silentassassin264 wrote...
See the problem is that while you pointed out the mages are treated horriby and that leads to the cornered mentality makes them sympathetic, the writers did not agree with you. Fenris, that former templar, and pretty much every non mage in the game always go to the circular insane logic that since they turned to the blood magic in the corner, it proofs them right that all mages are going to lose control and cause havoc. Despite that is clearly insane troll logic, they feel perfectly justified and the writers felt perfectly justified with that accusation.
Well the views of the characters don't necessarily reflect the views of the writers. I think the writers expect us to be able to look deeper and think harder, rather than just take everything characters say at face value.
As I said with Merrill before, she did nothing wrong. It was not like Merrill was running around using blood magic for mundane or slightly evil things. She was being rather responsible and in a New Path did nothing wrong and still everyone in the clan blames Merrill for Marethari's suicide and they even make Merrill blame herself for doing absolutely nothing wrong and feel quite justified because she is a blood mage. Merrill is my favorite character and her character quest just ends up another way for them to talk down mages and act like the a stupid, irresponsible adult children who endanger everyone around them.
But the fact that you feel that their anger is unjustified
proves that the game still leaves you space to sympathise with mage characters. Merrill being punsihed for her choices doesn't mean that the writers want her to be portrayed as evil. There's still, I feel, substantial room for self-interpretation.
Yes if you look for the mage oppresion in the game, it is there, seeing as by Act 3 they are held in cages. But do you ever get to see the mages held like animals? Do you see any non mage really taking their side? Nope and Nope. The writers made everything in the game feel like it was perfectly justified in response to the mages and that is the bias. If you stand up with Orsino in the square at the beginning of Act 3, no one joins you out of sympathy of the mages. The nobles that join you do it because they want to overthrow Meredith and get the nobility ruling again, not any sympathy for the mages. The Mage Underground is family members of mages and mages so that is still pretty much an exception and it really does not tie into the main story anyway.
Well the templars are the ruling power in Kirkwall and mages are not. The mages have nothing to lose by fighting back; they're already in a prison. But the nobility risks a lot, especially with Meredith trying to take over the city guard. Any noble who spoke out against her or in support of mages could find themselves arrested on suspicion of harbourng apostates, or even being one, or some other trumped up charge altogether.
It's kind of hard to imagine the writers being biased against fictional characters they created. Obviously they expected
some people to side with the mages, since they made it possible to do that. Having a pro-mage Hawke flee Kirkwall isn't a punishment for making the "wrong" choice. It's a logical consequence of his actions, and the only one that makes sense. The Chantry is still the most powerful organization in Thedas, and it's not going to look too kindly on those who openly oppose it. Hawke, for all his power, still would not be able to combat the full might of the Chantry and the templars. Personally, I thought being on the run was the perfect ending for pro-mage Hawke. The idea of being viscount doesn't appeal to me at all.
Retour en haut
