberchic wrote...

Then maybe Kirkwall becomes a symbol of the injustice endured by mages for the rest of Thedas? hence, the need for the Circle to break away still. 

What with all the blood mages going around, and the destruction of the Chantry, it's hard to see how it stands out as an injustice from all the other times Circles have been annulled.

Some could see the mages' actions as a desparate attempt to survive in the harsh conditions that Meredith imposed and allowed to flourish. Perhaps they might see this crazy blood mage "epidemic" as being caused by the templars. There are mages that have escpaed and family members of mages who know of these atrocities. It's not hard to imagine that some of these horrific stories would spread.

It's just a different viewpoint. I have no idea if the vast majority of the people in Thedas feel this way or not. My mindreading abilities need some work.

[Parahexavoctal]

I'm well aware that not every quest involved mages and/or templars & their conflict. I'm also well aware that there were plenty good mages, perhaps even with a single blood mage or two who weren't raving lunatics. I'm sure there were mages who just desired more freedom without the use of extreme measures, just as there were templars who didn't toe to Meredith's line.

Trouble is, all the bat-**** insane loonies on both sides got so much exposure and so little effective opposition (well, you can kill a score of them, but there's always a new one around the corner), that it simply seemed like they were all there was. They stole the picture.

There's also the problem of confirmation bias; by nature we like being confirmed in our choices. If we pick a side, we'd like them to validate the choice. However, no such thing happens in DA2. No matter how early and how thoroughly you pick a side, a horde of frothing bloodmages or zealots stand ready to throw the choice in your face. Staying neutral and mediating has the exact same result. Maybe it's because the plot is on rails to create (but not resolve) the conflict in spite of your best efforts, but the result is pretty much that I can't care for or identify with either side - yet not siding isn't even a choice...

Someone else here linked DarknessInducedAudienceApathy, but I'll throw it in here again because it does a better job of describing what I felt towards the end of the game than I could with my own words.

If/when the conflict is revisited, I really hope we can either mediate/end it properly, avoid it, or that picking a side will actually matter and perhaps even be vindicated to some degree if we do a good job of it.

[Sister Helen]

... I'm not a big codex reader, so I'm not sure if it was addressed there or not. My understanding was that Templars use lyrium to develop a resistance to magic (and/or allows them to use nullifying 'dispel magic' spells).
... I figured that mages went the blood magic route in part because it's easy and powerful, but also with the underlying thought that maybe the Templar resistance to magic didn't kick in when it came to blood magic. Because the Mage is using the Templar's own blood against them.
... Just a thought anyway. I fully endorse Varric's opinion of the whole Mage-VS-Templar thing: it's all just a bunch of guys in skirts.