257 réponses à ce sujet

[LobselVith8]

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

That's kind of my point. I found siding with the mages to be the much more obvious choice, and it shouldn't have been. If the intent was the create a difficult or morally gray choice at the end of the game I'd say the templars were botched even worse than the mages were. You run into a lot of crazy mages and a lot of crazy templars. But at the final decision point, those crazy mages are dead and a crazy templar is asking for your help. Instead, people sided with what they are lead to believe is a sane mage.

You're right. I think that's the problem with the final choice - it has nothing to do with the dichotomy between mages and templars, but with Meredith decreeing the death of the Circle of Kirkwall for the actions of one, single apostate who happens to be standing right in front of her. Help Meredith kill the mages for Anders' actions, or help protect the Circle of Kirkwall? The final choice has nothing to do with what the protagonist thinks about the Chantry controlled Circles, or mage rights.

I think it would have been better to go the 'New Vegas' route, and allow the protagonist to side with either the mages or the templars throughout the narrative, rather than having the plot railroad force Hawke into aiding either side (like when Hawke is forced to aid Petrice and Meredith, even if he refuses) or having companions with them that make no sense for a particular type of protagonist (i.e. apostates with pro-templar Hawke). I think having complex, flawed, multi-faceted characters on both sides of the argument would have been better than 'insane mages' like Decimus and Endgame Orsino and 'sadistic templars' like Alrik and Kerras.

[dragonflight288]

It is discussions like this that make me appreciate games like Risen. Despite Risen's flaws, each of the three factions do not force our unnamed protagonist to join. They talk about the good they do and you honestly witness all the bad, which can (VERY EASILY) make you second guess who is in the right and wrong.

But in DA2, we don't have any of that. We have apostates who are insane and corrupt templars. We have no evidence at the time of the final choice that the Circle is corrupt and full of blood mages. As far as we know, they all died in Thrask's rebellion.

In addition to Meredith and the templars trying to consolidate power by removing the office of Guard Captain and are actively trying to kick Aveline out so they can take over city defense along with the acting viscount and templar responsibilities.

All I saw was one woman overreaching beyond what she should of had as a templar, and everyone was too scared to stand up to her...even when Hawke is just getting off the boat.

[Lazy Jer]

If they wanted people to side with the Templars more...hmmm.

1) Make Meredeth less obviously corrupt.

Meredeth is somewhat harsh when you first show up, but by Act 3 she's completely corrupt and absolutely overstepped her boundries.  She had no reason to prevent a new Viscount from taking over in Kirkwall.  She had no reason to prevent Osino from petitioning the Grand Cleric for a resolution, and she most definiately didn't have the right to opt to kill all the circle mages (some of which the game establishes are children), for Anders action.  Meredeth does have a point about how the public would want blood for Anders actions, but killing every man, woman and child in the circle goes too far. 

2) Remove Bethany as a factor, or balance out her effect

I say this not because I didn't like having the character around, but because one big reasons I supported the mages was because of Bethany.  Not only did I not want Bethany to be killed, but Bethany by extension made me realize that a lot of other people had sisters or brothers in the circle.  Now, of course, some will say that on the flip side there were a lot of people's brothers/sisters/fathers/mothers worshiping or working in the Chantry and that the growing blood mage problem put the citizens of Kirkwall in mortal danger, but they didn't really have the personal connection to bring those facts home the way having a mage sister does (or, if you were a mage, being a mage yourself).

3) Show more corruption in the circle

Sure we know that there was corruption in the circle, but the difference between the Circle corruption and Meredeth's corruption is that the corruption isn't in the leadership itself.  Orsino seems to be a very reasonable man (to me anyway) who is performing the job he's been given, i.e. standing up for the Circle Mages.  If I had been given enough hints that Fenris' fears about the mages creating another Tivinter Imperium were well founded in Orsino's dialoug and/or behavior I may have hesitated a bit more.

So if the writers/programmers of this game had really wanted to make the choice more difficult those are the methods they may have considered, particularly 1 and 3.  Bethany, while a strong tilt towards the mages (for me anyway), was too important a character to the actual story, had they removed her I'm not sure I'd have been as invested in the story.

[Kwanzaabot]

I won't lie. My initial dislike of the Chantry comes from the fact that I dislike religion, and I want to punch Sebastian's face in every time he goes on about the Maker. Even doorknocking Mormons have more tact than that guy.

However, it's no secret that Templars are, by and large, complete and utter jerks.

And, I look at it this way. Abominations are jerks because they're possessed by demons. What's the Templars' excuse?

[DPSSOC]

Urzon wrote...
So, i ask again. With all the abominations running around, why isn't Kirkwall a fiery zombie hellscape again?

Kirkwall's abominations have exceptionally good manners?  It is a good question though, I mean at least a few of the abominations have to be Desire abominations so they'd at least be on par with Connor.  Heck in Act 3 there's a Desire Demon running a gang in Kirkwall.  What the hell?

[DPSSOC]

double

Modifié par DPSSOC, 11 octobre 2011 - 11:57 .

[Yakko77]

I have 4 Hawke's and every one, EVERY one, sides with the mages. I guess I project my personally feelings on my play throughs. I can't stand religious zealotry or acts of brutality justified through religion (i.e. The Right of Annulment in game or Jihad from modern real life fanatics).

[EmperorSahlertz]

Right of Annulment isn't justified by any religion... It is justified by a religious institution. I hope i don't have to explain the difference.

[Yakko77]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Right of Annulment isn't justified by any religion... It is justified by a religious institution. I hope i don't have to explain the difference.

Religion vs. Spirituality?

I'm a Deist.  Belief in God?  Yes... maybe... sort of.  Guess I'm part Agnostic too.  Faith in a religion?  Not so much anymore.  Nothing against those who do (unless they try to impose it on me).

[jamesp81]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Right of Annulment isn't justified by any religion... It is justified by a religious institution. I hope i don't have to explain the difference.

You know, I've yet to see you offer any realistic solution to the rampant abuse that takes place in the Circle system.

[TheCreeper]

When it comes to religion I think honestly think the chantry comes off as pretty good in DA2, besides sister petrice I mean. The Knight Commanders actions were based more in paranoia (and being high as kite on red lyrium) then any religious beliefs. The chantry could have done more to to reign in the templars (espically the Divine, seriously she sends an agent to ideal with mages but the balant breaking of chantry law by the knight commander is completely overlooked?) but that might have just made things worse.

Although Not all grand clerics are as reasonable and really having watchmen for the mages being part of a religious order that says that mages have a curse that is part of the reason the maker shuns humanity really strikes as a terrible idea. Problem is that reforming the templars would be down right impossible without some sort of major crisis or upheveal...which is pretty much what started at the end so score one for Anders I guess.

[DreamerM]

LobselVith8 wrote...
I think it would have been better to go the 'New Vegas' route, and allow the protagonist to side with either the mages or the templars throughout the narrative, rather than having the plot railroad force Hawke into aiding either side (like when Hawke is forced to aid Petrice and Meredith, even if he refuses) or having companions with them that make no sense for a particular type of protagonist (i.e. apostates with pro-templar Hawke). I think having complex, flawed, multi-faceted characters on both sides of the argument would have been better than 'insane mages' like Decimus and Endgame Orsino and 'sadistic templars' like Alrik and Kerras.

I have a mental image of....well, what if Chapter 3 didn't END with Anders destroying the Chantry, but started with it? Or (since Anders is such a vital support character in most parties and I will admit that I spared him only because I couldn't win the last fight without his help) if some other character sparks a big showdown? Then you play through the city where the mages and templars are actively at war, and you get to see for yourself what's really at stake.


Compare the arbitrary choice at the end of act 3 to what I consider an equivalent moral delema from DA:O:
Choosing the next Dwarven King. You have to choose between honorable
and incompetant or sleezy evil murderer who'll actually make a good
ruler. There are pros and cons to choosing each, as well as plenty of
chances to change your mind as you learned more and more about what you
were getting yourself into. Eventually the choice you make is less about
the NPCs and more about the Warden himself and what he values. That's
what makes it so special.

Give us a situation like THAT in act 3: you have to pick one or the other, and that determines your missions for the rest of the act. And you are given situations where you can change your mind. Say you pick Orsino to defend the innocent, only to have him then request you spring a dangerous blood mage and known murderer from Templar custody in order to have their help protecting the Circle. Say he asks you to slip poison into the templar's supply of lyrium. Say he asks you to help round up some orphans for use in a blood ritual. Do you do it? You can say no, and defect to the other side where Meredith wants your help raiding the homes of people suspected of being mages, executing members of the Mage Underground and their associates, and performing Rites of Tranquility for flimsy reasons. Eventually you just have to decide who disgusts you less.

[Quething]

I think "pick the side that disgusts you less" is still not the ideal thing to ask your players to do. I mean, the most common thing I see on the boards is not "screw the templars, the mages are innocent" and it's not "screw the mages, the templars are right." It's "screw the both of them, they're all evil lunatics, why the hell am I still in Kirkwall?"

The rational templar position is not supposed to be that mages are disgusting, it's supposed to be that mages are dangerous. The rational mage position is not supposed to be that templars are disgusting, it's that abuses and mistreatment are inevitable in a system like the Circle and/or freedom is a natural right. Neither position requires the other side to be crazy-evil or disgusting in any way. To wit:

On the templar side, yes, you should see occasional templars abusing their authority and raping or otherwise tormenting their charges - and you should be able to give them to templar authority. Meredith would have the perpetrators drummed out of the Order or imprisoned or whatever, and explain that they do what they can, but that sort of thing is a sad fact of the system and not having the system at all would be worse. The majority of templars, including many with power, should be Thrasks and Greagoirs, not Merediths and Cullens (and definitely not Kerrases and Alriks).

On the mage side, you would get Evelina's whole sad backstory. How she had a child in the Circle and turned apostate rather than have that child stolen from her. And then you would watch her turn abomination when Coterie or slavers threatened her kids, and that abomination would kill Walter. The majority of mages should be sane, sympathetic, friendly, good people.

If it's really supposed to be a choice players are interested in making in the first place, then players need to be able to sympathize with their allies. So there have to be good sides and legitimate points being made, not just "who triggers less bile reflex."

[Ryzaki]

Not to mention "pick the side that disgusts you less." usually leads to Darkness Induced Apathy.

[Ryzaki]

Not to mention "pick the side that disgusts you less." usually leads to Darkness Induced Apathy which then leads to the eight deadly words.

It's not good when the choice to walk away and leave the city to burn is one of the choices many of your audience would take.

[DreamerM]

Ryzaki wrote...

It's not good when the choice to walk away and leave the city to burn is one of the choices many of your audience would take.

There's a thing. I never understood why Hawke would care one whit for Kirkwall. Yeah the family has roots there, but he didn't grow up there, he has no obvious links to the local culture, and a lot of nasty crap happens to his friends and family there. I know where I Hawke, somewhere around the point where Mom is dead, my sibling is either dead or out of reach, I'd have grabbed my romantic interest and headed the eff out of dodge on the philosophy that one should avoid lit powder-kegs unless absolutely neccessary.

I know a decent RPer can come up with numerous head!canon reasons why Hawke doesn't leave town, but that doesn't change the fact that onscreen, Hawke stays only because The Plot Says So.

Not to mention a former slave port with giant tortured naked statues everywhere is not exactly endeering to the human playing the character either. The place gives me the creeps, intentionally I know, but still, another reason for the player to want to simply abandon the city to it's self-imposed fate.

Modifié par DreamerM, 12 octobre 2011 - 11:20 .

[Arthur Cousland]

The first mistake they did if Bioware wanted people to side with the templars was to have Hawke come from a family of mages.

It's hard to be anti-mage when the main character was raised by a mage father and has first-hand knowledge that not all mages are evil.

Meredith is also not an easy person to sympathise with.  During act 3, most of Kirkwall is afraid of her, even the templars.

When the templars regularly make mages tranquil for no good reason, even those who've passed their harrowings, plus treat the mages in the circle as if they were prisoners, it's no reason that they'd want to rebel.  A mage going to the Kirkwall circle is basically a death sentence.

If they wanted people to side with the templars more often, then the templars should have been given more visible redeeming qualities.  As it is, the templars in Kirkwall are more "bad cop" than "good cop".

I'm surprised that the "tranquil solution" wasn't passed by Meredith.  If she did have a nice side, it's a shame that we didn't get to see it.  It seemed like the only thing keeping Meredith from calling for the RoA sooner was Elthina, and after she was out of the picture, Meredith had no one to stop her.  She didn't care at all that Anders was the one person responsible for the destruction of the chantry; all mages had to pay.

[EmperorSahlertz]

jamesp81 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Right of Annulment isn't justified by any religion... It is justified by a religious institution. I hope i don't have to explain the difference.

You know, I've yet to see you offer any realistic solution to the rampant abuse that takes place in the Circle system.

I've yet to see you provide any reliable proof that the abuse situation in the Circles are rampant. We got a grand total of ONE case of implied rape in the Kirkwall Circle, and then the unreliable source of Anders claiming it happens all the time. I want actual proof.

[Relshar]

I always pick pro mage anyway due to the fact I really do not like the way the chantry holds mages prisoners for being born the way they are.
I also couln't let innocent people even if they are mages die due to the stupidity of one person (Anders, there were other ways to deal with the Templars I just wish BioWare would of let us choose)

I am also very much against religion in real life as well so for me not liking the Chantry and its ideas come easy to me.

[jamesp81]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Right of Annulment isn't justified by any religion... It is justified by a religious institution. I hope i don't have to explain the difference.

You know, I've yet to see you offer any realistic solution to the rampant abuse that takes place in the Circle system.

I've yet to see you provide any reliable proof that the abuse situation in the Circles are rampant. We got a grand total of ONE case of implied rape in the Kirkwall Circle, and then the unreliable source of Anders claiming it happens all the time. I want actual proof.

Harrowed mages are being made tranquil, it's a flouting of Chantry law.

Furthermore, common sense helps a lot here.  If would require a great fool to think abuses aren't going on in the circle.

The templars got what they deserved.  I wouldn't have stopped Anders even if I had the option to.  It's about time the criminality of the templars come back on them.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Harrowed mages may not be tranquiled based on suspecion alone. They may be tranquiled as punishment. However what happens in Kirkwall IS NOT representative of all Circles in Thedas, and were not even authorized by the Knight-Commander, which further proves it isn't a widespread problem in the Circles.

Abuses of course happens in the Circles. Abuses happens everywhere. To demand the Circle be 100% abuse-free is a pipe dream of epic proportions.

[jamesp81]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Harrowed mages may not be tranquiled based on suspecion alone. They may be tranquiled as punishment. However what happens in Kirkwall IS NOT representative of all Circles in Thedas, and were not even authorized by the Knight-Commander, which further proves it isn't a widespread problem in the Circles.

Abuses of course happens in the Circles. Abuses happens everywhere. To demand the Circle be 100% abuse-free is a pipe dream of epic proportions.

If the Circle is going to take control over people's lives as it does, then 100% abuse free is the standard they must meet.  If they can't, then they pay the price.

Edit:

Also, w/ respect to mages being tranquiled as punishment.  Yes, they are.  Punishment for being suspected of a crime, which might also be against chantry law.

If tranquility was used as a punishment for harrowed mages, then how the hell did Anders not get tranquiled before Awakening?  He escaped seven times.

Modifié par jamesp81, 13 octobre 2011 - 03:14 .

[jamesp81]

I am going to laugh my ass off if this happens in DA3:

Thedas: ZOMG, Qunari are invading us. We need the mages help to push them back like last time!
Mages: LOL, sod off.

It would be poetic justice for the rest of Thedas to experience the slavery they inflicted on their mages for nearly a millenium.

[KJandrew]

I don't get the argument that Mages should be free because of the abuse they receive in Circle. We've only seen a few cases of it, compared to the abuse that everyone other than the Nobles receive in the outside. Elves get abused, murdered and raped but no one bats an eye. The people of Lowtown live in a crime ridden slum, i'm sure the majority of the alienage, dust town or the poorer human districts would jump at the chance to live in a place like the Circle.

[jamesp81]

KJandrew wrote...

I don't get the argument that Mages should be free because of the abuse they receive in Circle. We've only seen a few cases of it, compared to the abuse that everyone other than the Nobles receive in the outside. Elves get abused, murdered and raped but no one bats an eye. The people of Lowtown live in a crime ridden slum, i'm sure the majority of the alienage, dust town or the poorer human districts would jump at the chance to live in a place like the Circle.

Bad behavior by one group does not justify bad behavior by another.  Bad behavior is bad behavior, and should be dealt with as such.

The templars should be disbanded, the chantry should be punished.  The nobles that abuse elves in alienages ought to be in prison or hanged depending on their specific crimes.  The criminals of lowtown should be locked up.  The elves should not be forced to live in ghettos and the mages should be free.