194 réponses à ce sujet

[Xilizhra]

I think what Xilizhra meant was that any vestiges of the current Order's incarnation -- drug addled religious zealots -- needs to be destroyed. Not the Templar Order as an idea to strive for, where people serve as protector to both Mage and non-mage. There are a lot of flaws in the current Templar Order's incarnation, and I think that's what Xilizhra was getting at.

No, the Templar Order as an ideal has to be destroyed as well, as it's bound up in magophobic religious dogma. Preserving the concept of mage guardians from the idea Templar Order is like preserving the concept of police forces from the idea of the Gestapo.

[TEWR]

Xilizhra wrote...

Also, my Grey Warden has never done either, unless you consider darkspawn innocent by virtue of not possessing free will)

My Wardens certainly agreed with the Architect's arguments on how the Darkspawn were forced to be what they are and would rather work together with him to make them people then constantly kill them -- because he had other matters to attend to really.

Giving them sentience so that you can possibly negotiate with them is certainly a noble goal.

[TEWR]

Xilizhra wrote...

No, the Templar Order as an ideal has to be destroyed as well, as it's bound up in magophobic religious dogma. Preserving the concept of mage guardians from the idea Templar Order is like preserving the concept of police forces from the idea of the Gestapo.

I'd say that destroying the very concept itself is going too far. Introducing reforms to how the Templar Order operates -- first by eliminating the magophobic beliefs, the recruitment methods, as well as the belief that the Templars have "divine right" over the mages -- would be better.

As well as more feasible.

The populus may revile the Templars for what they'll do in the war -- sacking villages, plundering goods to sell for lyrium, killing anyone that gets in their way due to withdrawal effects -- but I doubt they'll agree the Order itself should be eliminated wholesale, what with the chance that Abominations may be seen in the war (which is likely, though the circumstances that brought them to being will obviously differ).

The long and short of it is that Thedas needs the equivalent of what the Templar Order embodies in theory -- that of protector and guardian to both mage and non-mage. People like Thrask and Keran rather then people like Meredith, Lambert, Karras, and Alrik.

Thedas needs people who can effectively fight Abominations and malicious mages/maleficarum. Whether those people should be under the auspices of the Chantry, the State, or autonomous themselves is another matter entirely.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 31 juillet 2012 - 04:22 .

[Xilizhra]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Also, my Grey Warden has never done either, unless you consider darkspawn innocent by virtue of not possessing free will)

My Wardens certainly agreed with the Architect's arguments on how the Darkspawn were forced to be what they are and would rather work together with him to make them people then constantly kill them -- because he had other matters to attend to really.

Giving them sentience so that you can possibly negotiate with them is certainly a noble goal.

That's an interesting topic. While the natural world certainly has no shortage of species whose reproductive process involves the hideous violation of another species (lots of wasps, for instance), darkspawn would be the first sapient race to do this, with other sapient races as well. In addition to the fact that they poison everything they touch. Coexistence is ideal and I err on the Architect's side, but one must keep all of the (numerous) difficulties in mind.

[Xilizhra]

I'd say that destroying the very concept itself is going too far. Introducing reforms to how the Templar Order operates -- first by eliminating the magophobic beliefs, the recruitment methods, as well as the belief that the Templars have "divine right" over the mages -- would be better.

As well as more feasible.

That would require the destructive reboot of the entire Order to the point where you'd lose everything but the name. Why even keep that?

The long and short of it is that Thedas needs the equivalent of what the Templar Order embodies in theory -- that of protector and guardian to both mage and non-mage. People like Thrask and Keran rather then people like Meredith, Lambert, Karras, and Alrik.

It may, but the templar idea has been too tainted to reclaim, in my own opinion. It doesn't seem worth all the work necessary to start from that point.

[TEWR]

Xilizhra wrote...

That's an interesting topic. While the natural world certainly has no shortage of species whose reproductive process involves the hideous violation of another species (lots of wasps, for instance), darkspawn would be the first sapient race to do this, with other sapient races as well. In addition to the fact that they poison everything they touch. Coexistence is ideal and I err on the Architect's side, but one must keep all of the (numerous) difficulties in mind.

Well, truthfully the Darkspawn don't need to reproduce. They only did so out of sheer base instinct pre-Awakening. The Taint sustains them, granting them immortality -- but not invulnerability. The taint sustaining them also means that they don't need to eat people either, as they do that for reasons other then dietary.

What I'm curious about is whether or not female Darkspawn can be made. All Darkspawn, while I guess being asexual, are effectively male. They have the (tainted) parts for it -- there's really no doubt about that once you hear Hespith's chant -- as well as the voices when Awakened.

Given that the Mother created new Darkspawn when Awakened, I wonder if the same can be done with other broodmothers to the point where eventually all Darkspawn can live happily ever after with their own families. They get female Darkspawn equivalents -- instead of having to rely on creating Broodmothers, who are Ghouls -- and can live happily as tainted men.

Though I also wonder what made the Mother create the Children. Was it the Awakening of her? Was it her going insane from the lack of the Call of the Old Gods? Was it the lack of the song itself?

As for the Taint, well... the Architect managed to keep Armaas from contracting the Blight disease, indicating that he's found a way to prevent people from coming down with it. In addition, the Darkspawn could just isolate themselves in a forgotten section of the Deep Roads -- provided they make an accord with the Dwarves notifying them of such -- and live alone. I imagine the Genlocks would be able to carve the Deep Roads like the Dwarves did, once Awakened.

Xilizhra wrote..

That would require the destructive reboot of the entire Order to the point where you'd lose everything but the name. Why even keep that?

It may, but the templar idea has been too tainted to reclaim, in my own opinion. It doesn't seem worth all the work necessary to start from that point.

True, it would take a lot of work. But starting over from scratch is just as hard as reforming the system, if not harder.

If you were able to get rid of the people like Lambert and Meredith and still had the people like Gregoir, Keran, and Thrask; the Order would be more open to being reformed because you've gotten rid of the vehement and violent people that would fight back against such a thing whilst maintaining the group that can provide a levelheaded, rational, and clear discussion on how best to reform the system to be better at what it does.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 31 juillet 2012 - 04:45 .

[Xilizhra]

The possibility of ordinary darkspawn reproduction is intriguing, but I have to wonder whether or not it's possible, and I really don't think darkspawn are male or female. Hespith's chant is vague enough on the matter that I doubt "violated" necessarily means rape, especially as it'd be a really odd time to throw rape in after the broodmother is already bloating into the stages of obvious mutation.

If you were able to get rid of the people like Lambert and Meredith and still had the people like Gregoir, Keran, and Thrask; the Order would be more open to being reformed because you've gotten rid of the vehement and violent people that would fight back against such a thing whilst maintaining the group that can provide a levelheaded, rational, and clear discussion on how best to reform the system to be better at what it does.

I'd prefer not to chance it. The system is sick and favors the former over the latter (especially since the former are all higher-ranked than the latter in your examples). Also, not Greagoir; he's an ****, just less flagrant than Meredith (but also more sane and hence responsible).

[TEWR]

Xilizhra wrote...

The possibility of ordinary darkspawn reproduction is intriguing, but I have to wonder whether or not it's possible, and I really don't think darkspawn are male or female. Hespith's chant is vague enough on the matter that I doubt "violated" necessarily means rape, especially as it'd be a really odd time to throw rape in after the broodmother is already bloating into the stages of obvious mutation.

They seem to be male in body structure alone, possessing the parts for it. Whether they can actually be called male is another matter.

And the chant is describing the stages a woman goes through when becoming a broodmother, indicating that the sudden bloating and mutation is due to the raping.

"She grew as in her mouth they spew" can be taken to mean effectively the same as "We hated as she is violated", in that they both cover the same thing: the woman being raped into becoming a broodmother.

Xilizhra wrote...
I'd prefer not to chance it. The system is sick and favors the former over the latter (especially since the former are all higher-ranked than the latter in your examples).

Well, that's the point of reforming it. It'd be reformed to not favor the people like Meredith and Lambert. As it stands now, it still favors them. But once it's reformed, it would cease to do so.
 

Also, not Greagoir; he's an ****, just less flagrant than Meredith (but also more sane and hence responsible).

I found Gregoir to be a good Templar -- though his beating of a pregnant mage and ordering the execution of an apostate in the comics was abhorrent and sadly canon, but based on DAO I think he changed.

He's firm in his duty, understands the innocence of the Mages, and knows how to act morally for both sides.

The whole Jowan thing can really be ascribed to Uldred, as we know he would sell out blood mages to increase his own standing amongst the Circle's denizens as well as hide his own status as a maleficar. There's every reason to think that he set Jowan up on the path for blood magic and then sold him out to keep up that ruse, and Gregoir and Irving fell for it hook, line, and sinker.

[MisterJB]

Xilizhra wrote...
The idea of regulation doesn't necessitate amoral drug-addled religious zealots to do it. The Templar Order cannot be allowed to remain. Others may do a similar job, better, but it won't be the same.

You insist on painting all templars with the same colors. Amorality is simply the belief that nothing is inherently moral or immoral, this belief doesn't necessarely lead to any sort of abuse of power, neither does zealotry. It varies from templar to templar. The drugs are a problem, that is true but it is quite possible lyrium is the only way to properly combat mages.
The actions of the Order such as contain mages, watch for signs of corruption, hunt apostates and abominations are all strictly necessary and thus, any other group would  mantain them.
Any positive changes don't require for the Order to be dismantled.

(Also, my Grey Warden has never done either, unless you consider darkspawn innocent by virtue of not possessing free will)

And yet, many other Grey Wardens have commited "attrocities" in the name of figthing Blights. So, one individual Grey Warden is enough to absolve the organization of guilt but the same can't be said of templars?

Or just come up with ways to fix side effects instead of banning something from being used because of that.

The Chantry acknowledges that blood magic can be useful despite its dangers and thus, they allow a select few mages to learn it while keeping the majority of the population away from it.
It is a good system that doesn't require change.

Actually, you can disarm it. It requires certain skills, but so does disarming a knife.

The only way is through Tranquility.

The entire Order exists on the far side of a moral event horizon and always has.

The Order simply upholds laws that are absolutely necessary. If some templars abuses this power then he is going against the Order itself.

If any innocents are harmed in the process, well, the templars have been harming innocents for almost a thousand years and I don't see why they'd care to stop now.

You mean that templars have been protecting innocents. How many a mage would have been torn apart in the street if not for the templars? How many mundanes would be victims to magic if not for the templars?

By choosing to rule themselves, the mages fail to acknowledge the danger they represent to everyone around them. Thus, they do not deserve freedom.

The Circle is enslaved by the Chantry, so no.

The Chantry is not perfect but it has had a positive effect on Thedas. They have diminished the dangers of magic, slavery, created more moral populations. They have also proven they do not abuse the control they have over magic.

A sick and pathetic excuse of what this should be.

Many templars have forgotten they are supposed to protect mages as well, this is true. Dissolving the organization that has protected the world for centuries is not the solution, however.

Modifié par MisterJB, 31 juillet 2012 - 05:19 .

[MisterJB]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
eliminating the magophobic beliefs,

I don't see magophoby ever ceasing to exist. It is, after all, almost impossible for someone to not be afraid of people who can turn them to ash or control their minds with a tought

[Xilizhra]

You insist on painting all templars with the same colors. Amorality is simply the belief that nothing is inherently moral or immoral, this belief doesn't necessarely lead to any sort of abuse of power, neither does zealotry. It varies from templar to templar. The drugs are a problem, that is true but it is quite possible lyrium is the only way to properly combat mages.
The actions of the Order such as contain mages, watch for signs of corruption, hunt apostates and abominations are all strictly necessary and thus, any other group would mantain them.
Any positive changes don't require for the Order to be dismantled.

All I mention are the qualities that the Codex states the Order actually looks for. Also, the positive actions of the Order don't require that this particular group does them, whereas the negative ones are exacerbated by it being this particular group.

And yet, many other Grey Wardens have commited "attrocities" in the name of figthing Blights. So, one individual Grey Warden is enough to absolve the organization of guilt but the same can't be said of templars?

The Grey Wardens may require reforms as well (making more explicit the difference between necessity and expedience), but that's not the topic of this discussion.

The Chantry acknowledges that blood magic can be useful despite its dangers and thus, they allow a select few mages to learn it while keeping the majority of the population away from it.
It is a good system that doesn't require change.

It's broken, abusive and unjust, like most things to do with the templars.

The only way is through Tranquility.

Or through silencing, mana draining... Tranquility is more like breaking someone's fingers so they can never use a gun again.

The Order simply upholds laws that are absolutely necessary. If some templars abuses this power then he is going against the Order itself.

It upholds many others that are utterly unnecessary, many outright harmful.

You mean that templars have been protecting innocents. How many a mage would have been torn apart in the street if not for the templars? How many mundanes would be victims to magic if not for the templars.

Templars may have protected some innocents, but have systematically harmed many more. The victims of harm have the right to leave.

By choosing to rule themselves, the mages fail to acknowledge the danger they represent to everyone around them. Thus, they do not deserve freedom.

You have no proof of this until they win and set up a bad government. As of now, they only desire freedom from oppression and atrocity. Such is deserved, and the templars will fall.

The Chantry is not perfect but it has had a positive effect on Thedas. They have diminished the dangers of magic, slavery, created more moral populations. They have also proven they do not abuse the control they have over magic.

The Chantry itself doesn't need to be destroyed, only its control over magic broken (and preferably its political influence as well).

Many templars have forgotten they are supposed to protect mages as well, this is true. Dissolving the organization that has protected the world for centuries is not the solution, however.

It is the only solution. This protection is now obsolete and a new way must be found.

[TEWR]

MisterJB wrote...

I don't see magophoby ever ceasing to exist. It is, after all, almost impossible for someone to not be afraid of people who can turn them to ash or control their minds with a tought

Well, this all depends on how you view fear of what a Mage can do. Is it rational fear? Or is fear cranked up to 11 where it's dictating what you do, rather then you dictating how it is?

In essence, are you afraid but able to act like a person? Or are you so afraid that you are just as bad as what a Mage might do? Does your fear rule over you?

There's caution which stems from fear, and then there's a person being ruled by fear. You want the former, not the latter.

And you only want the former in regards to what might happen later on -- which isn't a pretext for locking away the Mages for their entire lives, but is a pretext for giving them sufficient training on how to control their powers.

You don't want the former in regards to the Mage himself, because that ignores the persona of the Mage. If they're a person of good moral character and you focus on the fact that "Crap, he can incinerate me easily" then you're being ruled by your fear.

Also, you can't control a person's mind with a thought. Well, you can, but not by virtue of simply being born a Mage -- though being a Mage factors into that ability. 

It's not something easily learned and from what I gather it's not something easily practiced either.

At any rate, my point on the magophobic belief being eliminated wasn't in regards to the populus at large -- though they are showing significant signs of being more Mage-friendly -- but in regards to the Templar Order itself.

[MisterJB]

[quote]Xilizhra wrote...
All I mention are the qualities that the Codex states the Order actually looks for.[/quote]
Ruthlessness and piety does not equal abuse of power or cruelty.

[quote]Also, the positive actions of the Order don't require that this particular group does them, whereas the negative ones are exacerbated by it being this particular group.[/quote]
Ah, so it is double standards, then? Only yhe evil can be credited to the templars, the good they do could be done by anyone else.


[quote]
It's broken, abusive and unjust, like most things to do with the templars.[/quote]
It is fair and necessary, like most things do with the templars.

[quote]Or through silencing, mana draining... Tranquility is more like breaking someone's fingers so they can never use a gun again.[/quote]
Mages can perfomr spells without saying a word and not everyone can drain mana.
Tranquility is a last resort to mages who have proven, beyond a doubt, they can't control their magic or are dangerous.

[quote]It upholds many others that are utterly unnecessary, many outright harmful.[/quote]
So you keep insisting.
All of the laws the templars uphold are absolutely necessary. There are templars who abuse them but this does not prove a fault within the laws themselves.

[quote]Templars may have protected some innocents, but have systematically harmed many more. [/quote]
No, they haven't. It would be almost impossible to determine the number of lives that have been saved because the mages are in a secure location where they can't harm or be harmed by mundanes.

[quote]The victims of harm have the right to leave.[/quote]
Not if the victims of harm place others in danger by leaving.

[quote]
You have no proof of this until they win and set up a bad government.[/quote]
Do I need to list  the dangers of magics and how many terrible acts it has commited in the history of Thedas?
But your suggestion is to wait and see and maybe apologize to their victims afterwards? No, thank you. I'd rather prevent it from happening.

[quote]As of now, they only desire freedom from oppression and atrocity.[/quote]
They were kept in a secure tower, protected by some of the best warriors in the world. They were clothed, fed, didn't have to work and received education.
Poor, poor mages. I pity them so.

Circles like Kirkwall are a rarity.

[quote]the templars will fall.[/quote]
In your universe, maybe.

[quote]
The Chantry itself doesn't need to be destroyed, only its control over magic broken (and preferably its political influence as well).[/quote]
The Chantry has proven that it doesn't abuse its control over magic and helps keep people safer.
The mages are better in their hands than that of kings and queens who will use them in wars of conquests.

[quote]It is the only solution. This protection is now obsolete and a new way must be found.[/quote]
There is no other way.

[MisterJB]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...]
Well, this all depends on how you view fear of what a Mage can do. Is it rational fear? Or is fear cranked up to 11 where it's dictating what you do, rather then you dictating how it is?

In essence, are you afraid but able to act like a person? Or are you so afraid that you are just as bad as what a Mage might do? Does your fear rule over you?

There's caution which stems from fear, and then there's a person being ruled by fear. You want the former, not the latter.

And you only want the former in regards to what might happen later on -- which isn't a pretext for locking away the Mages for their entire lives, but is a pretext for giving them sufficient training on how to control their powers.

You don't want the former in regards to the Mage himself, because that ignores the persona of the Mage. If they're a person of good moral character and you focus on the fact that "Crap, he can incinerate me easily" then you're being ruled by your fear.

What you call "Irrational fear" I consider to be reasonable precautions. And yes, that includes isolating mages.

Training a mage to control his powers might mean he won't kill anyone by accident but it also might mean he is now very much capable of paralyzing you and incinerate you. It is hard enough to trust other people of, supposedly, good character who are on equal footing with us. It would be impossible if they can kill you with a snap of fingers.

And what prevents these people from reaching the conclusion that they are superior and that they should rule? Their good moral character? Mages and mundanes are not born equal thus, equality between them is impossible.
At least while the greatest weapon of the mundanes is a catapult.

Modifié par MisterJB, 31 juillet 2012 - 05:57 .

[Xilizhra]

In your universe, maybe.

I'm too tired to continue a fruitless exchange; however, if my hypothesis of the templars being DA3's Cerberus is correct, they'll fall in everyone's universe, and not simply my own. And it will be oh-so-satisfying, as seeing Cerberus fall was.

[MisterJB]

Xilizhra wrote...
I'm too tired to continue a fruitless exchange; however, if my hypothesis of the templars being DA3's Cerberus is correct, they'll fall in everyone's universe, and not simply my own. And it will be oh-so-satisfying, as seeing Cerberus fall was.

As if we didn't have enough black and white morality in DA2 and ME3.
Also, now you're just being selfish and petty. I wouldn't want to deny Pro-mages their endings and I don't see why you must wish that on Pro-Templars.

[Xilizhra]

MisterJB wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
I'm too tired to continue a fruitless exchange; however, if my hypothesis of the templars being DA3's Cerberus is correct, they'll fall in everyone's universe, and not simply my own. And it will be oh-so-satisfying, as seeing Cerberus fall was.

As if we didn't have enough black and white morality in DA2 and ME3.
Also, now you're just being selfish and petty. I wouldn't want to deny Pro-mages their endings and I don't see why you must wish that on Pro-Templars.

Because I honestly feel it's similar to trying to get a pro-darkspawn or pro-qunari ending. Especially since by being pro-templar, you're not just against the mages but against the Chantry. A mage/Chantry split in decisions and allegiance strikes me as fitting much better.

[TEWR]

MisterJB wrote...

What you call "Irrational fear" I consider to be reasonable precautions. And yes, that includes isolating mages.

Many people would argue that this line of thought is the equivalent of the Qunari way of thinking and would eventually lead to its other parts, which goes beyond caution.

Me? That's a discussion I've had before and have actually defended by trying to see it from their viewpoint as not being done for abhorrent reasons but out of a warped sense of caring, based on what we know about the Qunari culture.

Training a mage to control his powers might mean he won't kill anyone by accident but it also might mean he is now very much capable of paralyzing you and incinerate you. It is hard enough to trust other people of, supposedly, good character who are on equal footing with us. It would be impossible if they can kill you with a snap of fingers.

If you find it hard to trust a person you've known for years and call a friend, then I don't think you really trust him nor truly consider him a friend. You merely pretend to trust him, and deceive not only him but yourself.

And what prevents these people from reaching the conclusion that they are superior and that they should rule? Their good moral character? Mages and mundanes are not born equal thus, equality between them is impossible.

Whoever said they should be granted the ability to rule or even have that option? I certainly didn't, and I'm perfectly comfortable barring them from the political spectrum -- in more then just holding lands. I mean even knowing nobility -- despite my personal feelings on the matter saying that it's how a person rules, not who.

Having Mages be free =/= no oversight and no restrictions whatsoever.

The only time a Mage should be able to be a noble or involved in the political spectrum is if they're a Warden, as their goal is to watch for the Darkspawn.

At least while the greatest weapon of the mundanes is a catapult.

Technically the greatest weapon of the mundanes is a bomb, made from ingredients that are magical in nature but do not require a Mage to make. This includes the Anders bomb as well as things like Fire Bombs, Acid Flasks, etc. 

[MisterJB]

Xilizhra wrote...
Because I honestly feel it's similar to trying to get a pro-darkspawn or pro-qunari ending. Especially since by being pro-templar, you're not just against the mages but against the Chantry. A mage/Chantry split in decisions and allegiance strikes me as fitting much better.

Not all templars have split from the Chantry.

[TEWR]

I think it's grossly inaccurate to continue to label the Templars that split from the Chantry as still being Templars.

They've returned to the days when they were the Inquisition, the cause of a lot of the terror in Thedas at the time prior to the Chantry's inception -- even if their goal to kill Abominations and malicious mages was noble, their methods inspired fear in the populus.

Fear that they may have already had due to what the Inquisition was pursuing, but fear that was compounded by the Inquisition's methods. So they were really monsters fighting other monsters at that time.

Thus it'd be best to call the Templars that split from the Chantry -- under Lambert's command -- the New Inquisition. Only their goal isn't so noble.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 31 juillet 2012 - 06:26 .

[Xilizhra]

Not all templars have split from the Chantry.

Then consider that tiny minority the pro-Chantry umbrella.

I think it's grossly inaccurate to continue to label the Templars that split from the Chantry as still being Templars.

They've returned to the days when they were the Inquisition, the cause of a lot of the terror in Thedas at the time prior to the Chantry's inception -- even if their goal was noble, their methods inspired fear in the populus.

Thus it'd be best to call the Templars that split from the Chantry -- under Lambert's command -- the New Inquisition.

They never stopped being such. The ones loyal to the Chantry cling to an idealism based on a foundation of lies; Lambert's majority has embraced the truth of the order's nature. I don't know what to call the ones loyal to the Chantry, really.

[MisterJB]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
Many people would argue that this line of thought is the equivalent of the Qunari way of thinking and would eventually lead to its other parts, which goes beyond caution.

Me? That's a discussion I've had before and have actually defended by trying to see it from their viewpoint as not being done for abhorrent reasons but out of a warped sense of caring, based on what we know about the Qunari culture.

The Qunari cultures does have its appeals but I do agree their treatment of mages goes beyond caution.
Or do you mean to imply the Circle systems is based on a warped sense of caring?

If you find it hard to trust a person you've known for years and call a friend, then I don't think you really trust him nor truly consider him a friend. You merely pretend to trust him, and deceive not only him but yourself.

Cynicals live longer.

Whoever said they should be granted the ability to rule or even have that option? I certainly didn't, and I'm perfectly comfortable barring them from the political spectrum -- in more then just holding lands. I mean even knowing nobility -- despite my personal feelings on the matter saying that it's how a person rules, not who.

Having Mages be free =/= no oversight and no restrictions whatsoever.

The only time a Mage should be able to be a noble or involved in the political spectrum is if they're a Warden, as their goal is to watch for the Darkspawn.

I agree that mages should be barred from political power but, would mundanes be able to stop them if mages are given more freedoms? They are born with a very real power.

I believe that if the system does not place all mages in the same location and watches them 24/7, it is likely to fail, regardless of restrictions. Thus, I support the Circle.
It could, however, afford some changes.

[TEWR]

Cailanites? People hoping for an ideal world, where sunshine and butterflies rule all!

But seriously, they're idealists. At the very least, they're more sensible then the New Inquisition is, even if you may personally see them as in the wrong.

Xilizhra wrote...

Then consider that tiny minority the pro-Chantry umbrella

There are also going to be Templars -- and maybe Seekers -- that are with the Mages. Essentially pulling a Thrask.

I still maintain that the Mages' best hope for what they want is to side with the Chantry under Justinia V, as that would go a long way towards public perception of them -- along with helping the common man in various matters, the most notable of which is the injustices and crimes the New Inquisition will commit.

[MisterJB]

Xilizhra wrote...
They never stopped being such. The ones loyal to the Chantry cling to an idealism based on a foundation of lies; Lambert's majority has embraced the truth of the order's nature. I don't know what to call the ones loyal to the Chantry, really.

A strange thing than that, until recently, most of Thedas viewed templars as saviors and warriors of light. Not to mention we don't have numbers to compare and determine which is the majority.

The nature of the Order is the protection of everyone from the dangers that come with magic, mundane and mage alike. If some templars have abandoned the Chantry to kill all mages, then they have ceased to be templars.
Thrask and Gregoir are true templars, Elrik and Meredith are not.

[Xilizhra]

I still maintain that the Mages' best hope for what they want is to side with the Chantry under Justinia V, as that would go a long way towards public perception of them -- along with helping the common man in various matters, the most notable of which is the injustices and crimes the New Inquisition will commit.

Hope that they don't end up in my own concept for the game, as she (along with all the other grand clerics) is dead by the end due to a Tevinter/templar/darkspawn attack on Val Royeaux that serves as the setting of the final level.

A strange thing than that, until recently, most of Thedas viewed templars as saviors and warriors of light. Not to mention we don't have numbers to compare and determine which is the majority.

From what Varric said, there's a definite implication that the great majority of templars left the Chantry, and that it's somehow unusual for Cassandra and company to have not done so.

The nature of the Order is the protection of everyone from the dangers that come with magic, mundane and mage alike. If some templars have abandoned the Chantry to kill all mages, then they have ceased to be templars.
Thrask and Gregoir are true templars, Elrik and Meredith are not.

They're all templars, some with different interpretations of their duty. All of them must be stopped, though some perhaps less fatally than others.