225 réponses à ce sujet

[RazorrX]

Xilizhra wrote...

I would love to have a good pro-templar companion.

Contradiction in terms.

Then having the templars (once the demon has been driven off, child is calmed, etc.) actually be kind to him. THAT would be an AWESOME Pro-Templar Quest.

The templars have currently engaged in a pogrom against mages. The kid is toast unless you kill the templars. Also, that quest would only be acceptable in any manner if you could fight off the templars thereafter.

And I would agree with you most of the time.  The games have pushed the fact that the Templars are rather Rabid about Hating Mages.  They have demonized them for so long they no longer view them as people, and readily do horrible things to them.  It makes who to side with rather easy for me - I go with the oppressed vs the Oppressors.

What I WANT is to have both sides shown in the proper light.  In Asunder we get to see the Divine in a new light, and I must admit that she made me actually LIKE the chantry, at least the NON Templar side of it.  Evangeline was what I thought a Templar should be.   It would be nice to actually see the Templar order live up to what it was supposed to be vs what we see in the games.

I believe that the Circle NEEDS to exist and have oversight by Non mages, both for the protection of the world as well as the mages themselves.

[Mr.House]

MinttyMint wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

MinttyMint wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Well in DAO you could pretty much kill all your companions. Kill Sten, let Anora execute Alastair, kill Leliana and Wynne at the ashes quest (lol Leliana surviving decapitation) kill Zevran after knocking him out, kill Dog while in pen, make Oghren a Warden thus killing him, leave Shale frozen, stab Morrigan in Witch Hunt...anyone I'm missing?

And many people liked that ammount of freedom until the dead started popping up in DA2. I say allow us to kill all companions unless they want a certain companion to be the the next game, dont allow us to kill that one then.
People will complain but then they would have complained anyway.

Hence they did that in DA2. Everyone but Varric, Isabela, Aveline and Seb can die.

Did they? I wouldnt know Ive never killed anyone.... I <3 all companions! Except... Merrill...

-Both siblings can die(one at the start, the other at thge deep roads and you did not bring Anders)
-Fenris will go against you at the end of the game if you help the mages and have low approval
-Merrill will go against you if at the end of the game if you help the Templars and have low approval
-Anders can either be stabbed via murder knife or let go and he will try to kill oyu if you sided with the Templars

[Eternal Phoenix]

Xilizhra wrote...

He/she wouldn't have a pro-templar viewpoint. We already have extreme mages (for both Origins and DA2). Well honestly I just want whatever templar companion we get (whether it be Cullen or some other guy/gal) to actually be a true templar. Whether they're extreme in their templar duties or not doesn't matter much actually so long as they express their viewpoint about mages and that they believe The Circle is necessary.

And why? Not only does the Order suck, but having an active member of an enemy army hanging around during the war would be a remarkably bad idea. Both sides, if there are two sides, should be able to logically retain all companions (although I won't object to everything being automatically pro-mage).

Maybe for a while the player can retain all companions but a conflict should arise eventually. How can you get two people who would literally hate each other to work alongside one another? Again this was one of DA2's flaws. Fenris had no problem flat out killing any mage outside of Hawke's group but Merrill or Anders? Oh no no, he couldn't despite the fact that he constantly ranted on about how much he hated magic and mages.

Choices need to be made in some circumstances whether someone likes it or not and that's part of providing a grown-up narrative for the player because that's how the real world functions and I'm sure a world almost torn apart by war would function as such but even worst. Now to have two enemies working together in such an event seems unbelievable to say the least.

A mage who is a Grey Warden/Seeker/Inquisitor working with a templar could hold zero problems but a blood mage and a templar? That's like getting Justice (before his corruption of course) to work with a demon. Hell he still refuses to do so now despite being Vengeance.

The narrative in Origins was better because characters were more believable and could end up betraying you (as someone would if you pushed them too far). I seriously hope DA3 goes in this direction instead of the "rivalry means respect" route of DA2. Not everything should be achievable in one playthrough and if there is to be any possibility of getting a magister and templar to work together then it should require to fulfill some requirements (like hardening the templar or something).

[Xilizhra]

RazorrX wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

I would love to have a good pro-templar companion.

Contradiction in terms.

Then having the templars (once the demon has been driven off, child is calmed, etc.) actually be kind to him. THAT would be an AWESOME Pro-Templar Quest.

The templars have currently engaged in a pogrom against mages. The kid is toast unless you kill the templars. Also, that quest would only be acceptable in any manner if you could fight off the templars thereafter.

And I would agree with you most of the time.  The games have pushed the fact that the Templars are rather Rabid about Hating Mages.  They have demonized them for so long they no longer view them as people, and readily do horrible things to them.  It makes who to side with rather easy for me - I go with the oppressed vs the Oppressors.

What I WANT is to have both sides shown in the proper light.  In Asunder we get to see the Divine in a new light, and I must admit that she made me actually LIKE the chantry, at least the NON Templar side of it.  Evangeline was what I thought a Templar should be.   It would be nice to actually see the Templar order live up to what it was supposed to be vs what we see in the games.

I believe that the Circle NEEDS to exist and have oversight by Non mages, both for the protection of the world as well as the mages themselves.

I'm pretty sure the Templar Order is being portrayed in exactly the way it's supposed to be portrayed. They're not supposed to live up to any supposed ideals; they're supposed to be vicious bigoted hypocrites out of touch with any reality aside from that which they can control.

[Mr.House]

RazorrX wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

I would love to have a good pro-templar companion.

Contradiction in terms.

Then having the templars (once the demon has been driven off, child is calmed, etc.) actually be kind to him. THAT would be an AWESOME Pro-Templar Quest.

The templars have currently engaged in a pogrom against mages. The kid is toast unless you kill the templars. Also, that quest would only be acceptable in any manner if you could fight off the templars thereafter.

And I would agree with you most of the time.  The games have pushed the fact that the Templars are rather Rabid about Hating Mages.  They have demonized them for so long they no longer view them as people, and readily do horrible things to them.  It makes who to side with rather easy for me - I go with the oppressed vs the Oppressors.

What I WANT is to have both sides shown in the proper light.  In Asunder we get to see the Divine in a new light, and I must admit that she made me actually LIKE the chantry, at least the NON Templar side of it.  Evangeline was what I thought a Templar should be.   It would be nice to actually see the Templar order live up to what it was supposed to be vs what we see in the games.

I believe that the Circle NEEDS to exist and have oversight by Non mages, both for the protection of the world as well as the mages themselves.

Cullen outright defies Meredith, stripping her of command when she as last lost it and crossed the line. Also defending three inocent mages who don't want to fight near the end and he will let Hawke go at the end if oyu helped the mages.

Cullen while yes starts off as your normal templar changes and shows some compasion. Who's to say in DA3 he will be the same guy we saw in DA2 when at the end of DA2 he has showen some change?

[Minttymint]

Mr.House wrote...

MinttyMint wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

MinttyMint wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Well in DAO you could pretty much kill all your companions. Kill Sten, let Anora execute Alastair, kill Leliana and Wynne at the ashes quest (lol Leliana surviving decapitation) kill Zevran after knocking him out, kill Dog while in pen, make Oghren a Warden thus killing him, leave Shale frozen, stab Morrigan in Witch Hunt...anyone I'm missing?

And many people liked that ammount of freedom until the dead started popping up in DA2. I say allow us to kill all companions unless they want a certain companion to be the the next game, dont allow us to kill that one then.
People will complain but then they would have complained anyway.

Hence they did that in DA2. Everyone but Varric, Isabela, Aveline and Seb can die.

Did they? I wouldnt know Ive never killed anyone.... I <3 all companions! Except... Merrill...

-Both siblings can die(one at the start, the other at thge deep roads and you did not bring Anders)
-Fenris will go against you at the end of the game if you help the mages and have low approval
-Merrill will go against you if at the end of the game if you help the Templars and have low approval
-Anders can either be stabbed via murder knife or let go and he will try to kill oyu if you sided with the Templars

Ohhhh  nice.  I knew the siblings could die but i didnt count that as Hawke doesnt -kill- them.

[GodWood]

Xilizhra wrote...
I'm pretty sure the Templar Order is being portrayed in exactly the way it's supposed to be portrayed. They're not supposed to live up to any supposed ideals; they're supposed to be vicious bigoted hypocrites out of touch with any reality aside from that which they can control.

Have you not read the debates between Gaider and some of you rabid "pro-mage liberation" folk?

Modifié par GodWood, 26 septembre 2012 - 01:39 .

[Eternal Phoenix]

Elton John is dead wrote...

I would love to have a good pro-templar companion.  I would actually love to have some very good pro-templar quests, not the den of blood mages #23982782, but more like a child has manifested magic and it is out of control, perhaps even a demon is influencing them and you go with the templars to take the child in.  NOT by killing or abusing them after they are caught, but with acutally care to protect BOTH the child AND the people nearby.  Then having the templars (once the demon has been driven off, child is calmed, etc.) actually be kind to him.  THAT would be an AWESOME Pro-Templar Quest.

Remember Ser Otto from Dragon Age: Origins? The almost blind templar? He actually cared for the safety of the people in the Alienage hence why he investigated the evil he was sensing there within the orphanage. Asides from that; he seemed kind enough and had great devotion to The Maker. I would have loved to have had him as a companion but he had to rush to The Maker's side...

I would welcome a templar companion like him but I would also welcome a templar who has a fanatical sense of duty to The Order and believes that all mages must be purged. At the end of the day it matters not really, so long as I get a templar companion, I'm happy.

Modifié par Elton John is dead, 26 septembre 2012 - 01:43 .

[Dave of Canada]

GodWood wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
I'm pretty sure the Templar Order is being portrayed in exactly the way it's supposed to be portrayed. They're not supposed to live up to any supposed ideals; they're supposed to be vicious bigoted hypocrites out of touch with any reality aside from that which they can control.

Have you not read the debates between Gaider and some of you rabid "pro-mage liberation" folk?

She expects (and desires) the Templar Order to become the ME3-Cerberus of DA3 and calls it good writing, don't bother.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 26 septembre 2012 - 01:40 .

[Xilizhra]

GodWood wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
I'm pretty sure the Templar Order is being portrayed in exactly the way it's supposed to be portrayed. They're not supposed to live up to any supposed ideals; they're supposed to be vicious bigoted hypocrites out of touch with any reality aside from that which they can control.

Have you not read the debates between Gaider and some of you rabid "pro-mage liberation" folk?

He's argued with them about many things, such as the legality of the Annulment and atheism. He's never once said that I or anyone else is incorrect about our opinions of the templars such as I have stated here.

[KiwiQuiche]

Mr.House wrote...

RazorrX wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

I would love to have a good pro-templar companion.

Contradiction in terms.

Then having the templars (once the demon has been driven off, child is calmed, etc.) actually be kind to him. THAT would be an AWESOME Pro-Templar Quest.

The templars have currently engaged in a pogrom against mages. The kid is toast unless you kill the templars. Also, that quest would only be acceptable in any manner if you could fight off the templars thereafter.

And I would agree with you most of the time.  The games have pushed the fact that the Templars are rather Rabid about Hating Mages.  They have demonized them for so long they no longer view them as people, and readily do horrible things to them.  It makes who to side with rather easy for me - I go with the oppressed vs the Oppressors.

What I WANT is to have both sides shown in the proper light.  In Asunder we get to see the Divine in a new light, and I must admit that she made me actually LIKE the chantry, at least the NON Templar side of it.  Evangeline was what I thought a Templar should be.   It would be nice to actually see the Templar order live up to what it was supposed to be vs what we see in the games.

I believe that the Circle NEEDS to exist and have oversight by Non mages, both for the protection of the world as well as the mages themselves.

Cullen outright defies Meredith, stripping her of command when she as last lost it and crossed the line. Also defending three inocent mages who don't want to fight near the end and he will let Hawke go at the end if oyu helped the mages.

Cullen while yes starts off as your normal templar changes and shows some compasion. Who's to say in DA3 he will be the same guy we saw in DA2 when at the end of DA2 he has showen some change?

Actually my impression of the end mage-side was that Cullen wasn't gonna fcuk around with the person who just kicked the sh!t outta Meredith.

But then people loved zealots like Fenris and Anders (though Anders was going insane so he kinda had an excuse) so maybe they would like Cullen? :I Personally I wouldn't but power to those who do.

[Eternal Phoenix]

Xilizhra wrote...

I'm pretty sure the Templar Order is being portrayed in exactly the way it's supposed to be portrayed. They're not supposed to live up to any supposed ideals; they're supposed to be vicious bigoted hypocrites out of touch with any reality aside from that which they can control.

Despite this, there seems to be more bad mages than bad templars.

[Mr.House]

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

RazorrX wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

I would love to have a good pro-templar companion.

Contradiction in terms.

Then having the templars (once the demon has been driven off, child is calmed, etc.) actually be kind to him. THAT would be an AWESOME Pro-Templar Quest.

The templars have currently engaged in a pogrom against mages. The kid is toast unless you kill the templars. Also, that quest would only be acceptable in any manner if you could fight off the templars thereafter.

And I would agree with you most of the time.  The games have pushed the fact that the Templars are rather Rabid about Hating Mages.  They have demonized them for so long they no longer view them as people, and readily do horrible things to them.  It makes who to side with rather easy for me - I go with the oppressed vs the Oppressors.

What I WANT is to have both sides shown in the proper light.  In Asunder we get to see the Divine in a new light, and I must admit that she made me actually LIKE the chantry, at least the NON Templar side of it.  Evangeline was what I thought a Templar should be.   It would be nice to actually see the Templar order live up to what it was supposed to be vs what we see in the games.

I believe that the Circle NEEDS to exist and have oversight by Non mages, both for the protection of the world as well as the mages themselves.

Cullen outright defies Meredith, stripping her of command when she as last lost it and crossed the line. Also defending three inocent mages who don't want to fight near the end and he will let Hawke go at the end if oyu helped the mages.

Cullen while yes starts off as your normal templar changes and shows some compasion. Who's to say in DA3 he will be the same guy we saw in DA2 when at the end of DA2 he has showen some change?

Actually my impression of the end mage-side was that Cullen wasn't gonna fcuk around with the person who just kicked the sh!t outta Meredith.

But then people loved zealots like Fenris and Anders (though Anders was going insane so he kinda had an excuse) so maybe they would like Cullen? :I Personally I wouldn't but power to those who do.

That impression makes no sense when he just helped said person kill Meredith.

[Xilizhra]

Elton John is dead wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

I'm pretty sure the Templar Order is being portrayed in exactly the way it's supposed to be portrayed. They're not supposed to live up to any supposed ideals; they're supposed to be vicious bigoted hypocrites out of touch with any reality aside from that which they can control.

Despite this, there seems to be more bad mages than bad templars.

Every templar in the Annulment in DA2 was bad. Every templar involved in torturing Dalish children was bad. Every templar abetting Ser Alrik was bad. Most templars, ultimately, are probably bad.

[KiwiQuiche]

Avejajed wrote...

What the hell is it with these Cullen threads? o.0

We've got loads of speculation time, that's what.

[Maria Caliban]

filetemo wrote...

I demand every conversation on the dialogue wheel to have the option "kill everybody in sight"

That sounds reasonable.

[KiwiQuiche]

Xilizhra wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

I'm pretty sure the Templar Order is being portrayed in exactly the way it's supposed to be portrayed. They're not supposed to live up to any supposed ideals; they're supposed to be vicious bigoted hypocrites out of touch with any reality aside from that which they can control.

Despite this, there seems to be more bad mages than bad templars.

Every templar in the Annulment in DA2 was bad. Every templar involved in torturing Dalish children was bad. Every templar abetting Ser Alrik was bad. Most templars, ultimately, are probably bad.

Kinda like how any mage who wanted freedom either went batsh!t or turned bloodmage. :| Only I can think of that didn't is Freyrinel.

[Xilizhra]

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

I'm pretty sure the Templar Order is being portrayed in exactly the way it's supposed to be portrayed. They're not supposed to live up to any supposed ideals; they're supposed to be vicious bigoted hypocrites out of touch with any reality aside from that which they can control.

Despite this, there seems to be more bad mages than bad templars.

Every templar in the Annulment in DA2 was bad. Every templar involved in torturing Dalish children was bad. Every templar abetting Ser Alrik was bad. Most templars, ultimately, are probably bad.

Kinda like how any mage who wanted freedom either went batsh!t or turned bloodmage. :| Only I can think of that didn't is Freyrinel.

Blood magic isn't inherently evil. Far fewer mages, even proportionally, went bad; we just had a rather constricted view of mages in general in DA2. However, this is an admitted error and won't happen again in DA3.

[LolaLei]

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Avejajed wrote...

What the hell is it with these Cullen threads? o.0

We've got loads of speculation time, that's what.

Well, there's no denying that he's created quite a stir! That's a good thing in my books!

[R2s Muse]

RazorrX wrote...

LolaLei wrote...

RazorrX wrote...
Actually no.  I simply do not like Cullen at all.  

Now give me a templar who actually embodies what it means to be a templar like Evangeline in Asunder and I would be SUPER happy to have them in my party, etc.  

... You've read the end of Asunder, right?

Yes, just finished it again last night.  I still hold that she stayed true to what she believed a templar was supposed to be, not what they have become.

Curious. I would argue that this is also what Cullen does in Act 3. He explicitly stands up to Meredith because she's not following what the Order is supposed to be, both with the surrendering mages and when he tries to relieve her of her command. I actually see he and Evangeline being rather similar.

[KiwiQuiche]

Xilizhra wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

I'm pretty sure the Templar Order is being portrayed in exactly the way it's supposed to be portrayed. They're not supposed to live up to any supposed ideals; they're supposed to be vicious bigoted hypocrites out of touch with any reality aside from that which they can control.

Despite this, there seems to be more bad mages than bad templars.

Every templar in the Annulment in DA2 was bad. Every templar involved in torturing Dalish children was bad. Every templar abetting Ser Alrik was bad. Most templars, ultimately, are probably bad.

Kinda like how any mage who wanted freedom either went batsh!t or turned bloodmage. :| Only I can think of that didn't is Freyrinel.

Blood magic isn't inherently evil. Far fewer mages, even proportionally, went bad; we just had a rather constricted view of mages in general in DA2. However, this is an admitted error and won't happen again in DA3.

True, I always simple viewed it as using your own life as a power source, rather then mana. Only because of Chantry propaganda was it labeled "TEH EVILZ" but most mages we met in DA2 were loonies, like Grace (ungrateful b!tch) that one with the crazy makeup possessing templars and On the Loose. Ugh.

So hopefully they're gonna fix that? Good, good. Also need moar good templars like Thrask. Wouldn't mind one like him on my team.

[KiwiQuiche]

Avejajed wrote...

The last thread was locked because of arguing, and let me just say with the current topic of conversation being now mages vs templars this thread is heading in the same direction. So good job, everybody.

Eh? I'm just saying everyone seems to be a lunatic in DA2 if they are a mage or a templar, Cullen included. Found only what, 2 sane on either side? Doesn't make Cullen appeal to me, wet blanket that he is.

[Mr.House]

KiwiQuiche wrote...
True, I always simple viewed it as using your own life as a power source, rather then mana. Only because of Chantry propaganda was it labeled "TEH EVILZ" but most mages we met in DA2 were loonies, like Grace (ungrateful b!tch) that one with the crazy makeup possessing templars and On the Loose. Ugh.

So hopefully they're gonna fix that? Good, good. Also need moar good templars like Thrask. Wouldn't mind one like him on my team.

All Thrask wanted was Meredith out of power, that's it.