43 réponses à ce sujet

[Heimdall]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

If she outright claimed that Elthina was being manipulated by a Blood Mage, I'm sure she could easily hand select enough Templars to get the job done and keep her behind bars. 

Considering how unpopular Meredith is among the people - including her own templars - I don't think Meredith could attempt it without serious ramifications. The Chantry won't tolerate this becoming a successful precedent when it threatens their power. Also, Elthina is popular as Grand Cleric, while Meredith is reviled as the de facto Viscount of Kirkwall.

Of course there would be ramifications.  Those ramifications would probably result in a blood bath eventually and the chaos would get worse until Meredith finally incited a massacre. Thing is, Meredith is unstable enough to do it, which is why Elthina wants to avoid giving her reason to attempt it.

Lord Aesir wrote...

The Templars answer to the Knight Commander before the Chantry. 

Actually, the Knight-Commander answers to the Grand Cleric, and the templars had no problem "escorting" Orsino despite Meredith throwing a tantrum about Elthina's order; in fact, one of the templars bowed to acknowledge Elthina, and they all ignored Meredith wanting Orsino in chains.

In theory the Grand Cleric has authority, but Asunder makes the relationship far less certain.  Meredith submitted to Elthina's will grudgingly but voluntarily.  The Templars respect the Grand Cleric, that does not mean they will obey her over a direct command from their Knight Commander.  Meredith has her supporters as well as her detractors amongst her Templars.

Modifié par Lord Aesir, 05 septembre 2012 - 08:29 .

[Fallstar]

You have to bear in mind that although people tend to argue either for mages or for templars with what appear to be fairly extremist stances, that's normally because people get tired of saying "but this compromise and this compromise would be acceptable" etc.

However most people on both sides of the debate understand that the current system (or at least the pre Act 3/Asunder system) is untenable, but having mages free to roam with absolutely 0 policing is an equally bad idea. There is a middle ground.

As for why it's an interesting debate, well it brings up all sorts of issues. Can someone be blamed for something they are born with? Can you blame the mages of today for what the original magisters did a few centuries ago? Can mages ever integrate with wider society? Is keeping the mages locked away in fact the lesser of two evils? Are the Templars, and by extension the chantry, whose power is based upon fear of magic, the right organization to be looking after the mages? Is another Tevinter inevitable if mages are allowed to go free? Etc. etc.

[Arthur Cousland]

It was interesting in Origins, but Meredith+Orsino pretty much ruined things.  I would be perfectly happy if DA3 had nothing to do with mages vs templars after playing through DA2, but it appears that DA3 will pick up where DA2 left off.

Modifié par Arthur Cousland, 06 septembre 2012 - 12:50 .

[nightscrawl]

Coachdongwiffle wrote...

Can't anybody just be a good person?

Like Thrask? =/

I think it's a fun concept. However, after two games and a novel of this issue, I want it to come to some sort of conclusion in DA3 so we can move on to some other story aspects of Thedas. It's a large continent, there is other stuff to deal with. I think that mages, magic, and those who oppose it will always be a part of Thedas, but I don't think that, going forward, it has to be so prominent. Perhaps Andraste herself will have a second coming and deal with the issue.

Modifié par nightscrawl, 06 septembre 2012 - 01:44 .

[JamesStark]

 I didn't at first, but Asunder handles it better than DA2 therefor making it more interesting.
I for one am looking forward to dealing with it in DA3 now. Especially if the DA3 wikipedia page is accurate

[ShadowLordXII]

Personally, I'd prefer if the war was against the Chantry.

The mage-templar conflict is just a symptom of the injustice and violence inherent in the system. The Chantry is the one who spreads propaganda that leads to prejudice and oppression of mages and elves. Their the ones who have templars addicted to lyrium, essentially turning them into their attack dogs. They've spread just as much blood and gore as the qunari (Mass graves in Rivain when it's people refused to reconvert from the Qun; the Dales; condoning Orlesian occupations of Nevarra, Free Marches and Ferelden)

Let's have a war against the Chantry or the oppressive structure that it's imposed.

[hitorihanzo]

ReggarBlane wrote...

I wholly apologize for bringing Anders into a topic about whether we feel like bothering with the Mage/Templar war is worth it. Anders' actions are immaterial to the topic, and I was wrong to mention him.

Back on topic: I'm curious about the war, but I'm burnt-out on it. We just had a "gather the allies" and an all-out war for those of us that played ME. If they make it a head-to-head situation or a "gather the allies" game, meh.

However! If they turn it into a political posturing, espionage, chess match with multiple opponents against each other, then yes. I'm interested.

That sounds like a great story, but a horrible video game. 

[DPSSOC]

I liked the debate more in Origins, DA2 kind of soured it. In Origins it was interesting because the majority of people on either side were sensible about it. You had mages siding more or less with the status quo (Wynne) and Templars expressing concern with some of the more extreme members (Cullen in magi origin). You also had free mages who were ok people to support the idea that the mages don't need to be locked up. None of that is present in DA2.

There is 1 sensible Templar and 1 sensible Mage and that's it. The Templar gets murdered by people he's trying to help and the mage becomes a Harvester, somehow. Free mages in the game are either blood mages or abominations and the Templars are absolutely dispicable human beings.

If they go back to Origins where both sides have legitimate arguments and concerns and most of them aren`t horrible human beings I`d find it interesting. If not it may as well just be Aliens vs Predator, there`s nothing to be gained in picking a side they`re both gonna kill ya in the end.

[dragonflight288]

Let's have a Casteless and City Elf debate.

[DPSSOC]

dragonflight288 wrote...

Let's have a Casteless and City Elf debate.

About anything in particular?  Are we going for the who`s the most oppressed, who`s better at being oppressed, best whine, best revenge?

Modifié par DPSSOC, 09 septembre 2012 - 05:37 .

[Plaintiff]

I think the Templaer/Mage debate is the most interesting thing about the entire Dragon Age franchise.

No other societal issue in Thedas is even slightly ambiguous. The oppression of elves isn't worthy of discussion because there's no possible way that one could argue that oppressing the elves is in any way helpful or necessary to the running of society. And I can't think of any other issues at all.

That said, I think there is a clear right and a clear wrong in the Templar/Mage argument, but at least the wrong side has one very slightly valid point.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 09 septembre 2012 - 06:15 .

[Renmiri1]

Plaintiff wrote...

I think the Templaer/Mage debate is the most interesting thing about the entire Dragon Age franchise.

No other societal issue in Thedas is even slightly ambiguous. The oppression of elves isn't worthy of discussion because there's no possible way that one could argue that oppressing the elves is in any way helpful or necessary to the running of society. And I can't think of any other issues at all.

That said, I think there is a clear right and a clear wrong in the Templar/Mage argument, but at least the wrong side has one very slightly valid point.

+100

[sylvanaerie]

I wouldn't mind it as a backstory element, maybe even something a companion (such as a mage or templar or seeker) has as their driving goal. But front and center? Not really into it. Kind of got my fill in DA2, and Varric pretty much sums it up when he asks "if anyone in Kirkwall isn't discussing it" in a bored kind of tone.

It has some elements I feel can still be explored, but I'm with those who evinced an interest in something more political (Orlais would be a good setting for that) for the next story. I wouldn't want the dangling plot points to just be dropped (and I don't think Bioware will, they are very good at storytelling), but it doesn't have to be central to the next tale for me to want to play it. But if they choose to make it central to DA3, it wouldn't put me off of buying it either.

[Ryzaki]

DPSSOC wrote...

I liked the debate more in Origins, DA2 kind of soured it. In Origins it was interesting because the majority of people on either side were sensible about it. You had mages siding more or less with the status quo (Wynne) and Templars expressing concern with some of the more extreme members (Cullen in magi origin). You also had free mages who were ok people to support the idea that the mages don't need to be locked up. None of that is present in DA2.

There is 1 sensible Templar and 1 sensible Mage and that's it. The Templar gets murdered by people he's trying to help and the mage becomes a Harvester, somehow. Free mages in the game are either blood mages or abominations and the Templars are absolutely dispicable human beings.

If they go back to Origins where both sides have legitimate arguments and concerns and most of them aren`t horrible human beings I`d find it interesting. If not it may as well just be Aliens vs Predator, there`s nothing to be gained in picking a side they`re both gonna kill ya in the end.

This. At this point I really would rather the status quo return because frankly it's the evil I know vs the evil I don't.

[Garrus94]

Coachdongwiffle wrote...

 I just don't find it interesting since there both wrong. Who cam first the chicken or the egg. haha. Stupid, it shows the Mages turn to blood magic and demons even if not being threatended by Templars and Templars crack down harder than they should even Mage's aren't rebelling. My choice was always just kill all of them because there all stupid. It made me mad that whenever I sided with the mages I was proven wrong cause they'd just turn to blood magic. It made me mad that Templars killed innocents. Can't anybody just be a good person? 

For me it was good until the end. Orsino ,the only "sane" mage, uses blood magic, and reveals he allowed a crazed Blood mage to get away free. Meredith goes insane and decides to kill everyone. Anders decides to attack the chantry itself in an insane move, which basically pits mages vs the world. Cullen is the sole voice of reason, who bloody was attacked by mages in Origins. It just shows the incompetence and insanity of both sides leaders and made me want to say F**k you guys I'm going home!

[Todd23]

fyi The egg came first. The animal that was to evolve into a chicken was already laying eggs.

[Lazy Jer]

DPSSOC wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

Let's have a Casteless and City Elf debate.

About anything in particular?  Are we going for the who`s the most oppressed, who`s better at being oppressed, best whine, best revenge?

Which side would win in a hockey game.

[EricHVela]

Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age ][, Dragon Age: Dissolution
The Templar War Trilogy.

I would be glad to see the Templar/Mage war end only so we can move on to other stuff in Thedas. I would rather not see Dragon Age become The War of the Circles or some such. That's just one thing happening in Thedas at the conclusion of the second Dragon Age.

[Adokat]

hitorihanzo wrote...

ReggarBlane wrote...

I wholly apologize for bringing Anders into a topic about whether we feel like bothering with the Mage/Templar war is worth it. Anders' actions are immaterial to the topic, and I was wrong to mention him.

Back on topic: I'm curious about the war, but I'm burnt-out on it. We just had a "gather the allies" and an all-out war for those of us that played ME. If they make it a head-to-head situation or a "gather the allies" game, meh.

However! If they turn it into a political posturing, espionage, chess match with multiple opponents against each other, then yes. I'm interested.

That sounds like a great story, but a horrible video game. 

I think it sounds like a great video game.  I'm sure clever designers can make that into compelling gameplay-just look at The Witcher 2 for example.  We seriously don't need another "gather the allies" plot.  This is one way that DA2 did a good thing by trying to mix up the standard fantasy story, they just bungled the execution in the third act.

I wouldn't mind seeing the Templar v.  Mage issue be a big part of DA3, but it can't be handled as poorly as DA2 did.