189 réponses à ce sujet

[jamesp81]

LobselVith8 wrote...

If anyone has read the myraid of threads about the dichotomy between templars and mages, then they see that there's a significant difference of opinion between people who support the Chantry controlled Circles and the Chantry of Andraste, and the people who disagree with the status quo for the mages of the Circles of Magi. The debates between both sides have gotten to the point where the creators of Dragon Age have become involved at times. In the aftermath of the Right of Annulment, Cassandra is trying to find Hawke to talk to the respective faction that he sided with, but how realistic is her goal of getting the Champion to stop a war between two sides that have such different goals?

Considering that Dragon Age 2 dealt with the crumbling relationship between the mages and templars, to the point where mages and templars rebelled from the Chantry, I don't see any future where there's a compromise between mages and templars. In fact, there's not even a compromise between fans who support the Chantry and the Order of Templars, and the fans who agree with changing the status quo for the mages in the Circles of Magi.

The narrative of Origins and Dragon Age 2 invited the player to make a choice and form an opinion about the Chantry, the templars, and the mages, but when the issues deal with the Chantry and the templars overseeing mages, and mages being free of the templars and the Chantry, I don't see a middle ground. I don't think a compromise is realistic when the goals between the two factions are irreconcilable.

OP is correct.

Mages and templars compromising with each other, after Kirkwall, is like asking water to compromise with fire.  It's not going to happen.

I roleplay my wardens and Hawkes as devout Andrastians, but vehemently opposed to the circle. 

[Dave of Canada]

The Circles are/were the compromise.

[Demx]

There has to be a compromise. Otherwise this battle will never end and it will be just like Star Wars, with the Siths and Jedis. Unless you think Bioware will make it so that the player is forced to do the work for one side, or after the battle is over the next game will completely ignore a group of players that won the war for the opposite team.

[esper]

Siradix wrote...

There has to be a compromise. Otherwise this battle will never end and it will be just like Star Wars, with the Siths and Jedis. Unless you think Bioware will make it so that the player is forced to do the work for one side, or after the battle is over the next game will completely ignore a group of players that won the war for the opposite team.

I want the battle to be part of the background lore in Thedas from now on. We have enough of tension and fractions fightings each other. Don't see what difference it does to have one more.

And I am not enough into star wars too see the comperison, but I don't believe that a lasting compromise can be reached in the dragon age.

[Sir JK]

I think a compromise is possible, not from the get go. But eventually. But it matters a lot what the compromise is. Noone will want to go back to status quo ante bellum. The circles as they were will never return. Neither side will accept them. both sides have at this point realised it didn't work.

Initially there'll be a lot of emotion. The sides will cause casualties and hate each others for the deaths of friends and comrades in arms. But both side lack reliable means of replenishment. By separating themselves from the Chantry the templars lost much of the support and the infrastructure backing them. They certainly have some means to do so. But will have lost much (but contrary to popular belief, I do not beliece the templars will lose the lyrium as such).
The mages are in a similar seat, they're not a coherent group and nor do they have the all encompassing information network the Chantry has. New mages will more or less actively have to seek out the mage-rebellion or come across them by chance.

Both sides thus lack reliable means to replenish their numbers.And chances are, now that neither side holds any loyalty to anyone but themselves, they're not going to be very tolerated in large groups by the local feudal warlords (the nobility).

This means that while the war might burn hot and be full of violence intitially, it'll calm down. If only because the belligrient parties will lose their most active and driving members to attrition. In a few years, or at the very worst, a generation or two, the war will be losing steam.

And that's when a compromise becomes possible again. And if I'd hazard a guess, I'd say that the most likely one is to start over. The mages will want safety from persecution, and the templars will want peace and security. Paradoxically... the very idea behind circles in the first place.
Maybe they'll be structured differently and called something else. But unless one side overpowers the other... going back to basics sounds the most plausible outcome.

[esper]

Sir JK wrote...

I think a compromise is possible, not from the get go. But eventually. But it matters a lot what the compromise is. Noone will want to go back to status quo ante bellum. The circles as they were will never return. Neither side will accept them. both sides have at this point realised it didn't work.

Initially there'll be a lot of emotion. The sides will cause casualties and hate each others for the deaths of friends and comrades in arms. But both side lack reliable means of replenishment. By separating themselves from the Chantry the templars lost much of the support and the infrastructure backing them. They certainly have some means to do so. But will have lost much (but contrary to popular belief, I do not beliece the templars will lose the lyrium as such).
The mages are in a similar seat, they're not a coherent group and nor do they have the all encompassing information network the Chantry has. New mages will more or less actively have to seek out the mage-rebellion or come across them by chance.

Both sides thus lack reliable means to replenish their numbers.And chances are, now that neither side holds any loyalty to anyone but themselves, they're not going to be very tolerated in large groups by the local feudal warlords (the nobility).

This means that while the war might burn hot and be full of violence intitially, it'll calm down. If only because the belligrient parties will lose their most active and driving members to attrition. In a few years, or at the very worst, a generation or two, the war will be losing steam.

And that's when a compromise becomes possible again. And if I'd hazard a guess, I'd say that the most likely one is to start over. The mages will want safety from persecution, and the templars will want peace and security. Paradoxically... the very idea behind circles in the first place.
Maybe they'll be structured differently and called something else. But unless one side overpowers the other... going back to basics sounds the most plausible outcome.

While it might happen it won't happen in the dragon age (realisticly speaking). The failure of the cirlce will be too fresh in the mages mind and the current templars will demand too much control over the mages. I honestley think that the mages and templars need to get the fighting out of their system (how terrible that fighting might be).

[dsl08002]

The only compromise i could think of between them is that all mages leave a sample of there blood when they are born because even if they want to be free hey still have to face the danger about getting possesed.

We all saw in the circle tower when uldred went insane and turned into a pride demon and from the codex pages a pride demon could be a danger to the entire world of thedas.

Think of what could happend if the pride demon went loose somewhere in the wilds and no one knew where,

The pride demon would do as it did in the tower which is to summon abomination and other demons

[esper]

dsl08002 wrote...

The only compromise i could think of between them is that all mages leave a sample of there blood when they are born because even if they want to be free hey still have to face the danger about getting possesed.

We all saw in the circle tower when uldred went insane and turned into a pride demon and from the codex pages a pride demon could be a danger to the entire world of thedas.

Think of what could happend if the pride demon went loose somewhere in the wilds and no one knew where,

The pride demon would do as it did in the tower which is to summon abomination and other demons

With was matierials, if there are no one around to witness, it would need human or elfs to make a abomination.
And if there were no one around it wouldn't really be a danger. Also The chasind must have some way to prevent their (I blieve they call them shamans) to go completely ambomination as the chasind still exits. (I always wonder what the chasind does about their own mages since they are afraid of the 'witches of the wilds')

[jamesp81]

I think a solution is only possible if the templars relax their stranglehold pretty significantly. Revoke templar authority to execute or tranquil mages and allow mages to have families like normal people. Let the families live in the circle tower if necessary.

The templars will agree to no such thing, at least not yet. So the war continues until such time as they do.

The status quo before the war is a non-starter. That is never coming back.

Modifié par jamesp81, 27 octobre 2011 - 08:58 .

[Sir JK]

esper wrote...

While it might happen it won't happen in the dragon age (realisticly speaking). The failure of the cirlce will be too fresh in the mages mind and the current templars will demand too much control over the mages. I honestley think that the mages and templars need to get the fighting out of their system (how terrible that fighting might be).

There's sixty years left of the dragon age. By the time it ends, the grandchildren of the ones fighting now will be raising families. Even young people like Bethany, Hawke, Cullen will be much too old to fight. And hate carries poorly over generations.
Sure, the first generation might remember the systems flaw with a fiery passion. But their children will never have experienced it. They'll be born to the war, but none of the old oppression.

Basically... more than enough time for everything to end and start over.

[esper]

Sir JK wrote...

esper wrote...

While it might happen it won't happen in the dragon age (realisticly speaking). The failure of the cirlce will be too fresh in the mages mind and the current templars will demand too much control over the mages. I honestley think that the mages and templars need to get the fighting out of their system (how terrible that fighting might be).

There's sixty years left of the dragon age. By the time it ends, the grandchildren of the ones fighting now will be raising families. Even young people like Bethany, Hawke, Cullen will be much too old to fight. And hate carries poorly over generations.
Sure, the first generation might remember the systems flaw with a fiery passion. But their children will never have experienced it. They'll be born to the war, but none of the old oppression.

Basically... more than enough time for everything to end and start over.

Hate, grudges and religion are the three things that carries over expentionally well through the generations - espcially when they are mixed and the problem isn't solved. What is sadly easily forgotten is gratitude.
I seroisly saw a greek man in television say that it was fair that the germans paid for the finanical problem in Greece because of second world war and we have other not so specific examples during the history ( I am just too tired to remember them right now).
The current mages grandchildren will rembemer the hate if they are still fighting then. What is interesting is how the templars will look since templar is a job and not a race. The best thing that could happen is that the templars (as an organisation) dies out and the chantry perhaps establish some new kind of deal with the mages.  

[Huntress]

dsl08002 wrote...

The only compromise i could think of between them is that all mages leave a sample of there blood when they are born because even if they want to be free hey still have to face the danger about getting possesed.

We all saw in the circle tower when uldred went insane and turned into a pride demon and from the codex pages a pride demon could be a danger to the entire world of thedas.

Think of what could happend if the pride demon went loose somewhere in the wilds and no one knew where,

The pride demon would do as it did in the tower which is to summon abomination and other demons

The only one who have fear of demons taking down the world is the chantry, elves never used templars and they still survived even before the chantry was formed, tevinter mages should have being destroyed by now after 900 years without the "help" from the templar, chasin people have shaman's and again no templars there..

The chantry might be right about the darkspawn but is not right about "the world over run by demons" part. I think they just want mages under their boot and not lose the precious "The Maker divene right" to rule the world.
The only one who could listen to the "Maker" was Andraste, so what ever this Divine think the maker would say or think about mages is coming out of her...

[Dave of Canada]

Tevinter Mages have Templar.
Dalish have ways of dealing with abominations, it doesn't stop them from occuring and they have limits in place.
We hardly know enough about the Chasind.

[TJPags]

LobselVith8 wrote...

If anyone has read the myraid of threads about the dichotomy between templars and mages, then they see that there's a significant difference of opinion between people who support the Chantry controlled Circles and the Chantry of Andraste, and the people who disagree with the status quo for the mages of the Circles of Magi. The debates between both sides have gotten to the point where the creators of Dragon Age have become involved at times. In the aftermath of the Right of Annulment, Cassandra is trying to find Hawke to talk to the respective faction that he sided with, but how realistic is her goal of getting the Champion to stop a war between two sides that have such different goals?

Considering that Dragon Age 2 dealt with the crumbling relationship between the mages and templars, to the point where mages and templars rebelled from the Chantry, I don't see any future where there's a compromise between mages and templars. In fact, there's not even a compromise between fans who support the Chantry and the Order of Templars, and the fans who agree with changing the status quo for the mages in the Circles of Magi.

The narrative of Origins and Dragon Age 2 invited the player to make a choice and form an opinion about the Chantry, the templars, and the mages, but when the issues deal with the Chantry and the templars overseeing mages, and mages being free of the templars and the Chantry, I don't see a middle ground. I don't think a compromise is realistic when the goals between the two factions are irreconcilable.

This, ladies and gentlemen, is called spin.  It works so well when you apply it broadly.

Yet Lob knows that this isn't about people supporting Chantry controlled Circles and the Chanty of Andraste. 

Rather, it's about people who feel mages are innocent little flowers who have never done anything wrong, and don't deserve to be planted in a Garden, but should be allowed to germinate wherever they may fall, and those who believe certain poisonous plants should be controlled.

Perhaps that's why I can never take these arguments too long - mage supporters don't even realize the position of the people they're arguing with.

[LobselVith8]

TJPags wrote...

This, ladies and gentlemen, is called spin.  It works so well when you apply it broadly.

Yet Lob knows that this isn't about people supporting Chantry controlled Circles and the Chanty of Andraste. 

Rather, it's about people who feel mages are innocent little flowers who have never done anything wrong, and don't deserve to be planted in a Garden, but should be allowed to germinate wherever they may fall, and those who believe certain poisonous plants should be controlled.

Perhaps that's why I can never take these arguments too long - mage supporters don't even realize the position of the people they're arguing with.

It looks to me like you're trying to start a flame war by demonizing people you disagree with in a thread that isn't debating the merits of either side, but addressing the problematic issue that neither side comes to an agreement over their differences. I have no interest in engaging in a flame war with you, TJPags.

People agree with the Chantry controlled Circles. Other people disagree with them. There are nuances within the disagreement, but it comes down to the fact that people side with either the templars or the mages, and we see the same in the narrative of Dragon Age 2 and its predecessor. I don't see a realistic compromise when the two sides have a different view of the Circles of Magi under the control of the Chantry and the templars when both sides, for the most part, want different things that aren't reconcilable with one another. Living under the templars isn't reconcilable with living free from the templars, after all. There's no middle ground when the two factions want the exact opposite of one another.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 28 octobre 2011 - 01:31 .

[tmp7704]

jamesp81 wrote...

Mages and templars compromising with each other, after Kirkwall, is like asking water to compromise with fire.  It's not going to happen.

Often enough it's not a matter of finding the compromise, but one (or both sides) ultimately running out of the will to fight, in face of growing losses or other sort of (moral/mental) fatigue.

Quite a few examples of that in our own recent history.

[TJPags]

LobselVith8 wrote...

TJPags wrote...

This, ladies and gentlemen, is called spin.  It works so well when you apply it broadly.

Yet Lob knows that this isn't about people supporting Chantry controlled Circles and the Chanty of Andraste. 

Rather, it's about people who feel mages are innocent little flowers who have never done anything wrong, and don't deserve to be planted in a Garden, but should be allowed to germinate wherever they may fall, and those who believe certain poisonous plants should be controlled.

Perhaps that's why I can never take these arguments too long - mage supporters don't even realize the position of the people they're arguing with.

It looks to me like you're trying to start a flame war by demonizing people you disagree with in a thread that isn't debating the merits of either side, but addressing the problematic issue that neither side comes to an agreement over their differences. I have no interest in engaging in a flame war with you, TJPags.

People agree with the Chantry controlled Circles. Other people disagree with them. There are nuances within the disagreement, but it comes down to the fact that people side with either the templars or the mages, and we see the same in the narrative of Dragon Age 2 and its predecessor. I don't see a realistic compromise when the two sides have a different view of the Circles of Magi under the control of the Chantry and the templars when both sides, for the most part, want different things that aren't reconcilable with one another. Living under the templars isn't reconcilable with living free from the templars, after all. There's no middle ground when the two factions want the exact opposite of one another.

No, I'm trying to show you where you're wrong.

The debate isn't about mages running free and wild or the Andrastian Circles.  Few people on this board support the Chantry controlled Circles or the Chantry of Andraste.  Rather, most people who you paint with those phrases actually support simply some form of control over mages, someone to watch and police them.

By continuing to spout things like "supporters of the Chantry of Andraste and Chantry controlled Circles" you, yourself, miss the chance for compromise.  Because if that's the only choice you allow us, of course we'll find no middle ground.

So, given that most people on this board labelled "pro-templar" are not, actually, pro-Chantry as it was, and considering that in the game, the Templars themselves have stopped following Chantry orders, don't you think there is, actually, the chance to compromise?

But then, you can continue to consider any statement that disagrees with you as an attempt to start a flame war, just like the mages can continue to think that any request for there to be controls over them means a life that they consider to be one of slavery too terrible to contemplate.  In which case, you and I are doomed to stop interacting, and the world of Thedas is doomed to never-ending war.

Either is fine with me, since this topic in general - with the exception of discussions about how to restructure it - bores me, and DA2 has pretty much killed my interest in the world of Thedas.

[Sinuphro]

it is realistic...if hawke could be allowed to make significant decisions

[TheCreeper]

Considering mage and templar supporters on this forum can't come together I don't see how the Mages and Templars could.

[maxernst]

LobselVith8 wrote...

TJPags wrote...

T

IPeople agree with the Chantry controlled Circles. Other people disagree with them. There are nuances within the disagreement, but it comes down to the fact that people side with either the templars or the mages,

Except that this is a false dichotomy.  One doesn't need to be opposed to some form of the circles in principle to be opposed to Meredith's imposition of the rite of annulment. 

[megski]

What I wonder most about, is why the templar order breaks away from the chantry. Say a person wants to be a soldier, they do have choices. Either their kingdom's military or the templar order. No matter the reason I think most people do have a choice to be templars, excluding situations like Alistair who was just fell into it. Now, we know that there are sadistic people that join armies and militaries for all the wrong reasons, but lets just say that most templars join the order out of pure-hearted religious reasons. What would make a group of devout believers tear away from their convictions? Perhaps there is some horrible deep dark secret the chantry has, and once it gets out, mages and templars can unite together against a common enemy. If I hate you, but we both hate this other person MORE than we hate each other, why not join forces?

[esper]

megski wrote...

What I wonder most about, is why the templar order breaks away from the chantry. Say a person wants to be a soldier, they do have choices. Either their kingdom's military or the templar order. No matter the reason I think most people do have a choice to be templars, excluding situations like Alistair who was just fell into it. Now, we know that there are sadistic people that join armies and militaries for all the wrong reasons, but lets just say that most templars join the order out of pure-hearted religious reasons. What would make a group of devout believers tear away from their convictions? Perhaps there is some horrible deep dark secret the chantry has, and once it gets out, mages and templars can unite together against a common enemy. If I hate you, but we both hate this other person MORE than we hate each other, why not join forces?

As I already say that happened in the blight. But once that enemy is defeated people forget that they were allied again in a decade or two or even less if we shall judge how well things went in Ferelden. If the underlying problem isn't solved they won't forget their hate and prejudices. 

[megski]

esper wrote...

megski wrote...

What I wonder most about, is why the templar order breaks away from the chantry. Say a person wants to be a soldier, they do have choices. Either their kingdom's military or the templar order. No matter the reason I think most people do have a choice to be templars, excluding situations like Alistair who was just fell into it. Now, we know that there are sadistic people that join armies and militaries for all the wrong reasons, but lets just say that most templars join the order out of pure-hearted religious reasons. What would make a group of devout believers tear away from their convictions? Perhaps there is some horrible deep dark secret the chantry has, and once it gets out, mages and templars can unite together against a common enemy. If I hate you, but we both hate this other person MORE than we hate each other, why not join forces?

As I already say that happened in the blight. But once that enemy is defeated people forget that they were allied again in a decade or two or even less if we shall judge how well things went in Ferelden. If the underlying problem isn't solved they won't forget their hate and prejudices. 

I still think it's still possible, that people can movie on and learn to love each other....through hate?  

Eventually people begin to tire of fighting and hating, even mages and templars.  Maybe in a couple of decades a new generation of mages and templars would be born, and relationships could progress from there.  People that didn't know about all the prejudice and hate that their parents experienced or dished out.  But you could be right too, anything is possible.

[esper]

megski wrote...

esper wrote...

megski wrote...

What I wonder most about, is why the templar order breaks away from the chantry. Say a person wants to be a soldier, they do have choices. Either their kingdom's military or the templar order. No matter the reason I think most people do have a choice to be templars, excluding situations like Alistair who was just fell into it. Now, we know that there are sadistic people that join armies and militaries for all the wrong reasons, but lets just say that most templars join the order out of pure-hearted religious reasons. What would make a group of devout believers tear away from their convictions? Perhaps there is some horrible deep dark secret the chantry has, and once it gets out, mages and templars can unite together against a common enemy. If I hate you, but we both hate this other person MORE than we hate each other, why not join forces?

As I already say that happened in the blight. But once that enemy is defeated people forget that they were allied again in a decade or two or even less if we shall judge how well things went in Ferelden. If the underlying problem isn't solved they won't forget their hate and prejudices. 

I still think it's still possible, that people can movie on and learn to love each other....through hate?  

Eventually people begin to tire of fighting and hating, even mages and templars.  Maybe in a couple of decades a new generation of mages and templars would be born, and relationships could progress from there.  People that didn't know about all the prejudice and hate that their parents experienced or dished out.  But you could be right too, anything is possible.

I do think that people can move on. I just don't think it can happen in the dragon age. The wounds are too fresh. Mage children are going to learn about their hate from their parents. And no new generation of templars is born. From this point foreward people are going to joing the templars to hunt mages (since they are no longer part of the chantry).

I do however admit that this is a game.