54 réponses à ce sujet

[Sutekh]

Dakota Strider wrote...

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.

I don't. They leave that kind of things to others. As the only barrier standing between Thedas and the darkspawn (annihilation), they have to. 

I am not sure where you picked up that notion, that they do not have a moral stance.

I picked up that notion in the canon material we have: the game(s) and the books, mainly The Calling. This is the only way we have to analyse Grey Wardens. The rest is only interpretation and speculations.

<snip> But, during the times when a Blight is not threatening, Wardens certainly would not be turning a blind eye to the world around them.

Darkspawn don't magically cease to exist between blights. First, there's a time during which you still have stragglers and such roaming the surface (Thaw), then they continue living their merry darkspawn life underground, making baby spawn via broodmothers and seeking the next Old God to taint. Wardens then have to forge deeper into the Deep Roads, but it's a neverending war. "In peace, vigilance" does mean something.

In short, they're too busy grey wardening to mingle in the world's affairs.

Not arguing that Riordan said that.

It comes straight from the toolset

If you do the Warden Keep, you get a few clues there.

Indeed you do. Sophia rebelled against the king because he was a tyrant (and for personal reasons). It's made clear that she shouldn't have done that, and that it was a very non-warden thing to do. As a result, wardens were banned from Ferelden for two centuries, and when the Blight started, there were very few of them to do something about it. This, in fact, is the perfect example of why Wardens should stay away from the world's business.

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.

Now, this is interesting. In my canon playthrough which I mostly use for import, I chose to help Avernus and give him carte blanche. In DA2, there's a mini-quest where you stumble upon a letter from the warden-commander (i.e. you) saying that Avernus findings must reach the First Warden ASAP. So, apparently, the First Warden is perfectly OK with it.

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).

Consider wardens as very specialized agents. They only deal with their domain of expertise, mainly because there aren't that many of them, and they need all their resources focused on their goal. They also can't afford to alienate one party, in case said party proves useful in time of need. And last, if they give up neutrality, they also give up immunity. Remember how Stroud leaves you dealing with the Qunari in DA2? That's grey wardens for you.

[Sylvianus]

Dakota Strider wrote...

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 like 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.

The Grey Wardens did not react to the invasion of Kirkwall, they just defended themself against the qunari and quickly after they left the city, while citizens were still in danger. I doubt they would react if the qunari invaded the continent.

Grey wardens aren't that many to serve as a useful army at this scale. The grey wardens unite the armies of Thedas against the darkspawn, this is their strenght, the most powerful in Thedas, but the only one they have. They lead the armies in war against the darkspawn, they know how to fight the blight.

But, once there aren't anymore blights, they do not have anymore kings, and their army behind them, they are weak, they lose their power. Why ? Because no one gives a **** about what they want, what they think when it isn't about the darkspawns. Who would follow the Grey wardens against the qunari ? No one. They couldn't be the leader of the free world, nobody would respect them, because it isn"t their competence.  What they could do ? Nothing. In times of war on the continent they would be just a bunch of strange people to the eyes of many folks. This is the reality for the Grey Wardens.

Just see how the wardens who have settled in countries are obliged to show signs of respect for kings, to deal with them carefully sometimes, and these same kings who do not always listen to them. The Grey Wardens even recruit elite men within their countries with their agreement. Mens from everywhere.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 24 avril 2012 - 03:37 .

[LegendaryBlade]

Huntress wrote...

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.

No, but it was created for a reason and it very successfully serves it's purpose. If it was so rapidly brought down it would mean potential blood mages and demons would spill out across country before a new, better system was put in to place. Even Anders was opposed to rapidly removing the circle in DA:A, before his character was ruined by Hepler in DA2.

Normally I would put a few paragraph shere, but i've had this fight 100 times. Sufficite to say the Circle needs work, but until another system is put in to place it needs to remain. Personally, I think a buddy system should be set up. Where mages can freely leave the circle, but will have Templars assigned to them. Even without walls to restrict them escape is still impossible due to philactories (sp?). 

Modifié par LegendaryBlade, 24 avril 2012 - 03:17 .

[Dakota Strider]

@Sutekh & @Sylvianus. Respectfully agree to disagree. Perhaps the non-game material such as novels and comic books are meant to be canon, but I have experienced enough of this sort of thing in the past, not to trust material that is not in the actual game itself. Authors, even when they are involved with the game, take way too much artistic license, to be trustworthy in that regard. Dragon Age writers have enough trouble as it is, keeping consistancy between DAO and DA2.

Well explained positions from both of you.. But until my playthrough of DA3 proves me wrong, I will stay with my perception of the Wardens.

[Sacred_Fantasy]

sjpelkessjpeler wrote...
Maybe I'm wrong here. In DA2 at the end of Act 2 there is some inconsistancy in the reply you get from the warden after you fight with them together against the kossith.

It is said (sorry do not know it litteraly on the top of my head) that they are there on warden business cannot aid/stay right now because they have to be neutral but maybe spread word on other city's in order to get help for Kirkwall.
There is no blight going on at that time. There are other things going on that have the wardens attention. But it could still be something that is politically related.

But they did side with Kirkwall and not the Qunari. Could be that they were just defending themselves at that time but I do no know. Might as well thought; let's help Kirkwall while we are here and fight the kossith.

Wrote about the schism earlier on this thread in the wardens. If there truly is one; what direction will the two groups take?  

The Qunari Conflict is in ACT 2. The Wardens and Bethany appeared in ACT 3.
They don't side with anyone. They were there because Bethany wanted to meet with her brother. They get caught in the middle of action and were forced to defend themselves against both templar and abominations/demons. 

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 24 avril 2012 - 03:29 .

[Sylvianus]

Dakota Strider wrote...

@Sutekh & @Sylvianus. Respectfully agree to disagree. Perhaps the non-game material such as novels and comic books are meant to be canon, but I have experienced enough of this sort of thing in the past, not to trust material that is not in the actual game itself. Authors, even when they are involved with the game, take way too much artistic license, to be trustworthy in that regard. Dragon Age writers have enough trouble as it is, keeping consistancy between DAO and DA2.

Well explained positions from both of you.. But until my playthrough of DA3 proves me wrong, I will stay with my perception of the Wardens.

Actually your peception is good, about the Grey wardens with more human side, involvment that could lead to something better, even if I disagree.  And do not worry, I just gave my opinion.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 24 avril 2012 - 03:29 .

[brushyourteeth]

Dakota Strider, I totally respect your opinion - it's based on experience.

I can say though that I've read all three of David Gaider's novels and haven't found anything inconsisent with the games. They're seriously a joy to read, so if you ever felt like giving them a chance I'd definitely recommend them.

[Sutekh]

@Dakota

All the examples I gave you came from the games only (DAO, Awakening and a dash of DA2), and the codices found in-game.

This being said, that doesn't mean that a bit more humanity wouldn't be a good thing for the wardens, or that they wouldn't in fact be more efficient if they were more in touch with the world. But that's the way they are. And, like brushyourteeth, I find them fascinating, even if I don't completely agree with how they deal with things.

[Melca36]

My Grey Warden would support the mages.

[Dakota Strider]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

sjpelkessjpeler wrote...
Maybe I'm wrong here. In DA2 at the end of Act 2 there is some inconsistancy in the reply you get from the warden after you fight with them together against the kossith.

It is said (sorry do not know it litteraly on the top of my head) that they are there on warden business cannot aid/stay right now because they have to be neutral but maybe spread word on other city's in order to get help for Kirkwall.
There is no blight going on at that time. There are other things going on that have the wardens attention. But it could still be something that is politically related.

But they did side with Kirkwall and not the Qunari. Could be that they were just defending themselves at that time but I do no know. Might as well thought; let's help Kirkwall while we are here and fight the kossith.

Wrote about the schism earlier on this thread in the wardens. If there truly is one; what direction will the two groups take?  

The Qunari Conflict is in ACT 2. The Wardens and Bethany appeared in ACT 3.
They don't side with anyone. They were there because Bethany wanted to meet with her brother. They get caught in the middle of action and were forced to defend themselves against both templar and abominations/demons. 

Even if Bethany is not with the Wardens, they do show up in Act 2, as you are fighting through Qunari to reach the palace.  And they do attack a large contingent of your enemies, just as sjpelkessjpeler noted.  The scene made it pretty clear that they were not caught up in things, but that they were making a conscious choice to attack the Qunari, then apologize to say they could not help more.   Perhaps getting that scene depends on your DAO import, or other decisions you make in DA2.  But the two playthroughs I had, both had that Warden appearance.  (Never had Bethany join the Warden's in my game, so did not see her in the above scene in Act 3).

Modifié par Dakota Strider, 24 avril 2012 - 06:09 .

[nightcobra]

my guess is that the order itself will remain neutral until it's continued existence is threatened, some members might take sides like warden mages if they're attacked by templars, or wardens that view the mages as much of a menace as darkspawn.

[Sacred_Fantasy]

Dakota Strider wrote...

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

sjpelkessjpeler wrote...
Maybe I'm wrong here. In DA2 at the end of Act 2 there is some inconsistancy in the reply you get from the warden after you fight with them together against the kossith.

It is said (sorry do not know it litteraly on the top of my head) that they are there on warden business cannot aid/stay right now because they have to be neutral but maybe spread word on other city's in order to get help for Kirkwall.
There is no blight going on at that time. There are other things going on that have the wardens attention. But it could still be something that is politically related.

But they did side with Kirkwall and not the Qunari. Could be that they were just defending themselves at that time but I do no know. Might as well thought; let's help Kirkwall while we are here and fight the kossith.

Wrote about the schism earlier on this thread in the wardens. If there truly is one; what direction will the two groups take?  

The Qunari Conflict is in ACT 2. The Wardens and Bethany appeared in ACT 3.
They don't side with anyone. They were there because Bethany wanted to meet with her brother. They get caught in the middle of action and were forced to defend themselves against both templar and abominations/demons. 

Even if Bethany is not with the Wardens, they do show up in Act 2, as you are fighting through Qunari to reach the palace.  And they do attack a large contingent of your enemies, just as sjpelkessjpeler noted.  The scene made it pretty clear that they were not caught up in things, but that they were making a conscious choice to attack the Qunari, then apologize to say they could not help more.   Perhaps getting that scene depends on your DAO import, or other decisions you make in DA2.  But the two playthroughs I had, both had that Warden appearance.  (Never had Bethany join the Warden's in my game, so did not see her in the above scene in Act 3).

After the expedition, I never met Bethany and the wardens again until the end of ACT 3. As far as I concern, Bethany did wrote a letter how she survived the joining in ACT 2. That's about it. No wardens or warden Bethany appearance in the entire ACT 2. The entire Qunari conflict was dealt by Hawke with the help of Orsino and Meredith. I recalled it was Meredith who saved Hawke from a Qunari's sneak attack somewhere near the palace.. Therefore making it harder to pick side. 

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 24 avril 2012 - 07:24 .

[LobselVith8]

Aldaris951 wrote...

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?

That really depends on the particular Wardens. Wardens like Ridorian, Duncan, and Stroud feel that the Wardens should be neutral as a rule. We hear Riordian talk about how the Anderfel Wardens are involved in politics, and basically rule the Anderfels as the nation has a weak king, so the people turn to the Wardens for leadership. The First Warden is also intrigued by how the Warden-Commander can become the new Arl of Amaranthine, and wants this to establish a precedent (as Mistress Woolsey says) to show the importance of a Warden outside the Blight. The Warden-Commander governs the arling of Amaranthine - to the point where lesser nobles swear fealty to the new Arl.

While I don't see the First Warden having the Wardens (as a whole) side with either side, we see that the Hero of Ferelden (the mage protagonist) can ask the new ruler to give the Circle of Ferelden its independence from the Chantry and the Order of Templars. Wouldn't the mages seek out the Hero of Ferelden who asked for his people to be emancipated? I suppose the Hero of Ferelden could, hypothetically, get involved (as an individual).

[Huntress]

LegendaryBlade wrote...

Sufficite to say the Circle needs work, but until another system is put in to place it needs to remain. Personally, I think a buddy system should be set up. Where mages can freely leave the circle, but will have Templars assigned to them. Even without walls to restrict them escape is still impossible due to philactories (sp?). 

You are asking for a foolproof system??
Foolproof:
1. Designed so as to be impervious to human incompetence, error, or misuse: a foolproof detonator; a foolproof safety lock.
2. Effective; infallible: a foolproof scheme.

Murphy's Corollary:
"It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious."

Shaw's Principle
Build a system that even a fool can use and only a fool will want to use it.

"All real programs contain errors unless proven otherwise, which is impossible."
"Any system which relies on human reliability is unreliable."

Anyway what I wanted to say is: Not one can't stop a mage or anyone who wants to do evil, not one can't stop a mage or anyone that want to do what is right. Tell me what system will stop this persons? none whatsoever, and thinking on a cure for it is like wanting to govern the weather, to stop time or be happy since you are born.

"Where mages can freely leave the circle, but will have Templars assigned to them."

^Tell me what is the meaning of freedom? having someone following you from dusk to dawn and watching you sleep, eat or having a S** is freedom? for whom? Would you want to be part of either choices? No? why not?

There is a http://en.wikipedia....he_Golden_Rule:

The Golden Rule or ethic of reciprocity is a maxim,[2] ethical code, or morality[3] that essentially states either of the following:

    (Positive form): One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself.[2]
    (Negative/prohibitive form, also called the Silver Rule): One should not treat others in ways that one would not like to be treated.

"Never impose on others what you would not choose for yourself." – Confucius

Modifié par Huntress, 24 avril 2012 - 06:37 .

[Uccio]

My Warden mage would support mage rebellion. After all he was against circle and chantry from the start.

[LegendaryBlade]

[quote]Huntress wrote...

You are asking for a foolproof system??
Foolproof:
1. Designed so as to be impervious to human incompetence, error, or misuse: a foolproof detonator; a foolproof safety lock.
2. Effective; infallible: a foolproof scheme.

Murphy's Corollary:
"It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious."

Shaw's Principle
Build a system that even a fool can use and only a fool will want to use it.


"All real programs contain errors unless proven otherwise, which is impossible."
"Any system which relies on human reliability is unreliable."  

[/quote]

I don't recall saying that at all. Better does not mean fullproof, that's a massive leap and logic and you know it. The Circle is flawed, but not system at all would be fifty times worse. Throwing out a bunch of quotes doesn't make your argument any more reasonable or your logic any less flawed.


[quote]Anyway what I wanted to say is: Not one can't stop a mage or anyone who wants to do evil, not one can't stop a mage or anyone that want to do what is right. Tell me what system will stop this persons? none whatsoever, and thinking on a cure for it is like wanting to govern the weather, to stop time or be happy since you are born.[/quote]

Every.Single.Mage is susceptible to the possibility of being over taken by a demon. Do you know what kind of mages are most susceptible? Those who have not received formal training and haven't built up their willpower for years. Without a circle, it's not a matter of mages who 'want to do evil' it's a matter of mages potentially losing control. Either through demonic corruption or the temptation of blood magic.

[quote]"Where mages can freely leave the circle, but will have Templars assigned to them."

^Tell me what is the meaning of freedom? having someone following you from dusk to dawn and watching you sleep, eat or having a S** is freedom? for whom? Would you want to be part of either choices? No? why not?

There is a http://en.wikipedia....he_Golden_Rule:

The Golden Rule or ethic of reciprocity is a maxim,[2] ethical code, or morality[3] that essentially states either of the following:

    (Positive form): One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself.[2]
    (Negative/prohibitive form, also called the Silver Rule): One should not treat others in ways that one would not like to be treated.

"Never impose on others what you would not choose for yourself." – Confucius 

[/quote]

Nomatter what, freedoms are going to be limited somehow short of simply dismissing any kind of system at all, which is beyond idealistic or foolish; it's dangerous. Mages are like people born with large yield bombs that cannot be removed inside of them. Bombs that are dorment, but we never know when they will suddenly go off. You tell me that in your world, you would let these people who could, at literally any moment, explode walk free. 

Most mages accept the reality of this, many mages lead happy lives inside the circle. I don't think the system is perfect, I believe a buddy system that allowed them to explore and see the world would be best. But neither am I so foolish as to believe that no system at all would be better.

We could go the route of the Qunari, we've seen what they do to their mages. At least we've sound something more humain than that.












[/quote]

Modifié par LegendaryBlade, 24 avril 2012 - 11:59 .

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

Aldaris951 wrote...

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?

It depends entirely on the Grey Warden in question. If you take Bethany as an example, she is on the side of her sibling--no matter what side the PC is on.

Unless there is a Blight or darkspawn threat, the Grey Wardens as an organisation may not involve themselves in this war. It'd be smart. The last thing they need is to waste their numbers and resources fighting someone else's fight, earning enemies, being kicked out of various Andrastian countries, and getting weakened before the next Old God awakens.

[Halberd96]

I think that the Grey Wardens would side with countries/nations rather than mages or templars...so if the strongest band of countries wants to obliterate and/or take back control of the mages then that is what they might do...

But I could be wrong, maybe the Grey Wardens will see the Mages as too vital or something. Duncan was very frustrated with the restrictions the Chantry had over the mages.

Also I think the Grey Wardens would only get involved if something really big happened, like if there was mass disorder or they really had to take drastic action that meant getting involved with politics and wars between nations or whatever

Modifié par Halberd96, 25 avril 2012 - 07:52 .

[5trangeCase]

This all depends on their "business", but they would probably side with the protagonist. That is, they would seek a conclusion to the war without choosing sides. They might also just ignore it entirely.

Grey Warden mages are Grey Wardens, they would almost certainly side with the order.

[Fast Jimmy]

Sutekh wrote...

Remember how Stroud leaves you dealing with the Qunari in DA2? That's grey wardens for you.

All other arguments aside, this sums it up pretty clearly. A true Grey Warden, one who is devoted to the Warden ideals, will act this way. Leave one city in utter turmoil that could result in the Kossith gaining control of a major city in the Free Marches and possibly reigniting war between them and the Chantry again after hundreds of years of peace... why?

Because they have Grey Warden business to attend to. There are entire armies who would rise up to take down the Kossith invasion if it got out of hand. But there are only a handful of Wardens to do Grey Warden business, which if they did not do, would not be done. 

Will there be Wardens who are mages who have differing opinions? Of course. Just as there are likley Templars who have mage friends or family and may not side with the war. There is plenty of room for human error in every organization. But it seems unlikely that the mages in the Grey Wardens would schism off and interfere in worldly politics just on a whim (unless the DA3 protag GIVES them a reason why).

It is an interesting discussion for a possible character piece or a companion (a lone Grey Warden mage who ventured off against orders to become involved with the war) but this is not something that the Wardens would get involved with unless there was much more at risk than whether or not mages are locked in a tower or not.

[jsadalia]

They'd sit back hoping for bigger and less dreary challenges.

More seriously, I doubt they'd do anything as a group. Individual Wardens would follow their conscience, and possibly end up fighting one another, but they would almost certainly be in the minority. If the Wardens as a whole came down on one side, it should only be because it would better allow them to combat the Darkspawn.

[MEBengal2008]

brushyourteeth wrote...

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.

GW do get involve in politics if there is no blight. They impacted Fereldan and were removed, because of the political involvement. Now, they may have to get involved again and most GW I believe do not like the way mages are enslaved; Duncan makes a note of it in DAO.

[Aldaris951]

Great points on both sides guys, I cant believe I forgot about wardens keep story, It was one of the best dlcs imo. Unlike Witch Hunt, WHERES MY DAMN GIFT MORRIGAN!