728 réponses à ce sujet

[MichaelFinnegan]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

Ahh, I see, thank you for explaining it in so much depth

It was no trouble.

But this bit I don't understand. If the Rite renders Tranquil invisible to demons and spirits, then how did Pharamond, a Tranquil, get the attention of one? Shouldn't that be impossible without help?

Yes, I'd assume that's true to an extent. A tranquil would have no actual "desire" to contact a demon, and very few "easy" means to do so. But, let's say someone ordered a tranquil to look into the nature of Tranquility, then perhaps it'd occur to the logical mind of a tranquil to contact a demon. So what would Pharamond, for instance, have done? He'd have first started with the assumption that the process of repairing Tranquility would have to be done from the other side of the Veil (from the Fade), and not being able to enter the Fade himself, he'd have sought out a place where someone/something from the Fade could be easily lured out, which would be a place where the Veil would be thin. Then he'd have proceeded to contact a demon. I suppose that's the best I can do with what I have.

Or are Tranquil only invisible to spirits and demons in the Fade itself, so a thin Veil gets around that? I don't expect answers for these, I'm just throwing questions around.

I'd assume a tranquil has two defensive mechanisms: first, by not entering the Fade naturally simply because he doesn't dream, he'd no longer is susceptible to possession like any mage would be; second, even if the demon somehow were to attempt to get into his mind, he could actively resist, which could be a volitional thing. Although he cannot do anything about the former, he could theoretically let down his mental guard and lure a demon into his mind. Now, I suppose the very act of allowing a demon to "contact" his mind would mean he'd be cured (as Pharamond's research seems to indicate), but it'd also mean he'd have let the demon into his mind in a cured and vulnerable state, dangerous for any mage.

I know it probably doesn't stand closer scrutiny, but that's what I have from what I understood so far...

It seems awfully plot-convenient that Pharamond is cured of being an abomination as well, but maybe that's me.

Oh, no. Where would any story about Dragon Age be without a Fade sequence? In Asunder, we have Wynne, Rhys, and party entering the Fade and "releasing" Pharamond from the demon's grasp. Here's the full sequence of events: Pharamond lures a demon to possess him (without the intent of getting possessed); he gets "cured" of Tranquility but proceeds to become possessed; all hell breaks loose at Adamant Fortress; Wynne comes to know about Pharamond's predicament and sets off to Val Royeaux to get help from other mages (Rhys, especially) at the White Spire; Wynne and party arrive at Adamant and deal with the other abominations at the Fortress; they then encounter Pharamond's abomination and carry out a ritual to enter the Fade to defeat the demon there; Wynne then kills the demon and releases Pharamond from its grasp. Their whole objective was to release Pharamond and learn what he'd learnt about Tranquility, and to know what went wrong. I think even Wynne's investigation is sanctioned by the Divine.

I don't know who had that 'breakthrough' for the cure or how they had it, but I find myself hoping that curing Formari won't be an easy 'phone-a-spirit' affair. That'd be way too cheap IMO. :/ Not that I understand how the Rite severs the connection, but usually broken things aren't glued back together without scars, and even then the glue is a foreign substancs...'Magic' is too easy an answer.

Well, in Gaider's defense, it's stated that Pharamond's research was his life's work, and that the Divine sanctioned Pharamond's research some 5 years prior to Pharamond becoming cured. Even though the answers probably weren't easily available, I agree the cure on the surface appears to be rather simple. The "scar" that you look for would be the sudden return of all emotions which leaves the cured tranquil more vulnerable than ever, thereby leaving the question open whether it's worth bringing the tranquil back at all.

Sometimes I think Gaider and Co. keep the details intentionally vague and "it's magic!" is built into some of the explanations. I have a suspicion they want to focus more on the story rather than on the exact technicalities of things (such as, what the consequences of doing something are, rather than how that something itself is done) - although I'd rather have the details as well. My opinion anyway, for what it's worth...

[Gervaise]

Sorry, did it actually say that Rhys and Adrian didn't know who was made tranquil or why? It would be extremely odd if they didn't at least know who was being made tranquil, even if they weren't privy to the reasons. You'd assume that they would take an interest in apprentices because of the possibility of recruiting them to their cause after they have passed the harrowing, so they would know who were the tough ones, who were the flakey ones, who were the rebellious ones. If the latter were the ones turning up tranquil, they would start crying foul. After all up until the opening of Asunder the White Spire appears to be under the control of a perfectly reasonable Knight Commander, who is only replaced after the attempt on the life of the Divine.

In Kinloch Hold the tranquil wander around in full view and the same was true of Kirkwall, which is why Anders comments on the increase in their numbers and the fact that he knows many of them weren't apprentices who failed their harrowing. He also clearly states that it is against chantry law for a Circle Mage to be made tranquil if they have passed their harrowing. Since this is common knowledge, Adrian at least would be quick to jump on it if this rule was being breached.

Anders was afraid of being made tranquil because he kept running away and was therefore technically an apostate once he left the Circle. Rhys was acused of murdering other mages by using blood magic, which again would technically make him an apostate since he was operating outside the law of the Circle, so again this might render him in danger of being made tranquil, although I think it was more likely he would be executed. Adrian warns the mages at Andoral's Reach that they will all be either executed or made tranquil because,.again, they are now apostates, but while they were still imprisoned in the Spire, the Lord Seeker was threatening summary execution, probably because he now knows that tranquility can be reversed, so there is not much point in using it unless you still want the knowledge the mage has in their mind, which was his argument for making Pharamond tranquil again, he would be safe but with the knowledge gained still able to be used.

The only mages in the Spire who "disappeared" were the apprentices who failed their harrowing. The principle use of the Rite of Tranquility in the Circles was for mages who seemed at too great a risk of being possessed and it seemed a foregone conclusion that they would fail their harrowing. Therefore they would be offered, or would ask for, the alternative of tranquility. It would seem that Pharamond fell into that category.

[Silfren]

Sylvianus wrote...

Also, Adrian, contrary to Anders, is not afraid to directly confront the Templars. Not afraid to attack them first, and attack them if they threaten them.

Yes, she can be aggressive towards people who are hostile towards her and mages, but it has nothing to do with the will to go after the masses murder of innocent people for political purposes.

(Yes it killed the elf, but then again, considering he was already dead, so it does not really matter)

Once again I have to say I find your posts as incomprehensible as they are laughable.

You've made it abundantly clear in older posts that you unequivocally see Anders as a terrorist whose actions were unjustifiable and unforgiveable.  So it's just plain bizarre that you hold Adrian in high esteem.  Asunder doesn't leave much room for interpretation, I think: had she been there when Anders exploded the Chantry I don't doubt she would have been his loudest supporter.  

Same with Evangeline.  She is essentially the same character as Greagoir. If you think of Greagoir as a reasonable, rational templar, then again it makes absolutely no sense for you to think of Evangeline as naive and easily manipulated for being a total mage-sympathizer.  She is just like him in her belief that mages are to be protected just as much as they are protected against, and not believing that mages are guilty just for existing.  There is nothing to justify your belief that she is naive or misguided.  Her own thoughts and actions within the book refute any such claim that she is blinded by her mage sympathies.

So I still question whether you actually read the same book as the rest of us.  Your assessments of the characters aren't merely a varying interpretation, they fly in the face of direct evidence of the book.  You might as well be insisting that you read blue anywhere the book read "yellow."

Modifié par Silfren, 14 janvier 2012 - 08:28 .

[Sylvianus]

You are just being ridiculous. That's like saying that Anders can not be good man and different, IS necessarily a terrorist ( you always said he isn't ), obsessed, because Adrian acts like him, is like him ( according to your assumptions ) without the ability to distinguish the two people. All what you said about Anders, that's Adrian. huuuurrrr which is completely stupid, you know. You're saying that everything you have defended about Anders ... is nonsense and actually all what you said, is nothing but nonsense. Are you aware ? Someone smart enought can find differences. To simplify everything  is just for fools who think they are smarter than others.

You should shut up, before saying totally crap, you appear like a fool.

Also It seems that you don't know why I despise Anders so much, And I never said that she couldn't be considered as a terrorist, the difference ? You won't know, you can just pretend to know, desesperate like you did in your last post.

But of course, you won't know why, I won't answer because.. actually, I just despise you, you don't desserve an answer. You can say watever what you want, I don't care about your thoughts, you are just a **** to me.

For the rest, I find it, funny how you're so desperate to have a mark of attention from me, but you won't have it, except, some depictable words. Because, you are nothing and your posts are nothing.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 14 janvier 2012 - 09:26 .

[Silfren]

Sylvianus wrote...

You are just being ridiculous. That's like saying that Anders can not be good man and different, IS necessarily a terrorist ( you always said he isn't ), obsessed, because Adrian acts like him, is like him ( according to your assumptions ) without the ability to distinguish the two people. All what you said about Anders, that's Adrian. huuuurrrr which is completely stupid, you know. You're saying that everything you have defended about Anders ... is nonsense and actually all what you said, is nothing but nonsense. Are you aware ? Someone smart enought can find differences. To simplify everything  is just for fools who think they are smarter than others.

I'm not saying anything about how Anders can be or should be interpreted.  I'm saying I find it utterly bizarre that anyone who does condemn him as a hateful terrorist, which you do, based on past posts you've written, can yet consider Adrian to be a good, not-too-immoral character. 

Nothing I'm saying has any bearing on how I view Anders.  Nor am I here debating whether Anders can rightly be viewed as a terrorist or freedom fighter.  Neither has ANYTHING to do with what I'm saying, so why you're bringing up non-existent points is beyond me.  

Of course I realize that a lot of the problem boils down to a major language barrier, as your English is extremely difficult to understand, but I know we wouldn't do any better the other way around, as the only other language Ihave any ability in is written Irish. 

You should shut up, before saying totally crap, you appear like a fool.

And maybe you should avoid steering into blatant personal attacks.  Also, I'm not about to shut up on an open forum, so you might as well stop telling me to.

Also It seems that you don't know why I despise Anders so much, And I never said that she couldn't be considered as a terrorist, the difference ? You won't know, you can just pretend to know, desesperate like you did in your last post.

I do know why you despise Anders.  I've never had a problem with you thinking whatever you wish about him.  That doesn't mean I'm not going to counter any point you bring up in defense of your view.  You realize these are discussion forums, right, not merely "state-my-opinion-and-not-let-anyone-contest-it forums?  Anything you write is open for others to challenge.  Deal with it or start a blog with comments disabled, I suggest.

But of course, you won't know why, I won't answer because.. actually, I just despise you, you don't desserve an answer. You can say watever what you want, I don't care about your thoughts, you are just a **** to me.

And yet you're answering me anyway.  You know what I do when I decide I don't want like a given poster to the extent that replying to their comments isn't worth my time, or even seeing what they have to say isn't worth it?  I scroll by posts with their name, and never respond to them.  But the personal attacks are a bit much.  I'm a **** to you?  Gee, you seem to be far more affected by my posts than I am by yours.

Replying to me by telling me you're not going to respond...it's kind of self-defeating, you know.

For the rest, I find it, funny how you're so desperate to have a mark of attention from me, but you won't have it, except, some depictable words. Because, you are nothing and your posts are nothing.

Well, if I was eager for your attention, getting it has turned out to be easy, because you continually respond regardless of how often you say you won't.  But no, I'm just freely addressing your posts because that's what people do in open forums--they debate and refute comments with which they disagree.  But you certainly are getting overly emotional and nasty, here.  I'm not the one repeatedly exclaiming "You are nothing!  And your posts are nothing!  You're just a **** to me!"  I think you need to re-consider which of us is personally affected by the other.

Modifié par Silfren, 14 janvier 2012 - 10:01 .

[Sylvianus]

Silfren wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...

You are just being ridiculous. That's like saying that Anders can not be good man and different, IS necessarily a terrorist ( you always said he isn't ), obsessed, because Adrian acts like him, is like him ( according to your assumptions ) without the ability to distinguish the two people. All what you said about Anders, that's Adrian. huuuurrrr which is completely stupid, you know. You're saying that everything you have defended about Anders ... is nonsense and actually all what you said, is nothing but nonsense. Are you aware ? Someone smart enought can find differences. To simplify everything  is just for fools who think they are smarter than others.

I'm not saying anything about how Anders can be or should be interpreted.  I'm saying I find it utterly bizarre that anyone who does condemn him as a hateful terrorist, which you do, based on past posts you've written, can yet consider Adrian to be a good, not-too-immoral character. 

Nothing I'm saying has any bearing on how I view Anders.  Nor am I here debating whether Anders can rightly be viewed as a terrorist or freedom fighter.  Neither has ANYTHING to do with what I'm saying, so why you're bringing up non-existent points is beyond me.  

Of course I realize that a lot of the problem boils down to a major language barrier, as your English is extremely difficult to understand, but I know we wouldn't do any better the other way around, as the only other language Ihave any ability in is written Irish. 

I did exactly like you, I say things, statements from what I read and I do not understand, probably.  * sarcasm *  So I pretend that I know everything, and I say the other is stupid. Me, I am right, yes, right right.

And my argument was also based on your previous statements about Adrian, that seemed strange, what you said about her, when you claimed some things about Anders totally radical in the past to defend him. You 're bizarre [ lol lol lol, ] Obviously, two characters are totally the same. You've simplified, I simplified what you said. Simple. You see how easy it is ? That's what you always do.

No, I do not become emotional, don't worry, I just lose more and more respect by reading your posts. And when I meet someone I respect less and less, I become contemptuous. People with an ego as big as yours, without anything to justify that,  I do not respect them, I laugh about them. And it will continue, sorry.

What you said in your previous post, was no debate, you don't know what is a debate.  it was simply a way of saying THIS IS WRONG SIR without any substance. Re-read all your words in your last post and you will see that there is nothing other than fool statements based on fool attempts  to say :  you're wrong, you're wrong, you're wrong. You are wrong because I say so, you are wrong because my interpretation is the only one which is true.

At this level, I consider it totally crap and stupid, like I consider your posts usually.

You think you're smarter than others, but I see no intelligence, just a person who displays a claim, who simplifies everything, as if she was narrow-minded. And it seems you are. You are unable to understand that two people can be different it seems. Or, wait, actually, it seems you are now...

The only attention I want to carry you, is the contempt, because it lives up to what you represent to me.

The rest, i don't care, I won't bother to answer. Too serious for you.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 15 janvier 2012 - 02:08 .

[MichaelFinnegan]

Gervaise wrote...

Sorry, did it actually say that Rhys and Adrian didn't know who was made tranquil or why? It would be extremely odd if they didn't at least know who was being made tranquil, even if they weren't privy to the reasons.

I imagine it's not so odd. I'm saying that none of the Circles mages would know for certain which apprentice would become a tranquil. It's how the process of Harrowing itself is conducted by the templars. The apprentice is dragged out of his bed in the middle of the night and offered a choice - either to take up the Harrowing or to submit to the Rite of Tranquility. If the apprentice refuses to undergo Harrowing, he ends up being made tranquil; on the other hand, if the apprentice takes up the Harrowing and succeeds, he ends up becoming a Circle mage, and if he fails, he ends up dead. It's only "post hoc" that any other Circle mage would know for certain what happened; and those apprentices who don't return are presumed dead - not many question that.

I think there could be a few exceptions, though - the mages who'd be assisting the apprentice to enter the Fade, if at all, who'd know before the other mages in the Circle.

You'd assume that they would take an interest in apprentices because of the possibility of recruiting them to their cause after they have passed the harrowing, so they would know who were the tough ones, who were the flakey ones, who were the rebellious ones.

What you're saying above if kind of different, and I agree with you. A senior enchanter might take an interest in what happens to his younger charge, and he might rightly guess the outcome - whether the apprentice might end up dead, tranquil, or a mage. And the other enchanters might overhear things from the said enchanter. You're bringing an example such as Jolen (in Asunder). The templars, however, are under no obligation to keep any (or all) mages informed.

If the latter were the ones turning up tranquil, they would start crying foul.

The enchanters who do cry foul might bring it to the notice of the First Enchanter, say, who might even take it up to a higher authority - the Knight Commander, who depending on his disposition might do something about it or not - or discuss the matter at the next conclave, which could be far, far off.

After all up until the opening of Asunder the White Spire appears to be under the control of a perfectly reasonable Knight Commander, who is only replaced after the attempt on the life of the Divine.

True. But as far as I know the fact remains that the Harrowing and Rite of Tranquility are left to the sole discretion of the templars.

In Kinloch Hold the tranquil wander around in full view and the same was true of Kirkwall, which is why Anders comments on the increase in their numbers and the fact that he knows many of them weren't apprentices who failed their harrowing. He also clearly states that it is against chantry law for a Circle Mage to be made tranquil if they have passed their harrowing. Since this is common knowledge, Adrian at least would be quick to jump on it if this rule was being breached.

The only reasoning I suppose is that a certain death sentence for an offending mage might be averted by giving that mage an opportunity to live as a tranquil. It is obvious there are some who consider this as leniency.

Anders was afraid of being made tranquil because he kept running away and was therefore technically an apostate once he left the Circle. Rhys was acused of murdering other mages by using blood magic, which again would technically make him an apostate since he was operating outside the law of the Circle, so again this might render him in danger of being made tranquil, although I think it was more likely he would be executed. Adrian warns the mages at Andoral's Reach that they will all be either executed or made tranquil because,.again, they are now apostates, but while they were still imprisoned in the Spire, the Lord Seeker was threatening summary execution, probably because he now knows that tranquility can be reversed, so there is not much point in using it unless you still want the knowledge the mage has in their mind, which was his argument for making Pharamond tranquil again, he would be safe but with the knowledge gained still able to be used.

The only mages in the Spire who "disappeared" were the apprentices who failed their harrowing. The principle use of the Rite of Tranquility in the Circles was for mages who seemed at too great a risk of being possessed and it seemed a foregone conclusion that they would fail their harrowing. Therefore they would be offered, or would ask for, the alternative of tranquility. It would seem that Pharamond fell into that category.

I more or less agree with all of the above. The only point none of the games, books, or any other kind of lore makes clear is whether there is a hard line between when a mage would be executed and when that mage might be offered Tranquility. Rhys doesn't know that, neither does Adrian, nor Anders, and at the end even Grand Enchanter Fiona confesses as much. And that decision doesn't seem to be left to the mages. And the "guilt" (if I should even use that term) of the mages could be just about anything - murder, permanent abandonment of the Circle as an apostate, or running off temporarily to meet one's parent. I don't think it really matters...

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

@Silfen @Sylvianus

Just FYI, if you both don't shut the hell up or take your bickering elsewhere, I'm asking a mod to step in. Thanks. Some of us are trying to talk here, and you two have been rivalmancing for three pages now.

@MichaelFinnegan - I suppose Wynne does have some history of dealing with abominations that can explain how she can help save Pharamond, either with Arl Eamon's son (in an appropriate playthrough) or simply her dialogue in DA:O. I do recall her talking about wondering if possession could be undone. It's possible I should feel greatful that she makes the attempt, instead of Anders who flails about and cries 'It's impossible!'

I'm wondering now if possession (however temporary) might be required for the cure? Because to me, that kind of consequence would be awesome. It's a risk worthy of giving people pause. It's hard to judge the process though when we only have one to go by, and didn't even see it happen start to finish.

Oh, no. Where would any story about Dragon Age be without a Fade sequence?

*facepalm* How true. XD But Val Royeaux knew about the abomination outbreak at the Fortress? If so, I'm really amazed that templars weren't sent to kill everything and search the surrounding lands for escapees. o_O Holy crap, that feels rather irresponsible of the Divine. Maybe she was covering her own ass and hoping the Tranquil-Reversal research wasn't found by the wrong people, considering she endorsed it and is indirectly to blame for all those deaths. Did the Templars or Seekers know that research was going on, by any chance? I'm just asking because it wouldn't be the first time mage research was allowed by a senior authority, circumventing the templars, and things going to poop. Notable examples, Wilhlem of Honnoleath sactioned by the First Enchanter Arden, Quentin sanctioned by First Enchanter Orsino

I suppose the research will have to continue if both magic and emotion were restored. I agree with you that the possible mental scarring should make future possession even easier, thus the former Tranquil more dangerous in terms of susceptibility, but Connor killed almost the entire staff of Redcliffe and unleashed undead on the town yet he bounced back remarkably well. Maybe time will tell...

As far as vagueness is concerned, it's convenient for a game/book symbiosis as things are far more flexible when they're not set in stone, and the story of a game can fluctuate in different ways before the final story is agreed on. The thing is that vagueness can be aggravating for the reader or player within the context of the game/book, as there is often no good character reason for things to be so deliberately vague. It serves the purpose of The Story, and is not necessarily bad, but it gets old quick when it happens all the time.

Anyway, thanks again for your excellent post.

[Sylvianus]

omg, hella rude tbh.

[David Gaider]

Knock it off. Sylvanius, Silfren is right about one thing: if you cannot stand your points being challenged without resorting to insults, then refrain-- or you'll be escorted off the forum. Otherwise, everyone is free to interpret the book and its characters as they see fit. Let's take a breath and enjoy the dicussion, shall we?

For all those who enjoyed the book, many thanks. Some interesting points brought up. Nice to read.

[MichaelFinnegan]

[quote]Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

@MichaelFinnegan - I suppose Wynne does have some history of dealing with abominations that can explain how she can help save Pharamond, either with Arl Eamon's son (in an appropriate playthrough)[/quote]
On my one and only DA:O playthrough, I sent Jowan into the Fade - at that time I'd thought it was the right thing to do. It was quite an aggravating experience though since he had neither healing spells nor flasks.

[quote]
or simply her dialogue in DA:O. I do recall her talking about wondering if possession could be undone.[/quote]
Yes, I recall it, vaguely though.

[quote]
It's possible I should feel greatful that she makes the attempt,[/quote]
Her plan was to deal with the demon in the Fade on her own - the other mages were brought along just to enable the ritual to enter the Fade. As fate (or the demon?) would have it, all of them get pushed into the Fade. It results in some amusing dialogue, though: after encountering the Archdemon in the Fade (yes, Wynne apparently still has nightmares about the Archdemon) Adrian asks Wynne what she'd have done if she'd entered the Fade on her own, to which Shale replies, "Died." Nevertheless, as we know, Wynne is unique, and she'd probably have done well.

[quote]
instead of Anders who flails about and cries 'It's impossible!' [/quote]
You mean Anders and Karl? In any case, I'd imagine Anders would probably be skeptical about the reversing his condition as well - I remember he thinks that Justice and he could not be separated. I've come to understand that emotion clouds the judgments of almost all the characters within DA, even under the best of circumstances. There are only a few who're able to pick themselves up and stand fast after a fall and see when they're wrong. I believe Asunder portrays such characters well, which was partly its appeal for me.

[quote]
I'm wondering now if possession (however temporary) might be required for the cure? Because to me, that kind of consequence would be awesome. It's a risk worthy of giving people pause. It's hard to judge the process though when we only have one to go by, and didn't even see it happen start to finish.[/quote]
You're right, of course, about us not knowing everything about this process. And there is the suggestion of a safer alternative - using a spirit medium to help the tranquil recover. But now the issue has become whether someone in authority would/could sanction it. And the Lord Seeker has seen the one instance of disaster, and convinced himself that that is how every attempt would end up. And, deeper than that, there are those within the templar ranks who see the Rite of Tranquility as the only means of enforcing order - and they'd not be so easily willing to see weaknesses in that weapon. Even with all these complications, it's probably true that a cured tranquil (regardless of the method employed for the cure) would be more emotionally vulnerable, in the shorter term at least.

[quote]
[quote]
Oh, no. Where would any story about Dragon Age be without a Fade sequence?[/quote]
*facepalm* How true. XD But Val Royeaux knew about the abomination outbreak at the Fortress?[/quote]
The templars and the Lord Seeker at the White Spire (the name for the tower housing the Circle at Val Royeaux) don't know about it at first. Apparently Wynne learns about the abominations at Adamant Fortress first when, on one of her visits, she's there along with Shale to discuss with Pharamond about how to reverse Shale's condition. She then immediately heads to the Grand Cathedral (or was it the royal palace?) at Val Royeaux to meet with Leliana, probably to get an audience with the Divine. She gets an authorization from the Divine to use "whatever means she deems necessary" to deal with the abominations at Adamant. Only then she approaches the Lord Seeker and, in the presence of Rhys, Adrian, and Evangeline, informs him that her tranquil friend has fallen to a demon, and she needs help from a couple of Circle mages to enter the Fade. She does not mention about any other abominations.

[quote]
If so, I'm really amazed that templars weren't sent to kill everything and search the surrounding lands for escapees.[/quote]
Oh, one templar (Evangeline) accompanies them on their journey, on the Lord Seeker's insistence. The Lord Seeker also sends 20 more templars to Adamant, behind everyone's back. Their purpose is something other than to merely deal with the abominations, though.

[quote]
o_O Holy crap, that feels rather irresponsible of the Divine.[/quote]
You mean sanctioning Pharamond's research? I suppose one could look at it that way; and she ought to have done more to keep an eye on what Pharamond was up to. I do not know if the research could have been done under the auspices of the templars. But I suppose there were reasons why she employed agents like Leliana - maybe taking the help of the templars and/or the seekers wasn't an option, knowing in what manner some of them regard the Rite of Tranquility; so she probably resorted to secrecy.

[quote]
Maybe she was covering her own ass and hoping the Tranquil-Reversal research wasn't found by the wrong people, considering she endorsed it and is indirectly to blame for all those deaths.[/quote]
That wasn't it, I think. The Divine openly admits in front of the Lord Seeker that her purposes for sanctioning the research were twofold: to see if there was a way in which Tranquility could be applied to remove only the magic, but not the emotions from a mage; and whether Tranquility could be reversed. I suppose she's dismayed by what happened at Adamant, which was a result she'd clearly not anticipated (in that sense, she's like everyone else, I suppose, somewhat flawed). But she covers her ass in a different way - when Wynne says that she's informed, at her own behest, all the Circles of Thedas, just prior to re-entering Val Royeaux, about the fact that Tranquility has been reversed, when in fact she was following the orders of the Divine. It's a complicated game that is played.

[quote]
Did the Templars or Seekers know that research was going on, by any chance?[/quote]
Nope, at least as far as I could tell.

[quote]
I'm just asking because it wouldn't be the first time mage research was allowed by a senior authority, circumventing the templars, and things going to poop. Notable examples, Wilhlem of Honnoleath sactioned by the First Enchanter Arden, Quentin sanctioned by First Enchanter Orsino[/quote]
I suppose what I can say is that the system works in ways that makes it not immediately apparent why things happen the way they do. All I can say is that the templar order is rigid, and the White Chantry is left at the mercy of the Divine commanding it - sometimes you get a Divine like Beatrix III, who's literally terrified of mages, and once in a while you get someone like Justinia V, who's clearly aiming for reforms. The mages, although not entirely without blame, are left at the mercy of either. What I learnt from Asunder is how powerless the Divine herself might become at times - and how fragile the Nevarran Accord, binding the Chantry, mages, and templars has been all along.

[quote]
I suppose the research will have to continue if both magic and emotion were restored. I agree with you that the possible mental scarring should make future possession even easier, thus the former Tranquil more dangerous in terms of susceptibility, but Connor killed almost the entire staff of Redcliffe and unleashed undead on the town yet he bounced back remarkably well. Maybe time will tell...[/quote]
Yes. Those are doubts and uncertainties one'd have to contend with. Maybe compassion and second chances deserve a place in the world, after all.

[quote]
As far as vagueness is concerned, it's convenient for a game/book symbiosis as things are far more flexible when they're not set in stone, and the story of a game can fluctuate in different ways before the final story is agreed on. The thing is that vagueness can be aggravating for the reader or player within the context of the game/book, as there is often no good character reason for things to be so deliberately vague. It serves the purpose of The Story, and is not necessarily bad, but it gets old quick when it happens all the time.[/quote]
I understand that the book has probably set a stage for the world to find itself in a particular state. The reasons why those events happened may not even be important, depending of course on how the future story plays out. So the particular events of the book may not find a place in future games. But I thought it was a good closure to the story of Wynne - if indeed she's no more. And, I agree; at times it can be quite aggravating - I don't know if all the mysteries broached upon, esp. the ones I found myself particularly interested in, would ever be elaborated upon; and how long I might have to wait to get answers, if any are forthcoming.

[quote]
Anyway, thanks again for your excellent post. [/quote]
I hope I've not entirely ruined your experience if you decide to read the book. But it does feels good to discuss the story with someone, esp. one so inquisitive.

[Gervaise]

Just thought I would reiterate, under normal circumstances, the templars are not the sole arbiters of who is made tranquil.  In DAO Jowan says he saw the order authorising him to be made tranquil on Greagoir's desk and it had been signed by Irving.   I am sure you are aware that the Ferelden Circle appears to have operated as it shoud (as opposed to Kirkwall) and that Greagoir trusted Irving's judgement to the extent that if he stood before him and declared the Circle was no longer a danger, then Greagoir would revoke the Rite of Anulment.   So even if it had been Greagoir's idea that Jowan should be made tranquil, he could not go ahead and perform the Rite without  the First Enchanter's approval.  Note also that the Knight Commander had it on his desk and would then presumably give the order to whoever he wished to perform it.   So there was a definite system and chain of command to be followed.   

Acutally I would have thought it far more likely that Irving and other senior enchanters would be the ones who first identified Jowan as a risk.   In his case, they suspected him of dabbling in forbidden magic and he actually says that he knows that occasionally a mage will be made tranquil because they think they will be a danger if made a full mage not because of the likelihood of possession, because after all if they fail the harrowing they'll be dead but because clearly it is thought they will pass the harrowing but become a dangerous threat.   Again, who is more likely to know if a mage seems to be taking too much interest in magic that they shouldn't - the templars who only see it from an outsiders point of view or a First Enchanter who has extensive knowledge of magic first hand?   

So my understanding is that the First Enchanter has to approve the mage being made tranquil but the templars carry out the sentence.  This is why I questioned what the hell was going on in Kirkwall because presumably mages were being made tranquil without the authorisation of the First Enchanter or going through the Knight Commander.  Orsino should have been well aware of it and he was well within his rights to complain about it to both Meredith and Elthina, who should have ordered an immediate investigation because it was breaking chantry law and undermining Meredith's authority, which should have been sufficient incentive for her to act.    The system which should have prevented an individual templar from misusing the Rite of Tranquility had clearly broken down.

All the above, of course, applies to Circle mages.   Naturally apostates would be a different matter and of course the First Enchanter rebelling would make them unable to approve the Rite.      So naturally the situation at the end of Asunder would be different, simply because it was unprecedented.   However, the Lord Seeker and Divine were able to rule on Pharamond because as Lambert pointed out, the reason he was originally made tranquil still seemed pertinent.   Therefore they did not have to refer back to the First Enchanter of his Circle for authorisation.   In fact as he had been under direct control of the Divine and had been doing her bidding, it was really down to her to decide what should be done with him.       

[Momiji.mii]

Wow, lots of interesting points being brought up about Asunder since I checked the discussion last. I didn't want to post too many spoilers in my last post, but it seems most of the book has been thoroughly spoiled already, so I won't restrain myself anymore.

After reading the book, I felt pretty sure that Rhys hadn't in fact comitted murder on Cole's behalf, nor that Cole was actually practicing blood magic. Mostly because if Cole was unable to murder people on his own, then his change of heart those two times when he was gripping the knife but refrained from doing harm would sort of lose meaning, and I felt at the time that it was very meaningful and important for how his character progressed. Cole made himself stop following the strong compulsion to kill because of his respect for Rhys, and the fact that Rhys will probably never know this, not all of it, felt very tragic to me. In a good way, of course.

Also, I think Cole momentarily disappeared probably because of Rhys losing belief in him, not because of him realizing that he was a spirit. As someone pointed out, him being a creepy fade spirit (but in cute way, hehe) and feeding on people's attention, losing Rhys as the center of his universe made him momentarily fade away, but since he know knew how to exist without murdering people, he could pull himself together and also carry out a personal agenda (i.e. taking his revenge on the Lord Seeker) without being compulsed to do so.

I too look forward to learn more about the spirits and what kind of magic Bioware might introduce from now on. As someone pointed out, Cole probably didn't thrive on blood magic. I felt that it was something else than the blood and the killing that "prolonged" Cole's existence, when re-reading those particular scenes, which made me surprised to visit the forum and see so many readers refering to it as blood magic.

As for Fiona being Grand Enchanter, well, once a system starts showing cracks and eventually fails, lots of radical changes (like having a former Warden become the most prominent leader for the mages) can sometimes happen. Changes like these are usually short-lived, but not at all impossible. I doubt very much that Fiona had to "sleep with someone important" as was suggested (hopefully just a tasteless joke). She showed a lot of willpower and dedication in The Calling and I felt that her showing up in such a prominent position in Asunder very much in character. I hope she'll have at least a cameo in upcoming games.

I was devastated when Wynne died. I can understand her need to feel like her unique circumstances mattered, that there was a reason for her being granted extra time, but I personally don't think that there ever was any universal, larger-than-life meaning behind her being possessed by a spirit, except for her personal benefit. But to Wynne, it mattered, a lot! So I love that she was able to pass on, knowing that she used her powers for something selfless. Giving Evangeline her life back was what Wynne needed to feel like she lived her life in a meaningful way, and it was quite fitting with her warmth and compassion, I think, not to mention her love of dramatic flair.

I can't help but feel bad for Shale, though. She may have complained a lot, but it was obvious that Shale had a lot of respect for her. Who will she pester with her sarcastic wit from now on?

Edited for grammar and clarification ^^;;

Modifié par Momiji.mii, 15 janvier 2012 - 03:18 .

[MichaelFinnegan]

Gervaise wrote...

Just thought I would reiterate,

I have no issues with this. As far as I'm concerned, the issue about who really makes a final call about Tranquility is unclear. I was just defending my position that the templars solely make the call, based on what I knew. And I admit I haven't played anything other than the human noble origin in DA:O, so I welcome any new information you might provide.

under normal circumstances, the templars are not the sole arbiters of who is made tranquil.  In DAO Jowan says he saw the order authorising him to be made tranquil on Greagoir's desk and it had been signed by Irving.

I remember one thing though, that when I decided to send Jowan into the Fade to free Connor, Irwing questioned my judgment. He seemed mistrustful of Jowan. So could it not be possible that Irwing somehow approached Greagoir to have Jowan made tranquil, and not the other way around?

I am sure you are aware that the Ferelden Circle appears to have operated as it shoud (as opposed to Kirkwall) and that Greagoir trusted Irving's judgement to the extent that if he stood before him and declared the Circle was no longer a danger, then Greagoir would revoke the Rite of Anulment.   So even if it had been Greagoir's idea that Jowan should be made tranquil, he could not go ahead and perform the Rite without  the First Enchanter's approval.  Note also that the Knight Commander had it on his desk and would then presumably give the order to whoever he wished to perform it.   So there was a definite system and chain of command to be followed.

When you say that the Ferelden Circle opererated as it should have, as opposed to the Kirkwall Circle, I believe you're assuming there are some set of rules that everyone ought to have abided by. I'm fine with that. But I'd question how is it that we'd know about it, when such a set of rules has never been made clear to us. All we have seen are a bunch of Circles, operating in different ways. What I'd say is that Greagoir and Irwing perhaps had mutual respect, which allowed them to consult each other even on matters such as RoA and RoT; but that is merely what it is - a trust, an entirely arbitrary thing in my opinion, which I believe doesn't imply automatically a standard of conduct that all the other Circles ought to be judged by.

Acutally I would have thought it far more likely that Irving and other senior enchanters would be the ones who first identified Jowan as a risk.   In his case, they suspected him of dabbling in forbidden magic and he actually says that he knows that occasionally a mage will be made tranquil because they think they will be a danger if made a full mage not because of the likelihood of possession, because after all if they fail the harrowing they'll be dead but because clearly it is thought they will pass the harrowing but become a dangerous threat.

Kind of what I was thinking when I read your first paragraph. I agree with your assessment.

Again, who is more likely to know if a mage seems to be taking too much interest in magic that they shouldn't - the templars who only see it from an outsiders point of view or a First Enchanter who has extensive knowledge of magic first hand?

What you've put above as a rhethorical question may not have easy answers. The templars are supposed to sniff out apostates, maleficarum, and so on. Identifying threats in mages is supposed to be part of who they are and what they do. They are supposed to watch mages like hawkes, all the time, ever alert. So, to answer your question correctly - I don't know.

So my understanding is that the First Enchanter has to approve the mage being made tranquil but the templars carry out the sentence.

I'd argue that this may not be true under all circumstances. Will the First Enchanter be present for every mage's harrowing? Will he be asked for permission before making an apprentice tranquil? I don't know.

This is why I questioned what the hell was going on in Kirkwall because presumably mages were being made tranquil without the authorisation of the First Enchanter or going through the Knight Commander.  Orsino should have been well aware of it and he was well within his rights to complain about it to both Meredith and Elthina, who should have ordered an immediate investigation because it was breaking chantry law and undermining Meredith's authority, which should have been sufficient incentive for her to act.    The system which should have prevented an individual templar from misusing the Rite of Tranquility had clearly broken down.

I largely agree with the sentiment you've expressed above. The only thing is that I'm not entirely clear on the facts. There appeared to some obvious abuses by the templar Alrik, who was apparently misuing RoT, even for the smallest of crimes. These were obvious failings of the system. But this in itself doesn't really clarify anything more about the system itself. All we have really is a bunch of notions about how this system ought to have worked, but it doesn't say how the system itself was. We don't know what the Chantry law is, to be precise.

All the above, of course, applies to Circle mages.   Naturally apostates would be a different matter and of course the First Enchanter rebelling would make them unable to approve the Rite.      So naturally the situation at the end of Asunder would be different, simply because it was unprecedented.

Right, Fiona only says that even if they surrendered, some would probably be spared from their fates of Tranquility or execution, which really clarifies nothing.

However, the Lord Seeker and Divine were able to rule on Pharamond because as Lambert pointed out, the reason he was originally made tranquil still seemed pertinent.   Therefore they did not have to refer back to the First Enchanter of his Circle for authorisation.   In fact as he had been under direct control of the Divine and had been doing her bidding, it was really down to her to decide what should be done with him.

I believe the authority of the Divine superseeds the authority of the Lord Seeker, which superseeds the authority of the Knight Commander(s), which superseeds the authority of the power structure of the mages, and so on. Regarding the matter of the Divine consenting to make Pharamond tranquil again - I do not know if she was forced to do so because she was pushed into a corner by the Lord Seeker's demands. I detected a hint of regret in her decision - perhaps it was just me.

[Gervaise]

I didn't get any sense of regret. If the Divine's authority truly superceded that of the Lord Seeker then she could have spared him. However, playing to the rules of the grand game, you give a little victory to your opponent in order to secure your own. Pharamond was just a pawn to be used and discarded when he had fulfilled his purpose. She had also probably realised that the mage could not have made the attempt on her life without help. Strangely enough she felt she could probably trust Lambert to safeguard her life so she gives him a little carrot to keep him on side.

Justina makes a lot of grand and admirable declarations but at the end of the day she is still a politician. Quite why she helped the First Enchanters escape at the end is not clear but presumably in the hope of influencing them not to break away from the Chantry entirely. After all the summary execution of every First Enchanter in Thedas was not exactly going to reduce the amount of tension and unrest in the Circles. If they were allowed to escape, only to come back into the fold, her authority over the Circles might even be improved. In this instance, her gamble did not pay off and the vote went against her but since Cassandra is searching for a way to avert the war, it would seem that Justina at least has survived this particular crisis thus far and is still hoping to resolve it in a manner acceptable to her.

[MichaelFinnegan]

Momiji.mii wrote...

As for Fiona being Grand Enchanter, well, once a system starts showing cracks and eventually fails, lots of radical changes (like having a former Warden become the most prominent leader for the mages) can sometimes happen. Changes like these are usually short-lived, but not at all impossible. I doubt very much that Fiona had to "sleep with someone important" as was suggested (hopefully just a tasteless joke). She showed a lot of willpower and dedication in The Calling and I felt that her showing up in such a prominent position in Asunder very much in character. I hope she'll have at least a cameo in upcoming games.

Fiona became a Circle mage, and later on she was elevated to the position of the Grand Enchanter. I believe it's not been clarified how she became the former. But Wynne talks to Rhys about the latter. Apparently, Fiona had been campaigning for freedom of the mages from the Circle. The previous Grand Enchanter, Briaus, had never allowed for such a vote during the meetings at the conclave. It is possible I think that popular sentiment was against Briaus, and he so he was replaced by Fiona during the previous election. With Fiona's election, Wynne mentions that the conclave was disbanded - perhaps the Divine realized that Fiona would immediately put forth a motion to liberate the mages from the Chantry. And indeed at the next available opportunity at the White Spire that is exactly what Fiona does. The question is: was Wynne being truthful?

[Shevy]

Does anyone know when the book will be translated into German?

[MichaelFinnegan]

Gervaise wrote...

I didn't get any sense of regret. If the Divine's authority truly superceded that of the Lord Seeker then she could have spared him. However, playing to the rules of the grand game, you give a little victory to your opponent in order to secure your own. Pharamond was just a pawn to be used and discarded when he had fulfilled his purpose. She had also probably realised that the mage could not have made the attempt on her life without help. Strangely enough she felt she could probably trust Lambert to safeguard her life so she gives him a little carrot to keep him on side.

We never got to know who was aiding the senior enchanter Jeannot when he attempted to assassinate the Divine. To answer your question, though, I think we need to look at the Nevarran Accord, which binds the templars to the Divine. The Divine, although she has authority over the Lord Seeker, she only does so under the aegis of the Accord. I suppose she'd been mindful that the accord could always be broken, and consequently she could lose her authority.

Justina makes a lot of grand and admirable declarations but at the end of the day she is still a politician. Quite why she helped the First Enchanters escape at the end is not clear but presumably in the hope of influencing them not to break away from the Chantry entirely. After all the summary execution of every First Enchanter in Thedas was not exactly going to reduce the amount of tension and unrest in the Circles. If they were allowed to escape, only to come back into the fold, her authority over the Circles might even be improved. In this instance, her gamble did not pay off and the vote went against her but since Cassandra is searching for a way to avert the war, it would seem that Justina at least has survived this particular crisis thus far and is still hoping to resolve it in a manner acceptable to her.

Yes, I too have little idea. All I remember is Wynne saying that the Divine would hear about what happened at the conclave. The Divine does tread a fine line, though - perhaps she'd just thought the Lord Seeker's action unjust, that he would execute all? Still summoning him to her side at that time was a bit odd. Perhaps there is more going on than what we learnt. After all, we've only seen the Lord Seekers POV at the end.

[Momiji.mii]

MichaelFinnegan wrote...
Fiona became a Circle mage, and later on she was elevated to the position of the Grand Enchanter. I believe it's not been clarified how she became the former. But Wynne talks to Rhys about the latter. Apparently, Fiona had been campaigning for freedom of the mages from the Circle. The previous Grand Enchanter, Briaus, had never allowed for such a vote during the meetings at the conclave. It is possible I think that popular sentiment was against Briaus, and he so he was replaced by Fiona during the previous election. With Fiona's election, Wynne mentions that the conclave was disbanded - perhaps the Divine realized that Fiona would immediately put forth a motion to liberate the mages from the Chantry. And indeed at the next available opportunity at the White Spire that is exactly what Fiona does. The question is: was Wynne being truthful?

That was more or less my point: Fiona was a radical choice, so radical in fact that the Divine felt the need to disband the conclave. If the whole system of Mage Circles, Templars and Chantry was not rocky at the time, Fiona probably wouldn't have been elected. It's like the Divine and the Chantry let the mages have their Conclave and their elections, to make them feel like they had power, when in fact the Divine had the right and the ability to remove said rights from them all along. Fiona being made Grand Enchanger showed the Divine exactly how much the system was in danger, and so, she (perhaps even regretfully) decided that the conclave had to be disbanded. 

There's not really any "right" and "wrong" here, more like it's a faulty system based on a situation or status quo that no longer stands true for those involved. I think the Divine was right to try to find a better system, one that would be able to avoide the worst abuse and oppression (like the RoT). Unfortunately, she made too little too late, and in order to rebuild something new, the system probably will have to fall to pieces completely, in order to be rebuilt together with the mages themselves, into something that fits the new status quo in Thedas. 

I'm so excited for Dragon Age now! It will be really interesting to see how Thedas deals with this.  

Edit: I forgot to mention how it's becoming aparent that with the way the Chantry has controlled mages through the Circles, there hasn't been enough research put into magic outside of what is already known. Probably, magic changes now that dragons are back in Thedas, and there should be more effort put into research in order to see how and why this happens. Tevinter is obviously doing their very best to persue and explore the boundaries of blood magic (for good and bad), but more research should have been done by the Circles in other areas. With the Circles being too strictly controled, all research that falls outside of what is already known has the risk of being seen as blood magic, just because it's unexplainable through ordinary means. I assume that this point will also be explored from now in in Dragon Age and I can't wait to find out. 

Modifié par Momiji.mii, 15 janvier 2012 - 04:27 .

[MichaelFinnegan]

Momiji.mii wrote...

That was more or less my point: Fiona was a radical choice, so radical in fact that the Divine felt the need to disband the conclave. If the whole system of Mage Circles, Templars and Chantry was not rocky at the time, Fiona probably wouldn't have been elected. It's like the Divine and the Chantry let the mages have their Conclave and their elections, to make them feel like they had power, when in fact the Divine had the right and the ability to remove said rights from them all along. Fiona being made Grand Enchanger showed the Divine exactly how much the system was in danger, and so, she (perhaps even regretfully) decided that the conclave had to be disbanded. 

There's not really any "right" and "wrong" here, more like it's a faulty system based on a situation or status quo that no longer stands true for those involved. I think the Divine was right to try to find a better system, one that would be able to avoide the worst abuse and oppression (like the RoT). Unfortunately, she made too little too late, and in order to rebuild something new, the system probably will have to fall to pieces completely, in order to be rebuilt together with the mages themselves, into something that fits the new status quo in Thedas.

I personally find it difficult to guess where this is going. There are just so many variables to contend with. Probably the broader pattern is simply that the mages are looking for freedom now; the templars, at least those under the Lord Seeker, are looking to overthrow the old system to wrest back (greater) control over the mages; and the Chantry under the Divine is caught trying to reconcile all of this somehow. Only one among these will hold true in the end.

I'm so excited for Dragon Age now! It will be really interesting to see how Thedas deals with this.

And with the dwarves, elves, the qunari, the other Chantry and Divine, the darkspawn, and the two remaining archdemons, the Grey Wardens, that mysterious idol, the Eluvian, the Fade, demons, spirits, lyrium in general, Flemeth, Morrigan, OGB, Sandal, magic, Maker, and god knows whatnot. Indeed, these are exciting times.

Edit: I forgot to mention how it's becoming aparent that with the way the Chantry has controlled mages through the Circles, there hasn't been enough research put into magic outside of what is already known. Probably, magic changes now that dragons are back in Thedas, and there should be more effort put into research in order to see how and why this happens. Tevinter is obviously doing their very best to persue and explore the boundaries of blood magic (for good and bad), but more research should have been done by the Circles in other areas. With the Circles being too strictly controled, all research that falls outside of what is already known has the risk of being seen as blood magic, just because it's unexplainable through ordinary means. I assume that this point will also be explored from now in in Dragon Age and I can't wait to find out.

Yes, the Divine has indeed raised my hopes, at least there is now a prospect that magic and aspects connected with it probably will be questioned and maybe explored; depending of course on the views that the templars will take and how the war will end. I've always maintained that the road to a better future is with lesser mysteries, fewer walls, lesser control. I think we're yet to go back into the other mysteries as well; perhaps shed more light on the nature of blood magic, and those other arcane types of magic we've only been given a brief glimpse of: like the abilities of Sandal, the different kind of magic of the elves, and so on. The scope of all this looks rather huge.

I mirror your excitement - Asunder has indeed been a good read.

[NedPepper]

Deadmac wrote...

@Silfren,
Awe... Defending your friend's honor? Its cute.

Hugs and kisses.

You're a swell human being....

[Gervaise]

I too am excited at the prospect of DA3, particularly with the scope now for much more vareity on the magic front - I like playing a mage. Let us not forget that there was a lot of aspects of possession demonstrated in Asunder but one that we still know very little of is the Wise Women of Rivain who deliberately allow themselves to be possessed, to what ends have not been made clear. Presumably spirit mediums like Rhys will be able to investigate what this is about now they are not restricted by the chantry's dictates.

[Jarlof Seoul]

Gervaise wrote...

I too am excited at the prospect of DA3, particularly with the scope now for much more vareity on the magic front - I like playing a mage. Let us not forget that there was a lot of aspects of possession demonstrated in Asunder but one that we still know very little of is the Wise Women of Rivain who deliberately allow themselves to be possessed, to what ends have not been made clear. Presumably spirit mediums like Rhys will be able to investigate what this is about now they are not restricted by the chantry's dictates.

good point! Look at Justice as an example of an interesting variation on a theme regarding possesion!

[Gibb_Shepard]

I really don't think Rhys killed those people. Cole, as demonstrated in the book, has the power to kill people in reality. He killed those three guards when he went to rescue Rhys with Leliana.

Cole was capable of killing people from the get go. I strongly believe that he was the one killing Spire mages, not a manipulated Rhys.

Also, did Wynne seriously almost pull an Anders? Turn her power to forbidden magic and her spirit into a demon? I may have misunderstood, but if true, that just seems very OOC for her, regardless of the circumstances.

[Heimdall]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

I really don't think Rhys killed those people. Cole, as demonstrated in the book, has the power to kill people in reality. He killed those three guards when he went to rescue Rhys with Leliana.

Cole was capable of killing people from the get go. I strongly believe that he was the one killing Spire mages, not a manipulated Rhys.

Also, did Wynne seriously almost pull an Anders? Turn her power to forbidden magic and her spirit into a demon? I may have misunderstood, but if true, that just seems very OOC for her, regardless of the circumstances.

Her son was apparently dead or captured, her protective/vengeful mother side came out.  Not terribly OOC.