130 réponses à ce sujet

[Silfren]

Something else occurs to me. Under the circumstances, the templars that split from the Chantry have a vested interest in having soldiers not addicted to lyrium. There's several answers to this. The best one would involve the templars badly needing the military support of various monarchs, which leads to the question of just who will the various political leaders support? Orlais would likely support the Chantry, but that alone just raises more questions, because the Chantry is likely to be split as well, between loyalists under Justinia V, and those who support the rebelling templars.

[Silfren]

Jasmine96 wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Anyway, we're going off on one thread and forgetting another. I listed the characters I think we'll see in DA3. Some of them anyway, haven't given it a great deal of thought. What about you guys?

What characters were those?

I have a feeling Lord Seeker Lambert will be at least one of the antagonists in Dragon Age 3 so I'm hoping we'll see him

Scroll back a little. 

ETA: I'm having to wrestle with a very contrary dog.  He keeps pushing his way in amongst my computer table and cutting off my posts before I'm finished, so I keep trying to go back and edit.

Modifié par Silfren, 02 mars 2012 - 03:37 .

[TEWR]

Silfren wrote...

If the withdrawal symptoms are as bad as they've been made to be, that makes them even less of a threat to Orzammar, not worse. Addicts don't dicate the terms of trade to their dealers.

That depends on the nature of the dealings. If it's in person where the Dwarves have a shipment of lyrium with them, then they're just as much of a threat.

If it's just say... by letter or shouting through Orzammar's gates where the Dwarves say they'll make a delivery at X location, then they're not much of a threat.

And who knows what the Templars would do in the timeframe when they're not insane yet.

Silfren wrote...

Anyway, we're going off on one thread and forgetting another. I listed the characters I think we'll see in DA3. Some of them anyway, haven't given it a great deal of thought. What about you guys?

I'll need to look at who you listed, so gimme a sec.

Jasmine96 wrote...

But if the templars traded with the dwarves also they wouldn't be in withdraw

Not necessarily. This depends on how much lyrium is mined, traded with the Templars, and then distributed between those Templars.

Remember, the Dwarves don't trade all their lyrium. In fact, they keep a lot of it for themselves. What they did trade was controlled solely by the Chantry.

With the Chantry fractured, the Dwarves are now free to dictate how much lyrium they trade at all. Before, it was enough to keep the entire Templar Order in line, due in part to the Chantry being the ones to give a Templar his lyrium.

Now with the New Inquisition, things have changed. The Dwarves can determine how much they sell and the New Inquisition may have people getting greedy.

[TEWR]

Silfren wrote...

Something else occurs to me. Under the circumstances, the templars that split from the Chantry have a vested interest in having soldiers not addicted to lyrium. There's several answers to this. The best one would involve the templars badly needing the military support of various monarchs, which leads to the question of just who will the various political leaders support? Orlais would likely support the Chantry, but that alone just raises more questions, because the Chantry is likely to be split as well, between loyalists under Justinia V, and those who support the rebelling templars.

I see the Chantry as being those under Divine Justinia V. Anyone fighting against her and her interest in supporting the mages is seeking to destroy the Chantry entirely. The Templars wanted to assassinate her for someone more malleable to their interests.

In terms of support from the nations, the only one I can see supporting the Templars is half of Orlais.

The Chantry portion of Rivain? Mages.

Nevarra? The Divine, A.K.A the Mages.

Ferelden? the Mages.

Anderfels? Mages, assuming the Templars attack the Warden mages.

Free Marches? Don't know. Kirkwall would probably support the Divine.

Tevinter? God I hope the mages don't accept their aid.

[Silfren]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Silfren wrote...

If the withdrawal symptoms are as bad as they've been made to be, that makes them even less of a threat to Orzammar, not worse. Addicts don't dicate the terms of trade to their dealers.

That depends on the nature of the dealings. If it's in person where the Dwarves have a shipment of lyrium with them, then they're just as much of a threat.

If it's just say... by letter or shouting through Orzammar's gates where the Dwarves say they'll make a delivery at X location, then they're not much of a threat.

And who knows what the Templars would do in the timeframe when they're not insane yet.

Silfren wrote...

Anyway, we're going off on one thread and forgetting another. I listed the characters I think we'll see in DA3. Some of them anyway, haven't given it a great deal of thought. What about you guys?

I'll need to look at who you listed, so gimme a sec.

Jasmine96 wrote...

But if the templars traded with the dwarves also they wouldn't be in withdraw

Not necessarily. This depends on how much lyrium is mined, traded with the Templars, and then distributed between those Templars.

Remember, the Dwarves don't trade all their lyrium. In fact, they keep a lot of it for themselves. What they did trade was controlled solely by the Chantry.

With the Chantry fractured, the Dwarves are now free to dictate how much lyrium they trade at all. Before, it was enough to keep the entire Templar Order in line, due in part to the Chantry being the ones to give a Templar his lyrium.

Now with the New Inquisition, things have changed. The Dwarves can determine how much they sell and the New Inquisition may have people getting greedy.

I don't think the Chantry has ever dictated to the dwarves themselves who they can sell to, but restricted who can buy from the dwarves on THEIR end.  Orzammar isn't part of any nation topside, after all, and not subject to any treaties with any given nation.  So far as I know, at least.  Seems like Orzammar would have happily trade with anyone who came along, but that their options were limited by the Chantry's restrictions on its own peoples.

As for how much lyrium is traded, I've always assumed that that was always Orzammar's prerogative.  They keep the vast majority of it for themselves because they want to, not because the Chantry only permits them to sell a tiny bit of it.

[TEWR]

I don't think the Chantry has ever dictated to the dwarves themselves who they can sell to, but restricted who can buy from the dwarves on THEIR end. Orzammar isn't part of any nation topside, after all, and not subject to any treaties with any given nation. So far as I know, at least. Seems like Orzammar would have happily trade with anyone who came along, but that their options were limited by the Chantry's restrictions on its own peoples.

As for how much lyrium is traded, I've always assumed that that was always Orzammar's prerogative. They keep the vast majority of it for themselves because they want to, not because the Chantry only permits them to sell a tiny bit of it.

The codex entry for lyrium -- as well as Alistair, Anders, and I believe a few other people -- says that the Chantry controls what is sold to the surface by the Dwarves of Orzammar. The only reason other people can buy from the Dwarves is because of smugglers like that mage in the Ferelden Circle, or some of the people in DAII.

[TEWR]

Anora grants the mage boon to a Mage Warden as well -- if he lived and asked for it or died fighting the Archdemon -- indicating that she is willing to give the mages greater rights.

Unfortunately, it's turned down. But the fact that she too was willing to not only consider the idea but grant it shows that she's behind it.

Additionally, Loghain was working to free the Circle with Uldred if the latter helped Loghain defeat the Blight.

Ferelden's populus is a mixed bag on the issue. On one hand, you have people like the gossips that blame mages and magic. On the other hand, you have the Mages Collective that has worked to increase pro-mage sentiments amongst the populus by making problems disappear before the Chantry becomes involved (source: item known as Collective Arming Cowl).

Though one should note that Alistair is a very popular and well-liked king. Which indicates that his actions are met with approval by the populus.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 02 mars 2012 - 04:13 .

[Silfren]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I see the Chantry as being those under Divine Justinia V. Anyone fighting against her and her interest in supporting the mages is seeking to destroy the Chantry entirely. The Templars wanted to assassinate her for someone more malleable to their interests.

Things are never quite that simple.  While Justinia will have her loyalists who support her, there will also be Chantry supporters who think that Justinia is destroying the Chantry and will support her overthrow.  In fact, though I referred to Justinia supporters as Loyalists, I imagine that the people who thought they were protecting the Chantry against Justinia would consider themselves loyalists.  They won't be agitating for the destruction of the Chantry at all.  

I wonder just how many factions we'll end up seeing?  Things are never as simple as one for and one against.  But bringing in all or even several of the likely factions may not be appropriate if Bioware wants to keep the narrative focused.

In terms of support from the nations, the only one I can see supporting the Templars is half of Orlais.

The Chantry portion of Rivain? Mages.

Nevarra? The Divine, A.K.A the Mages.

Ferelden? the Mages.

Anderfels? Mages, assuming the Templars attack the Warden mages.

Free Marches? Don't know. Kirkwall would probably support the Divine.

Tevinter? God I hope the mages don't accept their aid.

I agree that Rivain will likely support the mages.  I also expect that Orlais would support Justinia.  No idea about the others.  It will be interesting, obviously, to see where Kirkwall comes down in all this.  

Tevinter is going to be another one where multiple factions are very likely. 

Hmm.  I notice you didn't mention Ferelden, any more than I did.  I'm still thinking about this one.  Edit: take that lie bakc, I see you did mention Ferelden.  Sorry, I'm tired.  =P  I'm actually not so sure about this.  It seems a given, since Alistair seems pretty supportive.  But I'm not sure his sympathies extend so far as total mage freedom.  And then there's Anora, who is more pragmatic than Alistair will ever be, even when she is sympathetic.

Re: Wardens and the Anderfels, I think the Wardens will at least try to maintain their neutrality, and form their alliances whenever the dust settles, all the interest of their own mission against the darkspawn.  But I do see them fighting any fanatical Templars who get the idea in their head to go after Warden mages.  It may be that the Wardens find themselves having to make their own deals, to support whichever group agrees to let them keep their mages and be left alone.  It seems obvious that supporting the mages will automatically support the Warden cause, but who knows?  Bioware may throw us a curve ball on this one.

Now that I think of it, Orlais is going to have plenty of its own problems.  Several groups are poised to be fighting a war on several fronts, which is going to make resources scarce.

Modifié par Silfren, 02 mars 2012 - 04:15 .

[Silfren]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I don't think the Chantry has ever dictated to the dwarves themselves who they can sell to, but restricted who can buy from the dwarves on THEIR end. Orzammar isn't part of any nation topside, after all, and not subject to any treaties with any given nation. So far as I know, at least. Seems like Orzammar would have happily trade with anyone who came along, but that their options were limited by the Chantry's restrictions on its own peoples.

As for how much lyrium is traded, I've always assumed that that was always Orzammar's prerogative. They keep the vast majority of it for themselves because they want to, not because the Chantry only permits them to sell a tiny bit of it.

The codex entry for lyrium -- as well as Alistair, Anders, and I believe a few other people -- says that the Chantry controls what is sold to the surface by the Dwarves of Orzammar. The only reason other people can buy from the Dwarves is because of smugglers like that mage in the Ferelden Circle, or some of the people in DAII.

Well, yes, but that doesn't refute my point, which is that I think the Chantry doesn't place restrictions on the dwarves, but upon the people of Thedas--which is to say the surface-dwellers. 

[TEWR]

Silfren wrote...

Things are never quite that simple. While Justinia will have her loyalists who support her, there will also be Chantry supporters who think that Justinia is destroying the Chantry and will support her overthrow. In fact, though I referred to Justinia supporters as Loyalists, I imagine that the people who thought they were protecting the Chantry against Justinia would consider themselves loyalists. They won't be agitating for the destruction of the Chantry at all.

I think it is that simple, if people are willing to examine everything.

Who makes the decisions the rest of Thedas has to follow in regards to Chantry law? The Divine.

Who wanted to kill the Divine and put someone more malleable to their interests as a means to preserve their power over the mages? The Templars.

Now, I don't know if the Templars even tried to talk with Justinia V before voting on killing her. If they didn't, then supporting them is a mistake and it is destroying the Chantry.

The Templars don't dictate what the Divine does or doesn't do. It's the other way around. She's the authority within the Chantry.

I wonder just how many factions we'll end up seeing? Things are never as simple as one for and one against. But bringing in all or even several of the likely factions may not be appropriate if Bioware wants to keep the narrative focused.

That's kinda why I'm so apprehensive about DA3. I'm afraid that Bioware won't really be able to handle something on this large a scale.

Now that I think of it, Orlais is going to have plenty of its own problems. Several groups are poised to be fighting a war on several fronts, which is going to make resources scarce.

Simply put, Orlais is ****ed.

You've got half of Orlais backing Celene's attempt at peace -- which is odd given she's been labeled an expansionist in-game -- and the other half wanting to reconquer Ferelden as if they have some God-given right to it.

Then you have the Mage-Templar war, in which opinions will probably be divided even further.

Then you've got Loghain, who will upon hearing of Orlais' anti-Ferelden intentions flip over a table, punch a few Chevaliers in the face, and ride a horse back to Ferelden so as to keep them free from Orlais.

[Silfren]

Jasmine96 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Anora grants the mage boon to a Mage Warden as well -- if he lived and asked for it or died fighting the Archdemon -- indicating that she is willing to give the mages greater rights.

Unfortunately, it's turned down. But the fact that she too was willing to not only consider the idea but grant it shows that she's behind it.

Additionally, Loghain was working to free the Circle with Uldred if the latter helped Loghain defeat the Blight.

Ferelden's populus is a mixed bag on the issue. On one hand, you have people like the gossips that blame mages and magic. On the other hand, you have the Mages Collective that has worked to increase pro-mage sentiments amongst the populus by making problems disappear before the Chantry becomes involved (source: item known as Collective Arming Cowl).

Oh I always make Alistair King so I missed that part,
But yeah it seems like the common folk like those in that tavern in asunder seem to really not like mages so I'm not sure weather they would support the Divine or the templars, But then again in Kirkwall there were alot of mage sympathizers, though I imagine after the end of DA2 they're much less sympathetic.

So I'm not really sure who any of the other countries will support. I'm not even sure who the Divine supports, I know she probably doesn't support the Templars but I don't think she fully supports the mages either. She wanted to make Pharamod (or however you spell it) tranquil again which shows she most likely didn't wan't to go though with using his research to make the tranquil un-trainquil.

I think what the Divine want's is for both sides to calm down and go back to the way they were. Where as the Mages don't wan't that at all and the Templars want to destroy the mages completely. 

I wouldn't take a single group of people in a tavern as an indicator of the populace at large.  Yes, there will be plenty of common folk who hate mages for various reasons, especially when they're drunk and looking for a fight, or dealing with major problems and need a scapegoat. But this ignores the many people who are simply even-tempered enough to take a moderate view of mages, and those who have mage relatives and friends, or whose lives were made better by a mage.  Case in point: Anders may have created a lot of enemies with his action, but you can be sure he will have at least a few supporters, based not only on the squandering of goodwill by the templars under Meredith, but also by his free, no-questions-asked healing of Kirkwall's meanest citizens.  The Chantry doesn't have supporters down to the last man, woman, and child in Thedas.  There will be a measurable number against it, though granted that number is not likely to be large.

The Divine, based on what she said in Asunder, doesn't actually want things to go back to the way they were.  But it's hard to say more than that without spoilers.  Not that the three of us haven't suggested spoilerish stuff already.

[Silfren]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Things are never quite that simple. While Justinia will have her loyalists who support her, there will also be Chantry supporters who think that Justinia is destroying the Chantry and will support her overthrow. In fact, though I referred to Justinia supporters as Loyalists, I imagine that the people who thought they were protecting the Chantry against Justinia would consider themselves loyalists. They won't be agitating for the destruction of the Chantry at all.

I think it is that simple, if people are willing to examine everything.

Who makes the decisions the rest of Thedas has to follow in regards to Chantry law? The Divine.

Who wanted to kill the Divine and put someone more malleable to their interests as a means to preserve their power over the mages? The Templars.

Now, I don't know if the Templars even tried to talk with Justinia V before voting on killing her. If they didn't, then supporting them is a mistake and it is destroying the Chantry.

The Templars don't dictate what the Divine does or doesn't do. It's the other way around. She's the authority within the Chantry.

I wonder just how many factions we'll end up seeing? Things are never as simple as one for and one against. But bringing in all or even several of the likely factions may not be appropriate if Bioware wants to keep the narrative focused.

That's kinda why I'm so apprehensive about DA3. I'm afraid that Bioware won't really be able to handle something on this large a scale.

Now that I think of it, Orlais is going to have plenty of its own problems. Several groups are poised to be fighting a war on several fronts, which is going to make resources scarce.

Simply put, Orlais is ****ed.

You've got half of Orlais backing Celene's attempt at peace -- which is odd given she's been labeled an expansionist in-game -- and the other half wanting to reconquer Ferelden as if they have some God-given right to it.

Then you have the Mage-Templar war, in which opinions will probably be divided even further.

Then you've got Loghain, who will upon hearing of Orlais' anti-Ferelden intentions flip over a table, punch a few Chevaliers in the face, and ride a horse back to Ferelden so as to keep them free from Orlais.

Things may be made that simple in order to keep the story manageable, but in reality, no, it wouldn't be.  The Chantry is in chaos.  Talking about authority and legality is irrelevant when a war is underway.  There will be people loyal to the Chantry under the Divine, and there will be people loyal to the Chantry who think that Justinia is the worst thing to ever happen to it.  The first group will be completely against the templars.  The second group could have two factions: those in support of the templars, and those who don't care much for templars running amok but also don't care much for Justinia's liberal viewpoint.  Two cleanly split, evenly divided factions just isn't how things ever go in reality. 

Loghain will do no such thing in any world of mine.  I never, ever leave him alive.

[Silfren]

Jasmine96 wrote...

 Oh also to add to the talk about companions there been alot of talk about seeing Tallis and Cullen as companions.

in an interview I think either Mike Laidlaw or David Gaider talks about that if there was a high fan demand and Felcia Day was willing to do it Tallis could come back as a companion.

As for Cullen there was a written interview one of the fans had with David Gaider (could be an unreliable source I don't know) but she brings up the possibility of having him as a companion and David Gaider says something along the lines of how he likes his character and if the Bioware girls had their way he would deffinitely be in the next game (lol) 

As for me I wouldn't mind seeing Tallis again either way is fine but I really hope we see Cullen I loved his character arc and he was the only other person in Kirkwall not completely insane..
 

Meh.  I don't like Cullen.  I never did accept his sudden and completely implausible transition from fanatically anti-mage to allegedly reasonable.  If he is a companion in the next game, there's going to be some serious rivalry going on.

[TEWR]

Things may be made that simple in order to keep the story manageable, but in reality, no, it wouldn't be. The Chantry is in chaos. Talking about authority and legality is irrelevant when a war is underway. There will be people loyal to the Chantry under the Divine, and there will be people loyal to the Chantry who think that Justinia is the worst thing to ever happen to it. The first group will be completely against the templars. The second group could have two factions: those in support of the templars, and those who don't care much for templars running amok but also don't care much for Justinia's liberal viewpoint. Two cleanly split, evenly divided factions just isn't how things ever go in reality.

I haven't read Asunder, so I may be missing some very key things that would allow me to make a thorough analysis of the situation and how simple it may be.

Right now, I've only got the basic gist of what happens and as such it only appears like something that could be simple to me. So I'll concede for now that it isn't going to be a clean-cut case of two evenly split sides.

Loghain will do no such thing in any world of mine. I never, ever leave him alive.

Loghain lives in all playthroughs! Nobody tells him to stay dead! Nobody!

But if Orlais' invasion does play a role in DA3, Loghain has to do this. It needs to go into the same style of cutscenes DAO did -- where you could see what Loghain was doing in between quests -- just so we can revel in the awesomeness of it.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 02 mars 2012 - 05:14 .

[Silfren]

Jasmine96 wrote...

I guess you're right, I just assumed that people like the farmers and everything blamed mages for stupid stuff that wasn't really their ex. crops dying

It's just alot of people In Thedas don't wan't to end up like the Tevintier Impierium but I don't think they would go and support the Templars either. As Cullen was talking about in DA2 Templars don't have the best reputation anymore, especially not with the nobility or guard in Kirkwall with Meredith taking over as vicount

But as Orsino also said in the gallows how mages would not find sympathy anywhere else indicating people are hostile towards magic.

In that case I imagine the commonfolk would probably just support the chantry then whatever that leads to

As I said, factions.  There will be people who do think exactly that.  But not everyone.  Mind, I don't think there will be an even split by any means.  I think that a thousand years of  tradition will mean that the majority of people won't support total mage freedom, both because they've been taught to fear that concept, and also because most people just can't deal well with change, much less change on this deep of a level.

You'll have people who are sympathetic to the idea that being taken away from your family and locked away is an injustice.  Among those, you'll have people who support total mage freedom--this will likely be formed mostly of people with direct personal experience of losing their loved ones to the Circle system--and those who don't support absolute freedom but definitely some significant reform. 

So, yes.  A majority of people, probably a significant majority, probably won't be keen on the idea of a solution that completey changes the landscape of their world.  Its within this group you'll find two basic factions: the majority simply want things to go back to precisely the way they've always been.  Among this group, however, you'll have a smaller faction that loathes mages and wants to see them annhilated.