189 réponses à ce sujet

[Gervaise]

I would suggest that Cullen is portrayed as neither hardliner or moderate, but pretty much what the Templar Order thinks an ideal Templar should be.    First and foremost he believes in the Divine Right of Templars to control mages, whether regulating the Circle, or hunting down apostates outside of it.  Because he has experienced the full horror of an out of control Circle, he appreciates why the Templars are necessary.   When challenged over the actions of the Kirkwall Templars being responsible for the situation, his response is to better educate the mages over the need for the Circle, not do a thorough overhaul of his men and introduce checks and balances to prevent abuse.   In a way he is the centre point between the liberality of Thrask (who is prepared to turn a blind eye to open use of blood magic to achieve his aims) and Meredith (who has always been a hardliner and becomes more confirmed in her views under the influence of the idol).   Cullen is not crazy, he is not insane.   I get the feeling that people acuse Templars of being insane because they believe in the Maker, are fearful of what mages can do and feel they that have a mandate to control that risk - which would make the vast majority of citizens in Thedas insane since they pretty much support this view.   A free mage blowing up the Chantry and other members of the Resolutionists throughout Thedas doing other similar acts of terrorism are not likely to win over popular support for the cause of mage freedom.   The Resolutionists aimed to prove to people how little protection the Circles really offered.  It would seem they succeeded and that many Templars now feel the only course of action is to eradicate the mages.

With regard to the situation in Kirkwall, by the end the Chantry now longer had any control over matters.  Meredith had stopped taking Elthina's advice.  When Sebastian asked Averline, as Captain of the Guard, her view on this, her response was to support Meredith.   When Hawke asks Cullen who he thinks Elthina will support, he responds that she has no choice to support the Templars because of their Divine Right and that she is wrong to give the mages hope of change.  Elthina actually thinks that both sides have valid arguements but she is in fact now powerless to do anything which is why she says that it will have to be resolved between Meredith and Orsino.    Even if she came out in support of Orsino she does not have the backing of either the Templar Order or the City Guard to enforce it.   Both would probably suggest that she was under the influence of blood magic.     Elthina is the only reason the war hasn't erupted because of the respect the ordinary people have for her and her insistance on remaining impartial.   However, she recognises there are really two conflicts going on here, between Meredith and Orsino, and between the Templars and the apostates (most of whom have now turned to blood magic) Her final words to one of my Hawkes are "I hope you haven't come to persuade me to leave again.  I will not leave my people tp bear the price of war between Templars and Malificarum."   We know from Lelianna that everyone is looking at Kirkwall for a sign of things to come and that the Divine was willing to order an Exalted March to try and keep control (which was crazy since the majority of the population are believers).   It is a microcosm of the situation in the wider world outside.

Anders bomb doesn't just free the mages from Chantry control, it frees the Templars as well - whatever restrictions Chantry teaching might have placed on them are effectively removed.  There is no one left to oppose Meredith unless the Templars do so themselves and none of them do so until after the majority of the mages are dead.  Clearly none of the Templars, including Cullen, think that there is anything wrong with them destroying the Circle even though the Circle was not responsible for the bomb.     It is on this basis that the idea that Hawke could persuade Templars to abandon whatever cause of action they were committed to is ridiculous.   They were quite willing to arrest a Hawke who had helped them eliminate the mages.     So long as Templars believe themselves as divinely authorised to take the actions that they do, it is hard to see how anyone is going to talk them out of it.

The only way the Chantry could undermine them would be to revoke the teaching on Divine Right and admit that it has no basis in the Chant of Light.  However, that would also mean admitting that was also the case regarding the nobility and in fact the Chantry themselves.     So really I think there is no way back as regards a compromise that the Chantry would find acceptable.   Mind you that doesn't meant that the writers won't try to pretend there is one.

[AlexXIV]

Dave of Canada wrote...

I'm drunk, time to type.

I'm going to admit that we're not going to see any compromise from the current situation, as the compromise happens to be the Circle and we're not seeing the mages wanting to accept it and the Templar are large enough of an army that they're not going to need to accept any. Without the compromise, the mages will learn the hard way how they treat with rebellions on Thedas. They want to be like everybody else? They better be ready to suffer the consequences just like everybody else, they aren't special little snowflakes.

All Mages will be culled and the rebellion will be eliminated, any survivors will be made tranquil and assist in the menial labour to repair the damage from the war. The Circles will be rebuilt and the mages will face true oppression, none of that sympathetic noble lifestyle they're currently used to. Give them something to truly complain about.

Mage Loyalists will be rewarded with the right of their former lifestyle for their loyalty, Mage collaberators will be locked in Aeonar along with the worst of the mages and any Monarchy or Nobility which didn't do their duty to the Maker shall be overthrown and placed with a proper King willing to do his duty to the Maker.

The Chantry, unwilling to do the hard decisions with treating with mages, shall be seperated from the Templar andthe Templar will form their own group which has full control of the mages with the Knight-Commander of each Circle being independent and only responding to the Knight-Vigiliant when absolutely required.

This is probably making the usual suspects cringing and instantly typing out "YOU'RE A PRO-RAPE, PRO-RACISM, PRO-MURDER, PRO-BRAINWASHING... ect ...MONSTER", I might as well work and deserve the title if you're going to take any dissenting opinion as such. In other words, go talk to somebody who cares.

YOU'RE A PRO-RAPE, PRO-RACISM, PRO-MURDER, PRO-BRAINWASHING... ect ...MONSTER!!!

On a more serious note, even not too serious, it may happen just like that. But personally I feel that going back to status quo is kinda lame on many levels. Also I don't think the Chantry are such 'angels' as you seem to think. Choking on the hard decisions? When did they ever? Unless you are talking about apathetic Elthina.

[Sylvianus]

There will be a war, and after blood, death and suffering, there will be peace and compromise. I can assure you. Because war isn't a game like many of you think. We see that you are all born in a time of prosperity and peace. It seems so easy when I read you.

Your analysis is not good because you get the facts from the past that are no longer valid during the war. A war can change everything, spirits, mentality, etc, etc. Nothing is like before after a war.

Yes mages aspire to freedom, yes the Templars aspire to control their dangerousness. There will be inevitably agreements at one time or another because of new facts concrete, new projects, new moderate protagonists who will plead for peace. Everything you say is based on analysis fixed ,refusing to take first into account the reality of the present and close future.


Did you think that the war could divise the mages ? In one hand some resolutionists who don't want compromises, and want to destroy absolutely templars, despite death that strike them. And on the other hand  the moderate mages who are finally tired of war, and want compromise, negociations and peace with the templars ?

And so, to avoid for example that, they could accept peace, simply to preserve their unity. There are many factors.

The truth is simply that you don't want a compromise with the templars, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be realistic. That's totally false, on the contrary, it' s even less realistic a war which lasts thousand of years.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 30 octobre 2011 - 01:25 .

[tevikolady]

Gervaise wrote...

I would suggest that Cullen is portrayed as neither hardliner or moderate, but pretty much what the Templar Order thinks an ideal Templar should be.    First and foremost he believes in the Divine Right of Templars to control mages, whether regulating the Circle, or hunting down apostates outside of it.  Because he has experienced the full horror of an out of control Circle, he appreciates why the Templars are necessary.   When challenged over the actions of the Kirkwall Templars being responsible for the situation, his response is to better educate the mages over the need for the Circle, not do a thorough overhaul of his men and introduce checks and balances to prevent abuse.   In a way he is the centre point between the liberality of Thrask (who is prepared to turn a blind eye to open use of blood magic to achieve his aims) and Meredith (who has always been a hardliner and becomes more confirmed in her views under the influence of the idol).   Cullen is not crazy, he is not insane.   I get the feeling that people acuse Templars of being insane because they believe in the Maker, are fearful of what mages can do and feel they that have a mandate to control that risk - which would make the vast majority of citizens in Thedas insane since they pretty much support this view.   A free mage blowing up the Chantry and other members of the Resolutionists throughout Thedas doing other similar acts of terrorism are not likely to win over popular support for the cause of mage freedom.   The Resolutionists aimed to prove to people how little protection the Circles really offered.  It would seem they succeeded and that many Templars now feel the only course of action is to eradicate the mages.

With regard to the situation in Kirkwall, by the end the Chantry now longer had any control over matters.  Meredith had stopped taking Elthina's advice.  When Sebastian asked Averline, as Captain of the Guard, her view on this, her response was to support Meredith.   When Hawke asks Cullen who he thinks Elthina will support, he responds that she has no choice to support the Templars because of their Divine Right and that she is wrong to give the mages hope of change.  Elthina actually thinks that both sides have valid arguements but she is in fact now powerless to do anything which is why she says that it will have to be resolved between Meredith and Orsino.    Even if she came out in support of Orsino she does not have the backing of either the Templar Order or the City Guard to enforce it.   Both would probably suggest that she was under the influence of blood magic.     Elthina is the only reason the war hasn't erupted because of the respect the ordinary people have for her and her insistance on remaining impartial.   However, she recognises there are really two conflicts going on here, between Meredith and Orsino, and between the Templars and the apostates (most of whom have now turned to blood magic) Her final words to one of my Hawkes are "I hope you haven't come to persuade me to leave again.  I will not leave my people tp bear the price of war between Templars and Malificarum."   We know from Lelianna that everyone is looking at Kirkwall for a sign of things to come and that the Divine was willing to order an Exalted March to try and keep control (which was crazy since the majority of the population are believers).   It is a microcosm of the situation in the wider world outside.

Anders bomb doesn't just free the mages from Chantry control, it frees the Templars as well - whatever restrictions Chantry teaching might have placed on them are effectively removed.  There is no one left to oppose Meredith unless the Templars do so themselves and none of them do so until after the majority of the mages are dead.  Clearly none of the Templars, including Cullen, think that there is anything wrong with them destroying the Circle even though the Circle was not responsible for the bomb.     It is on this basis that the idea that Hawke could persuade Templars to abandon whatever cause of action they were committed to is ridiculous.   They were quite willing to arrest a Hawke who had helped them eliminate the mages.     So long as Templars believe themselves as divinely authorised to take the actions that they do, it is hard to see how anyone is going to talk them out of it.

The only way the Chantry could undermine them would be to revoke the teaching on Divine Right and admit that it has no basis in the Chant of Light.  However, that would also mean admitting that was also the case regarding the nobility and in fact the Chantry themselves.     So really I think there is no way back as regards a compromise that the Chantry would find acceptable.   Mind you that doesn't meant that the writers won't try to pretend there is one.

Very nicely said.  +internetz for you Ser.

[jamesp81]

Dave of Canada wrote...

I'm drunk, time to type.

I'm going to admit that we're not going to see any compromise from the current situation, as the compromise happens to be the Circle and we're not seeing the mages wanting to accept it and the Templar are large enough of an army that they're not going to need to accept any. Without the compromise, the mages will learn the hard way how they treat with rebellions on Thedas. They want to be like everybody else? They better be ready to suffer the consequences just like everybody else, they aren't special little snowflakes.

All Mages will be culled and the rebellion will be eliminated, any survivors will be made tranquil and assist in the menial labour to repair the damage from the war. The Circles will be rebuilt and the mages will face true oppression, none of that sympathetic noble lifestyle they're currently used to. Give them something to truly complain about.

Mage Loyalists will be rewarded with the right of their former lifestyle for their loyalty, Mage collaberators will be locked in Aeonar along with the worst of the mages and any Monarchy or Nobility which didn't do their duty to the Maker shall be overthrown and placed with a proper King willing to do his duty to the Maker.

The Chantry, unwilling to do the hard decisions with treating with mages, shall be seperated from the Templar andthe Templar will form their own group which has full control of the mages with the Knight-Commander of each Circle being independent and only responding to the Knight-Vigiliant when absolutely required.

This is probably making the usual suspects cringing and instantly typing out "YOU'RE A PRO-RAPE, PRO-RACISM, PRO-MURDER, PRO-BRAINWASHING... ect ...MONSTER", I might as well work and deserve the title if you're going to take any dissenting opinion as such. In other words, go talk to somebody who cares.

Yeah, you are drunk:lol:

Modifié par jamesp81, 30 octobre 2011 - 01:27 .

[tevikolady]

Sylvianus wrote...

There will be a war, and after blood, death and suffering, there will be peace and compromise. I can assure you. Because war isn't a game like many of you think. We see that you are all born in a time of prosperity and peace. It seems so easy when I read you.

Your analysis is not good because you get the facts from the past that are no longer valid during the war. A war can change everything, spirits, mentality, etc, etc. Nothing is like before after a war.

Yes mages aspire to freedom, yes the Templars aspire to control their dangerousness. There will be inevitably agreements at one time or another because of new facts concrete, new projects, new moderate protagonists who will plead for peace. Everything you say is based on analysis fixed ,refusing to take first into account the reality of the present and close future.


Did you think that the war could divise the mages ? In one hand some resolutionists who don't want compromises, and want to destroy absolutely templars, despite death that strike them. And on the other hand  the moderate mages who are finally tired of war, and want compromise, negociations and peace with the templars ?

And so, to avoid for example that, they could accept peace, simply to preserve their unity. There are many factors.

The truth is simply that you don't want a compromise with the templars, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be realistic. That's totally false, on the contrary, it' s even less realistic a war which lasts thousand of years.

War and rebellions are very, very pre-concieved notions.

War is an expression of dominance.  Rebellion is a expression of freedom. 

If you truly want to be free, you will fight for it will all your being.  You will die for it, you will bathe yourself in blood to change the world.  I refer back to Terry Goodkinds wonderful series called the Sword of Truth, in which Richard spent nearly one year in the Old World a Nicci's wife.  During that time, he came to see the evil that was the 'socialism' style of living, and how the very people suffered for it.  And when the first insurrection happened, it failed utterly because the people didn't have teh conviction to throw off the yoke of their oppressores.  They were not willing to die for it, and thus Richard would have no part of it.

Richard changed that with one very real expression of how people SHOULD live, by the creation of a statue.  The statue represented people being free and beautiful, alive to chose how to live their lives.  Not how the Imperium wanted them to live, feeling like the only way their lives were of any use was to die in wretched agony.  Richard shattered the statue, an action he alone took, caused a rebellion in which people were willing to kill and die for.

Sometimes, it takes the actions of one man to reshape the world, for better or for worse.  But the world needed this, and is partly why I let Anders live.  It was*his* rebellion.  He showed that he was willing to kill, and to die for this.  He fullfilled every criteria needed for a full scale rebellion.

[Sylvianus]

tevikolady wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...

There will be a war, and after blood, death and suffering, there will be peace and compromise. I can assure you. Because war isn't a game like many of you think. We see that you are all born in a time of prosperity and peace. It seems so easy when I read you.

Your analysis is not good because you get the facts from the past that are no longer valid during the war. A war can change everything, spirits, mentality, etc, etc. Nothing is like before after a war.

Yes mages aspire to freedom, yes the Templars aspire to control their dangerousness. There will be inevitably agreements at one time or another because of new facts concrete, new projects, new moderate protagonists who will plead for peace. Everything you say is based on analysis fixed ,refusing to take first into account the reality of the present and close future.


Did you think that the war could divise the mages ? In one hand some resolutionists who don't want compromises, and want to destroy absolutely templars, despite death that strike them. And on the other hand  the moderate mages who are finally tired of war, and want compromise, negociations and peace with the templars ?

And so, to avoid for example that, they could accept peace, simply to preserve their unity. There are many factors.

The truth is simply that you don't want a compromise with the templars, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be realistic. That's totally false, on the contrary, it' s even less realistic a war which lasts thousand of years.

War and rebellions are very, very pre-concieved notions.

War is an expression of dominance.  Rebellion is a expression of freedom. 

If you truly want to be free, you will fight for it will all your being.  You will die for it, you will bathe yourself in blood to change the world.  I refer back to Terry Goodkinds wonderful series called the Sword of Truth, in which Richard spent nearly one year in the Old World a Nicci's wife.  During that time, he came to see the evil that was the 'socialism' style of living, and how the very people suffered for it.  And when the first insurrection happened, it failed utterly because the people didn't have teh conviction to throw off the yoke of their oppressores.  They were not willing to die for it, and thus Richard would have no part of it.

Richard changed that with one very real expression of how people SHOULD live, by the creation of a statue.  The statue represented people being free and beautiful, alive to chose how to live their lives.  Not how the Imperium wanted them to live, feeling like the only way their lives were of any use was to die in wretched agony.  Richard shattered the statue, an action he alone took, caused a rebellion in which people were willing to kill and die for.

Sometimes, it takes the actions of one man to reshape the world, for better or for worse.  But the world needed this, and is partly why I let Anders live.  It was*his* rebellion.  He showed that he was willing to kill, and to die for this.  He fullfilled every criteria needed for a full scale rebellion.

 But that's  just the beginning, how could you say it's impossible, not realistic ?

Again, you do not know what will change the position of the Templars, and the chantry during the war. They might  be receptive to the call of the Mages and their will during a terrible war. You do not know if the ceasefire will be pronounced between them. You do not know if Qunari and Darkspawn will force them to fight together and improve relations between them, pushing later for example for negotiations less intransigent, less tense.

Also, The people of Thedas won't accept a war that lasts centuries, I 'm pretty sure about that.

And most of mages do not aspire primarily to total freedom. They want to be first treated with dignity as humans. Many of them like Wynn and others are responsible and know what their power means. They want to work with people without being chained and in appalling conditions, with rules completely immoral. Mages have exploded because the circle was a system failure on the human, social, and moral plan, etc.. But they could totally work together. And they might know this in the future because war, despite suffering, brings often comprehension. and that's what it needed.

The resolutionists were pretty much the minority in DAO. Some will say that all the mages want total freedom, but that is politics, like did anders, because we know that's not what we have seen in DA2. With Orsino for example. YOU, the pro mage players on this board are saying all want total freedom, but that's not why all exploded.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 30 octobre 2011 - 02:23 .

[tevikolady]

IN the scenario I gave with Richard and the statue, was pretty much the action of one man. The previous insurrection was met with failure because the people weren't willing to risk it. And when Richard incited the rebellion, the people acted. I would imagine that the thousands or so of the people there, only one or two really wanted things to change, but in the face of such an outrageous attack, views changed.

Yes, I was pro-mage in the game. I sympathize that all mages were considered slaves. My view of teh Chantry changed when I played a mage for my third time, and I came upon an apprentice praying to Andraste. I never met her before, but it appalled me that she had been brainwashed into believing that her gift was a curse. From then on, I hated the Chantry, and had already envisioned a world where the Chantry had no control over the Mages.

But, back to what I was saying, Orsino didn't want freedom, because all he'd ever known his whole life was slavery. Even as badly as he wanted it, many slaves, or oppressed people don't want change, because it is unknown. But when it happens, you find out what is the best, or the worst of you. (it still made no sense what he did, thats my only beef with the ending).

But once you force that change, once you push people into that abyss, you see who can, and who can't fly. THe Circles all around the world rose up, the Templars could be defied, and the Chantry eventually had to abandon the Circles. Maybe the mages didn't want it at first, but when its freedom or death, I doubt many mages lined up at the Templar headquarters and begged for them to lop off their heads.

Just sayin.

Modifié par tevikolady, 30 octobre 2011 - 02:41 .

[LobselVith8]

AlexXIV wrote...

I am pretty sure they are both bloodmages or at least using bloodmagic. The Dark Ritual was bloodmagic. Morrigan performed it and Flemeth taught it to her. Well true, there is no hint that Jowan used bloodmagic in Redcliffe, however it was how the trouble started. I personally think it doesn't have to be a direct link. It is enough for me to see that someone is a bloodmage and bad things happen, without me exactly understanding how. After all I don't know enough about bloodmagic to judge. I see a bloodmage, I see bad things happen. With the exception of Morrigan and Flemeth so far even though they are supposed to be the most evil of all. Bit funny that.

My sig is out of protest because of Bioware's habit to always kill my hero's family

Should Morrigan be considered a blood mage because of the 'dark ritual' she can perform? We never see her use blood instead of mana to power her spells, and she uses magic (i.e. shape-shifting) that is technically illegal already. Finn uses a spell that can be considered blood magic during Witch Hunt, but I wouldn't consider him a blood mage, either. I'd consider mages who use blood instead of mana for their spells, like Jowan and the Grey Warden mages mentioned by Duncan, blood mages.

[Sylvianus]

@tevik I don't disagree on the principle, but there are many other conclusions that may result from this war. Not only this one. Mages could win, templars could win, no one could win and so compromise. What I am saying, is clear, there are many possibilities, you haven't all the answers.

If the war lasts too long, is too terrible, you do not believe that pragmatism may have its place in the story ?

Andraste, slaves and all people had sworn loss Tevinter. And what we see today is that Tevinter is still there, with its own divine, and no one threatens it.

The Qunari were seen as heretics by humans and the chantry , Qunari were fanatics, who responded to the Qun and yet that did not stop both side to peace, to sign a treaty. Because the reality can be terrible and force people to be pragmatic, even with the most idealistic ideas.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 30 octobre 2011 - 02:58 .

[TEWR]

Dave of Canada wrote...


All Mages will be culled and the rebellion will be eliminated, any survivors will be made tranquil and assist in the menial labour to repair the damage from the war. The Circles will be rebuilt and the mages will face true oppression, none of that sympathetic noble lifestyle they're currently used to. Give them something to truly complain about.

I expected someone who's drunk and near a keyboard to start typing like "Gahohaopgje v bizbb vo qptup beoj o ba obnf oboe ba BANANAS!!! jaojo oeoru o oafjo jeo jifo hogheru0ajvphoe boa btoe gaopwjepjop[rue0[gbjv os"

First, I wouldn't call the Circles a compromise, if by the Circles you mean how they were recently being operated. If you mean the idea of the Circles, then it could be a compromise if reform was made to the system on a grand scale. The Mages, Chantry, and the Templars both need reforming, but IMO the Templar Order and the Chantry needs it more. The idea of what the Circles should be and what they actually are aren't the same thing.

Second, we have two -- three if you count the Starkhaven mages' description of the Starkhaven Circle -- representations of Circle life. Of those, two were told to the player as being bad to the mages -- with Kirkwall being worse than Starkhaven -- while the other has been told to us to have been the most liberal Circle of them all. That's a 2:1 ratio of Circles treating their mages horribly.

[IanPolaris]

[quote]KJandrew wrote...

[quote]IanPolaris wrote...

[quote]KJandrew wrote...

[quote]IanPolaris wrote...

There were various attempts such as many "children's crusades" that ended badly largely because of lack of political support.  You also neglect one other major factor.  The fall of Constantiople which made overland travel to the holy land virtually impossible.  The conflict didn't end.  The accessibility ended and by the time that didn't matter the Catholic Church had lost the politcal power needed.  Read some history please.
[/quote]
The Children's crusade took place place in 1212, hardly after the crusades. The last crusade to the east ended on 1272, Acre fell in 1291. After this there was not a single crusade against Jerusalem or the middle east. You can't try and claim the Fall of Constantinople as a reason, it was lost in 1453.
[/quote]

There were several "children's crusades" and other failed crusades actually, and the directive for the crusades was never lifted during the rest of the middle ages.  Constantinople may have fallen in 1453 but the Ottoman Turks had taken large chunks of the Balkans effectively cutting off easy access by military ground forces to the middle east at least a hundred years prior to that which fits very nicely with the end of active military crusades.  Again read your history.
[/quote]
Sorry unless my history teachers and my books all seem to be missing something there was only one proper children's crusade that tried to go to the middle east. Even the loss of land in the Balkan can not be used as a reason why the crusades never reignited. In the Third Crusade Richard and Philip sailed all the way to the middle east from italy, this happened in several of the other ones too.
[/quote]

The key word is "proper".  There were in fact several failed "crusades" that didn't make it past the logistical planning stages.  My point is that the crusades never properly ended but rather petered out.  The church during the entirety of the the middle ages never renounced the doctrine of the crusade.  They stopped for logistical and economic reasons, not because peace broke out.

Yes, I can say the seizure of land in the Balkans was a primary factor.  Sure the crusading armies could (and did) sail to the middle east, but when the Turks started to threaten Christian Austria, the logistic lines became impossible to maintain, and the big Christian powers (including the Italian city-states) had bigger fish to fry closer to home.  Again, you like too many others forget that wars are won by C3I and Logistics and those became impossible once the Ottomans obtained serious inroads into Europe.  I also add at the same time, the foe changed from the relatively disorganized Saracen Armies to the more unified and disciplined Turkish Armies.

That's the real reason there were no more crusades.  The Turks were too tough to take on militarily and no one wanted to spark a war that could result in the loss of Vienna and perhaps even all of Central Europe.  The Turks were feared turing the last half the the middle ages and first half of the rennaissance.

[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
There are lots of templars around when Cullen makes that statement.  Not ONE of them disagrees with it.  It's Kerran's sister that disagrees but not one templar does.  Not even Aveline (if persent) who was married to a Templar disagrees with it.  The facts as presented in the game back me on this.
[/quote]
Templars are soldiers, soldiers aren't supposed to disagree with their commanders in front of random strangers. 
[/quote]

We see plenty of other cases where templars disagree with other Templars in front of stangers even.  What youa re discussing is the modern (Prussian) modern military ideal and it doesn't apply here.
[/quote]
When do we see Templars disagree with a casual statement made by a superiour? Not arguing with your commander in public is hardly a modern (or prussian) ideal, so it does apply here.
[/quote]

Actually the whole idea of a rigid rank structure, discipline in the ranks when it comes to public expression and more are all parts of the modern Prussian Military ideal.  Until Frederick the Great most armies were little more than loosely organized mobs with units under the loose control of "captains" and "sergeants" of widely varying ability.  The Templars are nothing like what a midaeval army was.

[quote]
[quote]
Others have shown that Cullen is indeed protrayed as a moderate.
[/quote]
What others? Simply being kinder than Alarik and Meredith does not = Moderate. By that logic the presense of Thrask  and all the other Templar who are working in alliance with the mage underground show that Cullen is a physco.
[/quote]

The entire game goes out of it's way to protray Cullen as a moderate.
[/quote]
How? You keep on spouting this line even though you bring no evidence and even though plenty of people disagree with you.
[/quote]

Pleny of people agree with me too.  Better yet, Cullen is protrayed as the ideal Templar.  If the Ideal Templar believes that Templars control mages by divine right that makes my point even more I think.

-Polaris

[Vlad_Dracul]

There must be a compromise. For example, Warhammer 40000 is the most brutal scifi universe, and even there psykers (mages) had always useful laws and regulations. Most powerful psykers are Inquisitors, which hunting illegal psykers, witches and sorcerers, people what fight even against demons and abominations. Templar equivalent of holy warriors there are Grey Knights and Sisters of Battle, both lead by Inquisitors against unholy evil.

So, in Dragon Age 3, there should be a possibility reform the Chantry, when loyal mages with best training will be equal allies with Templars in fight against blood magic and demons or with choice to serve relatively free as doctors/healers amongst normal people or battle mages officers in royal armies. Reasonable laws and equality. Thats all.

[IanPolaris]

Sylvianus wrote...

@tevik I don't disagree on the principle, but there are many other conclusions that may result from this war. Not only this one. Mages could win, templars could win, no one could win and so compromise. What I am saying, is clear, there are many possibilities, you haven't all the answers.

If the war lasts too long, is too terrible, you do not believe that pragmatism may have its place in the story ?

Unless the Templars dramatically change their basic stance (which IS possible given sufficient time and pressure) then no, pragmatism doesn't have a place.  The only other way is if someone (other than the Chantry) took over the Templars and made them accept a pragmatic solution.  If I had to guess that outside force would be the crowned heads of state.  I can already see that possibility in Fereldan in fact.

Since the Templars believe they are doing the Maker's work by Divine RIght no matter what anyone else thinks (including the Chantry), I fail to see how any compromise is possible or really even desirable.

Andraste, slaves and all people had sworn loss Tevinter. And what we see today is that Tevinter is still there, with its own divine, and no one threatens it.

There have been at least two Exalted Marches against Tevinter, and Tevinter is currently being threatened by the Qunari, so it's not all sunshine and roses for Tevinter.  In addition to that, Andraste was betrayed and executed as part of this peace deal by a jealous husband and an upwardly mobil magister...and most of Andraste's armies were actually barbarian (Almarri) hordes who's first loyalty was to their chieftans the greatest of which cut a deal with Tevinter.

The Qunari were seen as heretics by humans and the chantry , Qunari were fanatics, who responded to the Qun and yet that did not stop both side to peace, to sign a treaty. Because the reality can be terrible and force people to be pragmatic, even with the most idealistic ideas.

Actually the Qunari are seen as godless heathans, and the peace is nothing of the sort.  It's an extended cease fire.  Both Sten and the Arishok make that crystal clear.

-Polariks

[KJandrew]

[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
[quote]
When do we see Templars disagree with a casual statement made by a superiour? Not arguing with your commander in public is hardly a modern (or prussian) ideal, so it does apply here.
[/quote]

Actually the whole idea of a rigid rank structure, discipline in the ranks when it comes to public expression and more are all parts of the modern Prussian Military ideal.  Until Frederick the Great most armies were little more than loosely organized mobs with units under the loose control of "captains" and "sergeants" of widely varying ability.  The Templars are nothing like what a midaeval army was.
[/quote]
Apart from you know the real life Templars, or the Hospitallers or the Tuetonic Knights or hell even the Knights of Lazarus. These all had a rigid rank structure and discipline. Even in National armies a Knight does not argue with the lord he's in service to in public in front of random strangers. Neither would a common footsoldier argue with an order or a statement from his captain or Sergeant.
On top of this you claimed we've seen plenty of times Templars argue with superiors in front of random strangers, i asked when we've ever seen this and you have still not given a single example. 
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
Others have shown that Cullen is indeed protrayed as a moderate.
[/quote]
What others? Simply being kinder than Alarik and Meredith does not = Moderate. By that logic the presense of Thrask  and all the other Templar who are working in alliance with the mage underground show that Cullen is a physco.
[/quote]

The entire game goes out of it's way to protray Cullen as a moderate.
[/quote]
How? You keep on spouting this line even though you bring no evidence and even though plenty of people disagree with you.
[/quote]

Pleny of people agree with me too.  Better yet, Cullen is protrayed as the ideal Templar.  If the Ideal Templar believes that Templars control mages by divine right that makes my point even more I think.

-Polaris
[/quote]
-----------------------------------
When is it ever said that Cullen is a "moderate" or "ideal" Templar in the game or by the devs? These are just oppinions expressed by people on this forum not a fact that can be used as evidence.
As i said before if you can give me a quote from one of the writers that Cullen is moderate then i'll cede the point. 

Modifié par KJandrew, 30 octobre 2011 - 05:34 .

[Sylvianus]

[quote]IanPolaris wrote...

[quote]Sylvianus wrote...

@tevik I don't disagree on the principle, but there are many other conclusions that may result from this war. Not only this one. Mages could win, templars could win, no one could win and so compromise. What I am saying, is clear, there are many possibilities, you haven't all the answers.

If the war lasts too long, is too terrible, you do not believe that pragmatism may have its place in the story ?
[/quote]

Since the Templars believe they are doing the Maker's work by Divine RIght no matter what anyone else thinks (including the Chantry), I fail to see how any compromise is possible or really even desirable.[/quote]

You fail to see, because you are not  yet at war and templars didn't suffer.  You could see it in the next game. It's only speculation now, not universal thruth. Religion can adapt to the politics and society, this has been demonstrated many times. And we see it today. The modern society requires and required them to upgrade their thoughts, and they did it sometimes to the detriment of what they have always thought and claimed.

And no, even the believers may have doubts about some things and we see it in DA2, with Kerran and Thrask for example. Nothing is absolute.

[quote]
Andraste, slaves and all people had sworn loss Tevinter. And what we see today is that Tevinter is still there, with its own divine, and no one threatens it.
[/quote]

[quote]There have been at least two Exalted Marches against Tevinter, and Tevinter is currently being threatened by the Qunari, so it's not all sunshine and roses for Tevinter.  In addition to that, Andraste was betrayed and executed as part of this peace deal by a jealous husband and an upwardly mobil magister...and most of Andraste's armies were actually barbarian (Almarri) hordes who's first loyalty was to their chieftans the greatest of which cut a deal with Tevinter.[/quote]

Yes two wars where nobody won. Is Tevinter threatened today, at least attacked ? No.  Why ? Because Thedas, people learned, they don't want a terrible war they aren't sure to win, even the chantry. That's called pragmatism even if that's not totally a peace. They let them despite that's a rogue state with its own and herectic divine, an " evil " state governed by mages. If they wanted so much to destroy Tevinter, they would act again, no doubt. And the Andraste'sarmies were barbarians who failed to destroy Tevinter and so gave up. Tevinter didn't try to regain its lost territory because of its weakness against all the others nations and because they knowed they couldn't win. Pragmatism.  They don't attack other nations.

And for the Qunari, they actually threat everyone, I don't see the point with Tevinter. Besides Tevinter refused to sign the treaty, that's why it's more complicate between them.

[quote]
The Qunari were seen as heretics by humans and the chantry , Qunari were fanatics, who responded to the Qun and yet that did not stop both side to peace, to sign a treaty. Because the reality can be terrible and force people to be pragmatic, even with the most idealistic ideas.
[/quote]

[quote] Actually the Qunari are seen as godless heathans, and the peace is nothing of the sort.  It's an extended cease fire.  Both Sten and the Arishok make that crystal clear. [/quote][/quote]

So, that's a compromise, even if that's not perfect. Qunari wanted to dominate and the chantry wanted to eradicate them before that I recall to you.  Now,  qunari don't have the right to be in the Thedas cities, that's why their presence in Kirkwall is such a problem. They ( humans nations and qunari ) don't want to destroy each other, they aren't at war at the moment.

If one breaks the cease fire, okay, but that's another story and that doesn't mean they couldn't sign another  treaty if in the next war, it's the same mess again as in the past.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 30 octobre 2011 - 06:16 .

[AlexXIV]

LobselVith8 wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

I am pretty sure they are both bloodmages or at least using bloodmagic. The Dark Ritual was bloodmagic. Morrigan performed it and Flemeth taught it to her. Well true, there is no hint that Jowan used bloodmagic in Redcliffe, however it was how the trouble started. I personally think it doesn't have to be a direct link. It is enough for me to see that someone is a bloodmage and bad things happen, without me exactly understanding how. After all I don't know enough about bloodmagic to judge. I see a bloodmage, I see bad things happen. With the exception of Morrigan and Flemeth so far even though they are supposed to be the most evil of all. Bit funny that.

My sig is out of protest because of Bioware's habit to always kill my hero's family

Should Morrigan be considered a blood mage because of the 'dark ritual' she can perform? We never see her use blood instead of mana to power her spells, and she uses magic (i.e. shape-shifting) that is technically illegal already. Finn uses a spell that can be considered blood magic during Witch Hunt, but I wouldn't consider him a blood mage, either. I'd consider mages who use blood instead of mana for their spells, like Jowan and the Grey Warden mages mentioned by Duncan, blood mages.

I think 'blood mage' is a Chantry term and as such inaccurate. There is probably an old tome or something somewhere containing all spells and rituals which are considered bloodmagic in the eyes of the Chantry. Morrigan says herself that the warden would probably consider it bloodmagic. Assuming the Warden goes with most people's prejudice who probably call all and any unknown or fobidden magic bloodmagic. If you look at Merrill for example, she is a Dalish Pariah. Not bloodmage. But everyone labels her bloodmage. So my guess is alot of ancient rituals and spells are offically labeled bloodmagic, while they in truth are each a different form of ancient magic, of which some require blood and some not. I only use the term bloodmage for Morrigan and Flemeth because Morrigan said so. If in the next game she says it is not really bloodmagic, then I basically believe it. Because I believe anything she told me. Not only because I like her, but simply because she is imo the most trustworthy source of knowledge when it comes to magic in general. Flemeth probably knows even more than Morrigan, but I don't trust her further than I could throw her in dragon form.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 30 octobre 2011 - 06:17 .

[IanPolaris]

[quote]Sylvianus wrote...

[quote]IanPolaris wrote...

[quote]Sylvianus wrote...

@tevik I don't disagree on the principle, but there are many other conclusions that may result from this war. Not only this one. Mages could win, templars could win, no one could win and so compromise. What I am saying, is clear, there are many possibilities, you haven't all the answers.

If the war lasts too long, is too terrible, you do not believe that pragmatism may have its place in the story ?
[/quote]

Since the Templars believe they are doing the Maker's work by Divine RIght no matter what anyone else thinks (including the Chantry), I fail to see how any compromise is possible or really even desirable.[/quote]

You fail to see, because you are not  yet at war and templars didn't suffer.  You could see it in the next game. It's only speculation now, not universal thruth. Religion can adapt to the politics and society, this has been demonstrated many times. And we see it today. The modern society requires and required them to upgrade their thoughts, and they did it sometimes to the detriment of what they have always thought and claimed.

And no, even the believers may have doubts about some things and we see it in DA2, with Kerran and Thrask for example. Nothing is absolute.
[/quote]

Thank you for illustrating my point.  UNTIL that change happens though, I fail to see how compromise is possible or even desirable.  Basically compromise...true compromise would require the Templars to admit that they might have been in error and that's not possible when you think you have an inside track to the Maker.  That may change but until it does I fail to see how peace is even possible or even desirable.


[quote]
[quote]
Andraste, slaves and all people had sworn loss Tevinter. And what we see today is that Tevinter is still there, with its own divine, and no one threatens it.
[/quote]


[quote]There have been at least two Exalted Marches against Tevinter, and Tevinter is currently being threatened by the Qunari, so it's not all sunshine and roses for Tevinter.  In addition to that, Andraste was betrayed and executed as part of this peace deal by a jealous husband and an upwardly mobil magister...and most of Andraste's armies were actually barbarian (Almarri) hordes who's first loyalty was to their chieftans the greatest of which cut a deal with Tevinter.[/quote]

Yes two wars where nobody won. Is Tevinter threatened today, at least attacked ? No.  Why ? Because Thedas, people learned, they don't want a terrible war they aren't sure to win, even the chantry. That's called pragmatism even if that's not totally a peace. They let them despite that's a rogue state with its own and herectic divine, an " evil " state governed by mages. If they wanted so much to destroy Tevinter, they would act again, no doubt. And the Andraste'sarmies were barbarians who failed to destroy Tevinter and so gave up. Tevinter didn't try to regain its lost territory because of its weakness against all the others nations and because they knowed they couldn't win. Pragmatism.  They don't attack other nations.

And for the Qunari, they actually threat everyone, I don't see the point with Tevinter. Besides Tevinter refused to sign the treaty, that's why it's more complicate between them.
[/quote]

The game makes it very clear that there is no true peace, only an extended cessation of hostilities which is far from the same thing.  In fact it's forbidden on pain of death to follow the Black Divine in Andrastian lands which is hardly the mark of peace or tolerance.

[quote]
[quote]
The Qunari were seen as heretics by humans and the chantry , Qunari were fanatics, who responded to the Qun and yet that did not stop both side to peace, to sign a treaty. Because the reality can be terrible and force people to be pragmatic, even with the most idealistic ideas.
[/quote]


[quote]Actually the Qunari are seen as godless heathans, and the peace is nothing of the sort.  It's an extended cease fire.  Both Sten and the Arishok make that crystal clear. [/quote][/quote]

So, that's a compromise, even if that's not perfect. Qunari wanted to dominate and the chantry wanted to eradicate them before that I recall to you.  Now,  qunari don't have the right to be in the Thedas cities, that's why their presence in Kirkwall is such a problem. They ( humans nations and qunari ) don't want to destroy each other, they aren't at war at the moment.

If one breaks the cease fire, okay, but that's another story and that doesn't mean they couldn't sign another  treaty if in the next war, it's the same mess again as in the past.
[/quote]

That is not compromise any more than the South and North Koreans compromised at the end of the Korean war (they didn't at all).  It's merely an extended pause in a lengthy war.

-Polaris

[The Baconer]

AlexXIV wrote...
If you look at Merrill for example, she is a Dalish Pariah. Not bloodmage.

That's really more of a social label than a proficiency. In practice, she does use blood magic, and calling her a blood mage wouldn't be inaccurate. Not that that's a bad thing, of course.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

I think the game makes is fairly clear there is a peace between Tevitner and the other Andrastian nations. People can travel between countries at will. Wynne could go to Minrathous with Shale on an academic study. Connor can take a position in Tevinter at Eamon's urging, Feynriel can go and become and apprentice to a mage, Loghain may not be able to get away with selling elves into slavery but he could still publicly hire them to supposedly cure the alienage of a plague. There are many Tevinter characters that show up in both stories and while most of them are slavers presumably they would have legitimate covers as a front for their work.

The Black and White Divines haven't fought a true war for over 400 years. They've had plenty of opportunity to do so.

[IanPolaris]

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

I think the game makes is fairly clear there is a peace between Tevitner and the other Andrastian nations. People can travel between countries at will. Wynne could go to Minrathous with Shale on an academic study. Connor can take a position in Tevinter at Eamon's urging, Feynriel can go and become and apprentice to a mage, Loghain may not be able to get away with selling elves into slavery but he could still publicly hire them to supposedly cure the alienage of a plague. There are many Tevinter characters that show up in both stories and while most of them are slavers presumably they would have legitimate covers as a front for their work.

The Black and White Divines haven't fought a true war for over 400 years. They've had plenty of opportunity to do so.

I don't think that's clear at all especially when one can not even wear a Tevinter Chanty holy symbol without being killed.  I'd say that this likely means that the war is ongoing, just on hiatus.  As for trade and commerce, even historically even the most virulent enemies would trade with each other even during the height of conflict.  The idea that war automatically means embargoing the enemy nation is a very modern notion.

-Polaris

[Jedi Master of Orion]

Four centuries is a long time. How many generations of peace is that? That's twice as long as the Dales existed. That's several times as long as the Exalted Marches themselves ever lasted. That's even longer than it took them to begin hostilities after the Schism happened in the first place. Peace with Tevinter is all the people of Thedas have ever known many times over. Unless something happens to change the status quo drastically, neither side is likely willing to ever send soldiers. Despite the tension, I'm certain both the Imperial and Andrastian Chantry don't consider the other to be an especially pressing concern.

Modifié par Jedi Master of Orion, 30 octobre 2011 - 07:13 .

[IanPolaris]

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

Four centuries is a long time. How many generations of peace is that? That's twice as long as the Dales existed. That's several times as long as the Exalted Marches themselves ever lasted. That's even longer than it took them to begin hostilities after the Schism happened in the first place. Peace with Tevinter is all the people of Thedas have ever known many times over. Unless something happens to change the status quo drastically, neither side is likely willing to ever send soldiers.

Four centuries is an eyeblink for some.  The point is that the Andrastian and Tevinter Chantries do not recognize each other's existance.  They have not made peace.  A long truce is still only a truce.  It's lasted as long as it has because of the Qunari who threaten both.  Long standing wars can be set aside to deal with outside threats but that doesn't a peace make.

-Polaris

[Jedi Master of Orion]

There was 110 years between the end of the Fourth Blight and the beginning of the First Qunari War. And the Archdemon was slain in only 12 years, if they were really interested in resuming hostilities they would have.

[Sylvianus]

the Templars to admit that they might have been in error and that's not possible when you think you have an inside track to the Maker. 

interpretations may vary depending on the urgency of the situation, awareness, and increasing demands of society in which they live.

For example before and during war religion, the catholic church which always claimed protestants must be eradicated, " no compromise " with those evil people, those children of the devil, " we need to protect the true faith and burn all those demons " and after many years after fighting each other , they claimed that all are among the childrens of God, despite the differences between the christians. Why did they change their assertions ? The catholics thought they had an inside track to the maker too. They were absolutely convinced that the protestants were the children of the devil, and wanted absolutely to kill them all. All. The church always said, God allows you to kill these miscreants, encouraged the populations under their control to do so.

And no one at the time could think one day there will be finally peace between the two factions, that it could be end. No one. The war change things. So how the people and the church could have changed their mentality, their mind according to you ?

The game makes it very clear that there is no true peace, only an extended cessation of hostilities which is far from the same thing.  In fact it's forbidden on pain of death to follow the Black Divine in Andrastian lands which is hardly the mark of peace or tolerance.

But the peace means first, to stop a material war, what is already better that to destroy each other until death. The white divine doesn't threat Tevinter and its beliefs and its people, that's already a big thing, despite, they are according to them "evil " and heretics. It's really insulting for them to see mages in a government, to lead a kingdom, and to pratice slavery with their blood magic without impunity.

That is not compromise any more than the South and North Koreans compromised at the end of the Korean war (they didn't at all).  It's merely an extended pause in a lengthy war.

Hmm. North Korea is currently fed by South Korea. Without South Korea, North Korea would have long since collapsed. In a lenghty war they wouldn't help at all North Korea, and don't say to me, they didn''t have the choice, because of a threat, The United States protects the South korea.

The goal of South Korea is waiting for the collapse of the North korean regime, and reunification. This is not peace, but it's not a lenghty war either. An extended pause, maybe, but South Korea simply wait the end.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 30 octobre 2011 - 07:25 .