1194 réponses à ce sujet

[EmperorSahlertz]

Nevarra weren't that big no, but taht means the Fre marches were larger. The entry specifically says that Orlais wished to expand to the north. So why on earth would they go through the Dales to the west, to then go to the north and establish a territory that would be disconencted from the Empire. And btw, Orlais was as big if not actually bigger back then.

[TEWR]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Nevarra weren't that big no, but taht means the Fre marches were larger. The entry specifically says that Orlais wished to expand to the north. So why on earth would they go through the Dales to the west, to then go to the north and establish a territory that would be disconencted from the Empire.

Do we know how much of the area of Orlais that currently borders Nevarra belonged to Orlais, if at all? Suppose it didn't belong to them. Suppose it belonged to the Imperium still. To clarify, we know Nevarra belong to the Free Marches at the time. But we don't know how much outside of that area belonged to Orlais.

And considering Nevarra became a larger nation because of aggressive expansion, it seems that the Dales was a direct lead into the country.

Andraste's March didn't destroy Tevinter. It just severely weakened them. Suppose that at this time Tevinter was too strong for Orlais to handle?

But an unified mass of city-states? It's not a bad target, provided that they could've exploited how they weren't unified and move in from the Dales, who Orlais probably considered an ally -- if a neutral one -- at the time.

And btw, Orlais was as big if not actually bigger back then.

Source? As far as I know, we only know that Drakon was conquering his neighbors, but we don't know the relative size of Orlais at the time.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 05 avril 2012 - 03:48 .

[dragonflight288]

My point was simply that the friction between the two countries dates far further back, than even the formation of the Chantry. Whatever the reason for the Dalish pressure is irrelevant to the point I was trying to make.

Yeah, humans were prejudiced against elves and vice-versa after Tevinter destroyed Arlathan, as the elves saw their immortality was being lost the more they interacted with shemlen (quicklings). And humans have seen elves as less than human (Vaughn) and barely worth being servants (ostagar Quartermaster, nobles, merchants, city elves themselves) for many centuries. The elves only joined Andraste so they could get a land of their own again.

The tensions existed long before Andraste was even born.

[prizm123]

i find it kind of dumb that no one seems to understand that the only reason i sided with the mages was because i wanted to protect Bethany

[Arppis]

Guess they lack the ability to empathize.

I mean sure, dangerous mages need to be put down or prisoned. But they aren't all bad and give people purpose and they'll be more happy to fight for your society. Mages just really need a place in the society.

It's better to have few rogue mages, than to have all of the mages feel like only way to survive is to fight the society around them.

[LolaLei]

It's a catch 22 situation, the more the Templar squeeze, the more the mages rebel and the more the mages rebel, the more the Templars come down on them.

... All it takes is for a few idiots to abuse their power (on both the Templar and Mage sides) for it to be ruined for everyone else.

[Lynata]

Arppis wrote...
Guess they lack the ability to empathize.

On the contrary; "their" emphathy just doesn't stop at the mages.

Maybe DA3 should take place in Tevinter if so many people have a problem understanding that we're talking about shades of grey rather than a black vs white situation.

LolaLei wrote...
It's a catch 22 situation, the more the Templar squeeze, the more the mages rebel and the more the mages rebel, the more the Templars come down on them. 

True, the novel "Asunder" explores this situation in some more detail - it does seem as if the situation wasn't as tense just a few years back; that there was some sort of change going on. Like a vicious cycle. Personally, I think the ideal solution would be to "reset" the cycle to its original position rather than breaking it entirely, for the latter has a big chance of resulting in extremes rather than a compromise.

It'll be interesting how things develop in the setting, now that the war is on.

Modifié par Lynata, 07 avril 2012 - 04:06 .

[gonzalez.melissa53]

It's an RPG. I like to experience the "dark side" too XD. Also, Cullen is not evil... just confused! Lots of trauma involved in being a demon hostage and all!

[LolaLei]

gonzalez.melissa53 wrote...

It's an RPG. I like to experience the "dark side" too XD. Also, Cullen is not evil... just confused! Lots of trauma involved in being a demon hostage and all!

I think if anyone can change the Templars for the better it's Cullen, he's seen both sides of the Mages and Templars, the good (through Amell and the peaceful times in the Circle) and the bad (being taken hostage by the blood Mages) and the good in Templars (when he sympathised with them in his younger years) and the bad (Meredith's demise) he also seems to mellow out during the Kirkwall years and beings to question the motives of the Templars towards the end.

... soooo maybe mix that up with some good old fashioned PC mage lovin' in DA3 (fingers crossed) and we could end up seeing a more peaceful existence between the Mages and Templars again under Cullen's command.

Modifié par LolaLei, 07 avril 2012 - 04:17 .

[gonzalez.melissa53]

LolaLei wrote...

gonzalez.melissa53 wrote...

It's an RPG. I like to experience the "dark side" too XD. Also, Cullen is not evil... just confused! Lots of trauma involved in being a demon hostage and all!

I think if anyone can change the Templars for the better it's Cullen, he's seen both sides of the Mages and Templars, the good (through Amell and the peaceful times in the Circle) and the bad (being taken hostage by the blood Mages) and the good in Templars (when he sympathised with them in his younger years) and the bad (Meredith's demise) he also seems to mellow out during the Kirkwall years and beings to question the motives of the Templars towards the end.

... soooo maybe mix that up with some good old fashioned PC mage lovin' in DA3 (fingers crossed) and we could end up seeing a more peaceful existence between the Mages and Templars again under Cullen's command.

/agree

[jbrand2002uk]

I supported the mages right up till anders kills the grand cleric who was innocent after that it was impossible to support the mages even on my mage playthrough's

[LolaLei]

I wasn't particularly bothered about blowing up the Grand Cleric, we told her to move some place safe. It was a fair warning LOL.

[Freyerwald]

Supported the mages pretty much from beginning to end. Sure, the game tried as best it could, to make the whole thing seem like a "shades of grey" issue. In my eyes it did not succeed.

Rather it seemed like it kept throwing terrorists of "middle-eastern appearance" at me, in a half-assed attempt to convince me that it´s "somewhat reasonable" to mistreat and abuse (or at the very least distrust) all of those "middle-eastern-potential-terrorists". 

No sale.

Modifié par Freyerwald, 07 avril 2012 - 10:06 .

[prizm123]

i am thinking now of siding with the templars with my apostate mage playthrough, just for kicks....

[LolaLei]

prizm123 wrote...

i am thinking now of siding with the templars with my apostate mage playthrough, just for kicks....

I was thinking of playing as a blood mage Templar supporter whilst dating Anders the blood mage hating apostate... ya know, for ****s and giggles.

[Porenferser]

Well I for example already played an aggressive blood mage who sided with the templars.
His reasons?
He hates every mage except for himself, because he is disgusted by all their weaknesses.
Only he is capable of using (blood) magic without becoming possessed and thus a danger for the society.
So in the end, Fenris and Sebastian were his best friends, Anders was slaughtered, alongside with Merrill and the whole rest of the circle.
And now he plans to commit Genocide on every living mage in whole Thedas, until only he alone is left.

(Now go along and hate me =P)

[LolaLei]

Porenferser wrote...

Well I for example already played an aggressive blood mage who sided with the templars.
His reasons?
He hates every mage except for himself, because he is disgusted by all their weaknesses.
Only he is capable of using (blood) magic without becoming possessed and thus a danger for the society.
So in the end, Fenris and Sebastian were his best friends, Anders was slaughtered, alongside with Merrill and the whole rest of the circle.
And now he plans to commit Genocide on every living mage in whole Thedas, until only he alone is left.

(Now go along and hate me =P)

I didn't even know you could kill Merrill!

[Always Alice]

LolaLei wrote...

I didn't even know you could kill Merrill!

You can if you side with the templars and she doesn't have her friendship/rivalry bar maxed out, I think.

[Ryzaki]

Easily OP. My Hawke cared more about the civilians of Kirkwall than the mages in the Kirkwall Circle.

Sure some of the templars were bastards that needed a knife in the eye but that goes for some in any major organization.

[Halberd96]

I think the Circle is necessary but I don't think genociding the mages and abusing them is good either, like what Meredith secretly wanted.

Its impossible to completely wipe out the mages and its impossible to try and kill them or lock them up and expect them not to fight back...

Also I don't think the idea of the Mages being completely free is very good, they would probably screw everything over.

But oppressing them and/or trying to kill them just doesn't work either evidently and its just going to create anarchy and distract everyone from the real threats (Darkspawn, the Tevinter Imperium, and any other possible threats like dragons, cults, barbarians from the frozen wasteland in the south, its all possible...)

Modifié par Halberd96, 09 avril 2012 - 02:07 .

[DKJaigen]

While more information is required to see if the circles are necessary . I'm completely convinced however that should the mages require some kind of watchman it should never be the templars.
They lack morals and common sense.

[Lynata]

Halberd96 wrote...
Also I don't think the idea of the Mages being completely free is very good, they would probably screw everything over.

Since you mentioned the Tevinter Imperium ...

... the irony is that the Tevinter Imperium looks like it does now because the mages managed to convince the Chantry that it needs to loosen up. So in a way, this is also a case of "Fooled me once ..." 

Apparently there was a better balance in the system once - then Tevinter went for "free mages" and the other Andrastean nations responded by tightening their grip to ensure that it doesn't happen elsewhere too. At least that's the impression I got from "Asunder". The Kirkwall incident then dialed up this precarious situation to eleven, and the Lord Seeker's personal experiences from Tevinter led to the final straw in the form of him ordering the templars to crack down on the mages until the pressure just became too much (so Lambert directly contributed to the situation he attempted to avoid).

[LobselVith8]

Lynata wrote...

Halberd96 wrote...

Also I don't think the idea of the Mages being completely free is very good, they would probably screw everything over.

Since you mentioned the Tevinter Imperium ...

... the irony is that the Tevinter Imperium looks like it does now because the mages managed to convince the Chantry that it needs to loosen up. So in a way, this is also a case of "Fooled me once ..." 

Except the Avvar, the Chasind, the Dalish clans, and the seers and witches in the Kingdom of Rivain demonstrate that free mages do not equal the Tevinter Imperium. The little that we know about the nation of the Dales and the kingdom of Arlathan gives no indication that the free mages in those societies were anything like the brutal Magisters in the Imperium, who have enslaved mages and non-mages alike.

Lynata wrote...

Apparently there was a better balance in the system once - then Tevinter went for "free mages" and the other Andrastean nations responded by tightening their grip to ensure that it doesn't happen elsewhere too.

Tevinter enforces slavery against mages and non-mages. It's hardly a proper example of a society of "free mages" when many of them are actually slaves.

Lynata wrote...

At least that's the impression I got from "Asunder". The Kirkwall incident then dialed up this precarious situation to eleven, and the Lord Seeker's personal experiences from Tevinter led to the final straw in the form of him ordering the templars to crack down on the mages until the pressure just became too much (so Lambert directly contributed to the situation he attempted to avoid).

Considering that mages have been fighting against the Chantry controlled Circles for centuries, with Aldenon the Great and his renegade mages fighting against the Chantry of Andraste and the Order of Templars during the formation of Ferelden, and centuries later with the rebellion at the Circle of Ferelden, it's not surprising that the Circles of Magi have broken free from the Chantry and its templars.

[DKJaigen]

Lynata wrote...

Halberd96 wrote...
Also I don't think the idea of the Mages being completely free is very good, they would probably screw everything over.

Since you mentioned the Tevinter Imperium ...

... the irony is that the Tevinter Imperium looks like it does now because the mages managed to convince the Chantry that it needs to loosen up. So in a way, this is also a case of "Fooled me once ..." 

Your such a bull**** generator, No the mages regained independence because of the nobility (and the mages usually belong to the nobility) not because of the mages themselves. The nobility btw are the ones that decides what the chantry can do. And thats why the chantry and the templars will lose the coming war. I dont think empress Celene will be amused when she finds out that she has no access to the mages in the middle of the civil war because of the templars and the chantry.