54 réponses à ce sujet

[Aldaris951]

The grey wardens imo would most likely side with the templars to restore order, They cant afford to step aside as that would weaken the nations for when a blight returns, But what of grey warden mages? Who would they support?  Would they stand with the order even if the grey wardens dont take a side? Or would they fight for their people?

Modifié par Aldaris951, 23 avril 2012 - 10:58 .

[brushyourteeth]

Grey Wardens support Grey Wardens.

If they do get involved, it will be a rare thing indeed. Even the mages -- that's not their life anymore. Their only concern now is killing the darkspawn and finding ways to end/prevent a Blight. If they involve themselves at all, it will be because they and the protagonist have a common enemy on the way to doing whatever they're doing.

[andar91]

I imagine it would vary depend on the mages; it's not like all Grey Wardens agree on everything just because they're Grey Wardens. Some may agree with fighting the templars because they've tasted freedom and want to share; others may have fond memories of the Circle and think that the resistance is brash. As far as actually taking action, I don't see where the Grey Wardens come into play in the conflict (unless they're brought into it). Their job is keeping the darkspawn/blights under control, not interfering in politics or theology.

But that's as far as I know. Maybe the writers have designed them to be more politically significant than I realize.

[Aldaris951]

Grey wardens duty is to stop blights, By not helping in the war they are letting the nations and even valuble mages die that would lessen their chances of surviving the next blight, Imo they have to get involved, Its their duty.

[Sutekh]

As an organization, Grey Wardens are neutral and wouldn't support anyone. If the Templar / Mage war came in the way of their dealing with darkspawns, I suppose they'd side with whomever is the most useful at the moment, even if they have to change side later on. They're a pragmatic bunch with a very clear goal.

A mage Grey Warden is a Warden first, and a mage second. It's the only way they can remain above the Chantry laws. Would a mage warden side with mages only because they're fellow mages, then the Chantry could very well decide they're just that, a mage, and deal with them accordingly.

[brushyourteeth]

Sutekh wrote...

As an organization, Grey Wardens are neutral and wouldn't support anyone. If the Templar / Mage war came in the way of their dealing with darkspawns, I suppose they'd side with whomever is the most useful at the moment, even if they have to change side later on. They're a pragmatic bunch with a very clear goal.

A mage Grey Warden is a Warden first, and a mage second. It's the only way they can remain above the Chantry laws. Would a mage warden side with mages only because they're fellow mages, then the Chantry could very well decide they're just that, a mage, and deal with them accordingly.

this is perfect.

Grey Wardens have gotten involved in politics in the past (Sophia and the Warden's Reach debacle), but as a rule their only concern is darkspawn. If the Templars get in the way of them preventing a Blight, they may attack the Templars. If the mages get in the way of them preventing a Blight, they may attack the mages. Otherwise, I'm not saying that they definitely won't get involved, but it would be very unusual and that would kind of make them terrible at Grey Wardening.

[Dakota Strider]

Just going by human nature....Grey Warden mages have experienced freedom from the Circle and the Chantry, and have survived without Templars looking over their shoulders every minute. I think they would individually support other mages seeking more freedom. They may not be in support of total freedom from the Chantry, for Circle mages, since there will always be rogue mages that use blood magic to take advantage of other, and/or summoning demons. They would also be in favor of a Templar branch able to deal with abominations, as well as the blood mages.

It sounds like I am taking both sides, but it seems to me, that there has to be a middle ground. Until there is a way to protect mages from becoming possessed by demons in their sleep (without making them Tranquil) mages will always be involuntarily putting society at risk. However, the heavy handed methods of the Templars and the Chantry have to be changed drastically. I think Grey Warden mages, would see this issue more clearly, and objectively, than most other involved in this conflict.

Modifié par Dakota Strider, 23 avril 2012 - 11:32 .

[BroBear Berbil]

It would depend on the mage. You'd hope, for the Wardens' sake, that Anders is the exception and not the rule. I'm not sure even a mage like Avernus would take much of an interest in the templar/mage conflict.

[LegendaryBlade]

I know my Grey Warden, as a mage, would support the Templars. The destruction of the circle is something the world is not ready for. That was, if he got involved at all, and even then only if he chose a side.

[Dakota Strider]

Anders would certainly be the exception, since I doubt there are too many other mages that are possessed by spirits called Justice (with heavy leanings of Vengeance). I think most mages would have strong feelings, but without a supernatural force pushing them in one direction, they could act more rationally.

[Sylvianus]

Aldaris951 wrote...

Grey wardens duty is to stop blights, By not helping in the war they are letting the nations and even valuble mages die that would lessen their chances of surviving the next blight, Imo they have to get involved, Its their duty.

We / they do not know when there will be a new blight. It can takes many many years, centuries. Thinking about unseen threats and illusory has no interest, and they would lose any credibility if they were to intervene in every conflict  warning of the need to keep potential recruits for the day when the blight would come. A day that may never come actually.

The wardens can not anticipate everything. They need proofs and facts, to convince the nations. A process that is not obvious, especially when last generations have forgotten what the blight and its horrors are.

Even in Thedas, only a few people believe that there was actually a blight in Ferelden, because it took only one -two years and it did happen only in a small and insignificant country. Also, warden's duty isn't to protect valubles mages if they are not wardens. There could be a genocide against them in a few countries, they couldn't do anything, they wouldn't do anything.

The wardens would deal first with the diplomatic solution in my opinion if they were in danger. Neutrality is something important to them. I would see only individuals, like Bethany or Anders, leaving themself the order, surely. But then, they wouldn't be wardens anymore. 

Wardens are vulnerable and they need the confidence of countries that receive them. Their neutrality is important, at least for the chiefs, except when it concerns their fight against the darkspawns. I do not think they would rush to the side of a camp because they would be attacked by the other one. I think that they would remain only at first on the defensive, dealing with the situation, trying to hide their mages, not allowing anyone to touch their members but without joining a camp either despite attacks against them. Without going on the offensive. I see them more anxious to investigate what happens in the world, improvising against the perils between mages and templars.

Also any mage deserter who would be involved in politics, or the fighting against the templars without their agreement would be abandoned to its fate, even if calling for help. Like.... Sophia saw it.

I do not think mages would be stupid enough to target the integrity of their order, they would attack just wildly, aimlessly at worst.

But the Templars, it is possible that they may decide to target their headquarters and all their members against the defensive reaction of the wardens and the refusal to hand over their mages. But I do not believe it. They are not supported by the divine, not powerful enough, to do that.. Templars seem already divided between them, they are not that much confident or united to try that.. We may have some templars who want peace, other pragmatics, other who do not believe anymore in their order, and others fanatics who would be able to attack wardens on the roads but nothing really threatening to their order and its integrity.

I suppose they'd side with whomever is the most useful at the moment even if they have to change side later on. They're a pragmatic bunch with a very clear goal.

I would say only if their fight against the darkspawn, requires it immediately and if the situation is really bad.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 24 avril 2012 - 12:25 .

[brushyourteeth]

Part of it greatly depends on your definitions of "support" and "side with."

If you mean "root for" then yes, the Grey Warden mages definitely have a strong opinion.

If you mean "will abandon the order to give aid to" then I seriously think not.

[BubbleDncr]

Grey Wardens aren't allowed to pick a side, tho I imagine Grey Warden mages will root for the mages, as many have said.

The only reason I see them picking a side is if they were forced to - like if another blight happened and, as in Origins, the only way to get people to take the blight seriously and stop it is to get involved in politics. But supposedly Alistair and the Warden got reprimanded by the order for doing just that, so yea...anything more than a few rogue Wardens picking a side would probably just be a last resort.

[Sutekh]

Dakota Strider wrote...

They would also be in favor of a Templar branch able to deal with abominations, as well as the blood mages.

Grey Wardens don't give a nug's tail about blood magic. If it's what it takes to get rid of the darkspawn, then, by all means, blood magic away (besides, the Joining is a little bit too close).

They don't have a moral stance, let alone a political one. All they care about is darkspawn, darkspawn and darkspawn. Also, Blights. And darkspawn.

This is what Riordan - our principal source of grey warden lore in-game - says on the matter:

"There are too few of us. It's not a matter of what we like; it's a matter of what we must do. Our duty is to slay the archdemon. We aren't judges. Kinslayers, blood mages, traitors, rebels, carta thugs, common bandits: Anyone with the skill and the mettle to take up the sword against the darkspawn is welcome among us."

On an individual level, of course, things might be different, and rogue wardens do exist (Anders is one), but as an organization, they just can't afford taking side.

[Sylvianus]

BubbleDncr wrote...

Grey Wardens aren't allowed to pick a side, tho I imagine some Grey Warden mages who won't be anymore wardens will root for the mages, as many have said. 

Fixed. 

Modifié par Sylvianus, 24 avril 2012 - 12:42 .

[Sylvanpyxie]

By not helping in the war they are letting the nations and even valuble mages die that would lessen their chances of surviving the next blight

Wardens can't risk political back-lash for a Blight that may happen *>centuries<* from now.

They might very well lose resources by not interfering, but the losses of the Templar Mage conflict will be replenished by the time another Blight rolls around.

Wardens need to work with nations, with *all* factions, if they break their neutrality and damage their reputation by interfering in petty politics then they *will* lose favour with political and military factions.

It's hard to build political bridges up again, which is why Wardens must maintain neutrality. They can't afford to be on someone's "blacklist" when the darkspawn return with another Blight.

[Dakota Strider]

Sutekh wrote...

Dakota Strider wrote...

They would also be in favor of a Templar branch able to deal with abominations, as well as the blood mages.

Grey Wardens don't give a nug's tail about blood magic. If it's what it takes to get rid of the darkspawn, then, by all means, blood magic away (besides, the Joining is a little bit too close). 

I find it hard to believe, that Wardens would sacrifice so much to save the world from the Blight and darkspawn, just to not give a "nug's tail" about other factors that are messing it up, especially someone summoning demons, and creating abominations. 

They don't have a moral stance, let alone a political one. All they care about is darkspawn, darkspawn and darkspawn. Also, Blights. And darkspawn.

I am not sure where you picked up that notion, that they do not have a moral stance.  They are supposed to stay out of politics, that is true.  And during the middle of a Blight, they are pledged to do whatever it takes to defeat the Blight.  However, a group of men and women of all races, that chose to give up a normal life to sacrifice themselves for good of everyone, certainly do have a moral stance.   And darkspawn are not always around, although it happens we were introduced to the Dragon Age world, just as a Blight was beginning.  But, during the times when a Blight is not threatening, Wardens certainly would not be turning a blind eye to the world around them. 

  This is what Riordan - our principal source of grey warden lore in-game - says on the matter:

"There are too few of us. It's not a matter of what we like; it's a matter of what we must do. Our duty is to slay the archdemon. We aren't judges. Kinslayers, blood mages, traitors, rebels, carta thugs, common bandits: Anyone with the skill and the mettle to take up the sword against the darkspawn is welcome among us."

On an individual level, of course, things might be different, and rogue wardens do exist (Anders is one), but as an organization, they just can't afford taking side.

Not arguing that Riordan said that.  And we have very few sources of Grey Warden lore in DAO.  Duncan was with us for too short of a time, Alistair knows only a little more than we do.  If you do the Warden Keep, you get a few clues there.   And there, I think it is based on the individual player, if you approve or disapprove of Avernus and his use of blood magic, and choose to use, or destroy his research.

And during a Blight, as Riordan said, all means necessary to defeat the Arch Demon.  However, the world is not always under a Blight, and I did not get the impression that Wardens had a free pass to act in this manner during "peace time".    That may still be open to interpretation, but I am personally of the mindset if the Warden's sacrifice so much to keep the world safe from darkspawn, they would be opposed to see it go to hell from unleashed abominations and unscrupolous blood mages.  (and not saying all blood mages are necessarily evil). 

[brushyourteeth]

Dakota Strider wrote...

Sutekh wrote...

Dakota Strider wrote...

They would also be in favor of a Templar branch able to deal with abominations, as well as the blood mages.

Grey Wardens don't give a nug's tail about blood magic. If it's what it takes to get rid of the darkspawn, then, by all means, blood magic away (besides, the Joining is a little bit too close). 

I find it hard to believe, that Wardens would sacrifice so much to save the world from the Blight and darkspawn, just to not give a "nug's tail" about other factors that are messing it up, especially someone summoning demons, and creating abominations. 

They don't have a moral stance, let alone a political one. All they care about is darkspawn, darkspawn and darkspawn. Also, Blights. And darkspawn.

I am not sure where you picked up that notion, that they do not have a moral stance.  They are supposed to stay out of politics, that is true.  And during the middle of a Blight, they are pledged to do whatever it takes to defeat the Blight.  However, a group of men and women of all races, that chose to give up a normal life to sacrifice themselves for good of everyone, certainly do have a moral stance.   And darkspawn are not always around, although it happens we were introduced to the Dragon Age world, just as a Blight was beginning.  But, during the times when a Blight is not threatening, Wardens certainly would not be turning a blind eye to the world around them. 

  This is what Riordan - our principal source of grey warden lore in-game - says on the matter:

"There are too few of us. It's not a matter of what we like; it's a matter of what we must do. Our duty is to slay the archdemon. We aren't judges. Kinslayers, blood mages, traitors, rebels, carta thugs, common bandits: Anyone with the skill and the mettle to take up the sword against the darkspawn is welcome among us."

On an individual level, of course, things might be different, and rogue wardens do exist (Anders is one), but as an organization, they just can't afford taking side.

Not arguing that Riordan said that.  And we have very few sources of Grey Warden lore in DAO.  Duncan was with us for too short of a time, Alistair knows only a little more than we do.  If you do the Warden Keep, you get a few clues there.   And there, I think it is based on the individual player, if you approve or disapprove of Avernus and his use of blood magic, and choose to use, or destroy his research.

And during a Blight, as Riordan said, all means necessary to defeat the Arch Demon.  However, the world is not always under a Blight, and I did not get the impression that Wardens had a free pass to act in this manner during "peace time".    That may still be open to interpretation, but I am personally of the mindset if the Warden's sacrifice so much to keep the world safe from darkspawn, they would be opposed to see it go to hell from unleashed abominations and unscrupolous blood mages.  (and not saying all blood mages are necessarily evil). 

Everything that you're saying makes perfect sense, and it seems like the Grey Wardens ought to be as noble as what you're describing, but... it just isn't so. The Warden and Alistair were kind of terrible Grey Wardens actually because they wasted a lot of time wandering around Fereldan do-gooding. If a superior officer had been there, they would have authorized them to take the shortest trip possible to gather allies and defeat the Archdemon, even if it meant leaving their own brand of chaos and destruction in their wake. Even in times of peace, Grey Wardens don't have time for moralizing. A blight could happen at any time. Darkspawn forces are gathering all the time. They do what's needed and let the world handle the world.

I had a really hard time grasping this concept. But after reading "The Calling" well... I was forced to see the dark, brutal side of the Wardens. If you've read it, skim through it again. If you haven't, it's a good read and it explains a lot (including the story of how Duncan became a Grey Warden, which isn't a happy tale either).

[Dakota Strider]

@brushyourteeth Thanks for the recommendation. Actually, I have not looked at any material that was not in the actual games, or official DLC. Even if it is the same writer, I have found in the past, that there are always inconsistancies with outside material from one source to another. For example, Ed Greenwood, and others' novels of Forgotten Realms were always different than the source material for the Forgotten Realms game world, and Ed Greenwood was the creator of the Forgotten Realms world.

It may very well be a good thing that Alistair and the Warden did not have a chance for a true Warden indoctrination. Perhaps the dark, brutal side, is not as necessary as those that control the Wardens believe. Perhaps a more humane side, would make the Wardens better. All conjecture, but it worked once. The world is a constantly changing place, and even the vaunted Wardens may need to reassess their views.

[brushyourteeth]

Dakota Strider wrote...

It may very well be a good thing that Alistair and the Warden did not have a chance for a true Warden indoctrination. Perhaps the dark, brutal side, is not as necessary as those that control the Wardens believe. Perhaps a more humane side, would make the Wardens better. All conjecture, but it worked once. The world is a constantly changing place, and even the vaunted Wardens may need to reassess their views.

I actually couldn't agree more! Though I had to admit to myself that the results-at-any-costs Wardens were technically much more fascinating than I'd suspected, I would like them much better if they weren't so brutal. I wonder if that very topic will come up in DAIII?

[Sylvianus]

brushyourteeth wrote...
 The Warden and Alistair were kind of terrible Grey Wardens actually because they wasted a lot of time wandering around Fereldan do-gooding. If a superior officer had been there, they would have authorized them to take the shortest trip possible to gather allies and defeat the Archdemon, even if it meant leaving their own brand of chaos and destruction in their wake. Even in times of peace, Grey Wardens don't have time for moralizing. A blight could happen at any time. Darkspawn forces are gathering all the time. They do what's needed and let the world handle the world.

I had a really hard time grasping this concept. But after reading "The Calling" well... I was forced to see the dark, brutal side of the Wardens. If you've read it, skim through it again. If you haven't, it's a good read and it explains a lot (including the story of how Duncan became a Grey Warden, which isn't a happy tale either).

Absolutely. Allistair is a terrible grey warden.

And In times of peace,Grey wardens do not waste their time, indeed. They seeks the old gods who remain and will be the next threat, seeking clues or relics to events that might interest them, they investigate all the time in deep roads, draw maps of the deep roads, perform special assignments related to the harmful effects of the Blights from the past. And those effects can last centuries. And , there are still darkspawn to fight and to kill, even in times of peace for the love of god lol

They are always watching !

It may very well be a good thing that Alistair and the Warden did not have a chance for a true Warden indoctrination. Perhaps the dark, brutal side, is not as necessary as those that control the Wardens believe. Perhaps a more humane side, would make the Wardens better. All conjecture, but it worked once. The world is a constantly changing place, and even the vaunted Wardens may need to reassess their views.
 

What do you mean, they should be involved in politics, or conflicts, they should leave their neutrality ?

Modifié par Sylvianus, 24 avril 2012 - 01:57 .

[BroBear Berbil]

In regards to Blood Magic, while it's acceptable for Wardens I always thought it'd be more of a last resort kind of thing like Sophia Dryden and Avernus' use of it. I know a kind of blood magic is involved in creating new Wardens but I think a full company of Wardens would probably look upon a mage slicing their hand open and summoning demons willy nilly unfavorably.

Becoming a Warden doesn't completely erase one's upbringing or morals.

This isn't how it works in the games really but the worst the games let you do is mind control and sap health from allies; and only in battle. Blood Magic in almost every situation seems pretty frivolous to me.

[Huntress]

LegendaryBlade wrote...

I know my Grey Warden, as a mage, would support the Templars. The destruction of the circle is something the world is not ready for. That was, if he got involved at all, and even then only if he chose a side.

Really? do you think mages were born after the chantry was created? The tevinter mages/dalish mages/Rivain shamans, they all were born after the Chantry made prison for them?.. Mages have been walking in thedas way before The maker / Andraste  religion was form. Still the world didn't end then, demons are not rampant killing first borns anywere in thedas, the chantry is a lie.


My Mage warden will probably do somethings, not to destroy the warden order of course.. Thedas needs  the wardens but she won't sit idle while the templars frame every single mage as blood mage/malificar or demon lover.

Modifié par Huntress, 24 avril 2012 - 02:09 .

[Dakota Strider]

Sylvianus wrote...

It may very well be a good thing that Alistair and the Warden did not have a chance for a true Warden indoctrination. Perhaps the dark, brutal side, is not as necessary as those that control the Wardens believe. Perhaps a more humane side, would make the Wardens better. All conjecture, but it worked once. The world is a constantly changing place, and even the vaunted Wardens may need to reassess their views.
 

What do you mean, they should be involved in politics, or conflicts, they should leave their neutrality ?

Depends on how specific you mean, when you talk about politics.  In most cases, the Wardens would not be concerned about something so trivial as to who is sitting on a throne somewhere.  Rulers come and go.  However, I would hope the Wardens would look at each situation individually.  What would all the Warden's do, if say the Qunari invaded?  Just stand by and watch, and let the Qunari take over?  Would the Wardens believe the Qunari would let the Wardens be exempt from embracing the Qun?

I find it unlikely the Wardens would be looking to jump right into the middle of the Templar/Circle conflict.  However, that is something that could endanger the world that the Wardens are trying to protect.  The possible  consequences of either side having a total victory, may be something the Wardens do not believe is best.   One consequence could be that the world would be less prepared to deal with an upcoming blight.  So, the Wardens are likely going to be prepared to step in, if they see an opportunity, when their intervention can end the conflict, or if they view the outcome of not getting involved is too dangerous for Thedas for Wardens to stay neutral.

Modifié par Dakota Strider, 24 avril 2012 - 03:08 .