233 réponses à ce sujet

[wright1978]

Thought DA2 presented Templars fairly well. There were some extremists but equally there were the moderate characters who were trying to restrain the more militant elements.

Da2 presented mages as generally crazy. Give a mage a break and that mage then comes back and bites you in the arse by turning into a blood mage or a massive abomination in Orsino's case.

So i really want to see a non crazy mage in DA inquisition who isn't me or my relative.

[Teahouse Fox]

wright1978 wrote...

Thought DA2 presented Templars fairly well. There were some extremists but equally there were the moderate characters who were trying to restrain the more militant elements.

Da2 presented mages as generally crazy. Give a mage a break and that mage then comes back and bites you in the arse by turning into a blood mage or a massive abomination in Orsino's case.

So i really want to see a non crazy mage in DA inquisition who isn't me or my relative.

This.

I think the writers presented everyone as bat***t crazy in DA2, but was overly subtle about the reasons. Kirkwall was built on top of a Hellmouth. I was surprised as this became clearer that there was no option for Hawke to shriek it at the top of her lungs and force people to Do Something about it.  Crazy mages, crazy templars, crazy wardens, all being indoctrinated by the unadulterated crazy seeping up from below.  You can't be building your city-states on top of a Hellmouth and expect good things to come out of it.

Pro-Templars say "Mages be crazy up in here!" and lock down the controls to an excessive extreme. Mages are not just taught to control their craft, but are second class citizens, subject to whatever whim of punishment the Knight Commander, or seemingly any Templar, deems fit. Extreme abuse of power is their hallmark. Mages are stilled after their harrowing - something that should be illegal, yet the divine is unwilling to step in until it all explodes. They have appointed themselves the Mages caretaker, but instead of taking care of them, they have become flaming Torquemadas on steroids.

Pro-Mages say Templars are sadistic, evil, inhumane, and out of control. That it's inhuman to treat people as chattel because they are mages. And to a certain degree, they are right. But mages cannot exist without some oversight. The moment an NPC mage of any background is left to his own devices, they are doing bloodmagic experiments on prisoners, playing with demons, getting their granddaughters posessed, murdering people's mothers, staging bloody coups, and turning into abominations. I wanna see a few sane mages once in a while who are not the PC. That used to be Anders, but the writers ground him into sludge for more crazy-train fuel.  They probably will leave us with no hope of reforming him (as the Warden helped Connor Guerrin), either.

Yet the Templars and Mages still seem kindly and sweet compared to the actual extremes of this universe. The qunari solution to handling sarebaas being the extreme anti-mage stance. The only thing more horrifying to a qunari
than a qunari mage was a non-qunari mage, and the only good mage is a stone cold dead one.  On the other end of the spectrum, Tevinter has gone extreme pro-mage. They've been given the full control of their own destinies, and what do they have there? A slave state, where anyone without the power and cojones to prevent it, is made chattel.

Hopefully, there is a middle ground where reform is brought to the system, without throwing everything out the window and going full-on qunari or Tevinter.

Modifié par Hannova, 24 octobre 2012 - 11:59 .

[MisterJB]

Sir JK wrote...
But to show the ambigouty of the normal mages, a great way to showcase their danger is to simply put them in a situation were it becomes abundantly clear that even with no demons, no insanity, mages are dangerous.

An idea that popped up in my head would be an occupied village. A mage party has forced their way into a village. They need it to serve as a base for a while. The village elder was uncooperative (due to bad harvests, the village can't feed the mages and themselves) and has either been put to sleep (not killed though) or is mindcontrolled. The mages literally can't leave without putting the entire rebellion at risk.
The mages aren't trying to be malevolent, but the population never speaks up to them, just stares into the ground and clenches their fists.
One young woman is the subject of a mage's flirting, she is not interested but he is not relenting. Her brother steps up to stop it, an argument happens and the mage just pushes him away magically. Not hurting him, but also preventing him from stepping in and protecting his sister.
A barn has been burnt down, three graves recently dug lie beside it. The mage who did it in drunken rage has been punished/is about to the punished and is currently feeling the full weight of his own guilt as he realised that two occupants were children. Noone intended it, noone wanted it... but three persons are dead. A mage, not the pulprit, lament the pointlessness of it all.
The local chantry is desecrated, a handful of villagers desperately seek it out to repair it and pray for salvation. A mage want to help out but feels it's best to keep his distance, he/she relises that it would probably do more harm than good. For extra darkness, toss in a blinded lay sister/revered mother and a subtle implication of rape (but never proven) and a group of mages promising that if they found out who did it, they'll let the villagers do what they please with him. They'll just stand back and dispel everything the pulprit tries to do.

I'm not saying I want that specific situation, but something along similar lines. Show mages (and templars/Chantry members) who means well, but the harsch realities corrupt their intentions once translated into actions. The dangers in the ordinary, in the compromises that makes life. The true greyness of both factions, need to be the relatable, The things you see and think "damn... that could have been me".

I like this, very good. If fighting for full mage freedom will be an option in DA3, then Bioware should showcase the dangers of that reality without involving extenuating circunstances such as abominations and blood magic.

Modifié par MisterJB, 24 octobre 2012 - 12:20 .

[The Elder King]

Dave of Canada wrote...

It's unfortunate how mages must be restricted but they cannot be allowed to roam free, they must take their superior lifestyle and learn to tolerate it while the Templar protect them from their own folly. The Divine's mage sympathies shows her as too short-sighted and she must be replaced with one who'd see things from the Templar perspective.

What is the templar's stance after Asunder? Do they want to exterminate mages or do they want to bring back the Circle system?
Regardless, even if the Circle system will be back (I do think is one of the outcomes that should be possible in DA3) the least that has to be done (I didn't have yet formed an opinion in the matter of mage's freedom, but in the case of the return of the Circle system I'd grant mages far more freedom, which I doubt a lot of pro-templars want) is to have a law that states clearly that templars can't decide to treat mages as they wish, and heavy punishment should be given to the templars that violate that rule.

[The Elder King]

wright1978 wrote...

Thought DA2 presented Templars fairly well. There were some extremists but equally there were the moderate characters who were trying to restrain the more militant elements.

Da2 presented mages as generally crazy. Give a mage a break and that mage then comes back and bites you in the arse by turning into a blood mage or a massive abomination in Orsino's case.

So i really want to see a non crazy mage in DA inquisition who isn't me or my relative.

I think that DA2 shown templars and mages as their worst. My choice on the matter (since I'm neutral) is to choose the side in the game that I think it's the better. In DA2, I'd have to find the side which is worst, and then pick the other one.
If Anders didn't blow up the Chantry, and the game would've simply ask the player to pick a side, I'd have probably never finished the game.

[MisterJB]

hhh89 wrote...
What is the templar's stance after Asunder? Do they want to exterminate mages or do they want to bring back the Circle system?

The templars are hardly united. Lambert, the instigator of the separation, wants to crush the rebellion, kill most of the mages and imput a much harsher Circle System. But he himself admits many Knight Commanders are only followying because they are scared of speaking against him. And many Seekers and Templars are still loyal to Justinia.

Regardless, even if the Circle system will be back (I do think is one of the outcomes that should be possible in DA3) the least that has to be done (I didn't have yet formed an opinion in the matter of mage's freedom, but in the case of the return of the Circle system I'd grant mages far more freedom, which I doubt a lot of pro-templars want) is to have a law that states clearly that templars can't decide to treat mages as they wish, and heavy punishment should be given to the templars that violate that rule.

I'm Pro-Templar and I agree with this. A more lenient Circle System. Let mages marry and keep their children with the understanding only one is allowed per couple. Let mages write to their families with the understanding those letters will be read by the Templars to ensure no escape plans are being fomented. Let their families visit.
Let mages visit cities with the understanding veteran assassin templars will allways be nearby even if you can't see them. Let mages choose whether or not they want to take the Harrowing with the understanding many of their freedom are dependant on this. Grant mages more support during their Harrowing as Malcolm did for Bethany.
Let mages know Tranquility is still the puishment for blood magic with the understanding any templar who rapes a mage will be expelled from the Order and forced to live the rest of his life without a drop of lyrium.

[The Elder King]

MisterJB wrote...

hhh89 wrote...
What is the templar's stance after Asunder? Do they want to exterminate mages or do they want to bring back the Circle system?

The templars are hardly united. Lambert, the instigator of the separation, wants to crush the rebellion, kill most of the mages and imput a much harsher Circle System. But he himself admits many Knight Commanders are only followying because they are scared of speaking against him. And many Seekers and Templars are still loyal to Justinia.

If the templar's goal will be the same as Lambert, then I'll surely not support them, though as you said, not every templars support him.

I'm Pro-Templar and I agree with this. A more lenient Circle System. Let mages marry and keep their children with the understanding only one is allowed per couple. Let mages write to their families with the understanding those letters will be read by the Templars to ensure no escape plans are being fomented. Let their families visit.
Let mages visit cities with the understanding veteran assassin templars will allways be nearby even if you can't see them. Let mages choose whether or not they want to take the Harrowing with the understanding many of their freedom are dependant on this. Grant mages more support during their Harrowing as Malcolm did for Bethany.
Let mages know Tranquility is still the puishment for blood magic with the understanding any templar who rapes a mage will be expelled from the Order and forced to live the rest of his life without a drop of lyrium.

This is a far better system than the current one. The system I'd propose if I choose that in my opinion the mages should live separate from the society could be similar, though the Harrowing is a thing that I hardly digest (expecially because it doesn't seem to make mages better suited to resist possession). I'd like to know how dalish Keepers teach their apprentice to resiste spirits/demons.
About Bethany's Harrowing, it's stated in Legacy that Malcolm supported her? I didn't play the dlc.
Though I must say that your system is most likely to be proposed by the Chantry than by the templars.

Modifié par hhh89, 24 octobre 2012 - 01:02 .

[Dave of Canada]

hhh89 wrote...

What is the templar's stance after Asunder? Do they want to exterminate mages or do they want to bring back the Circle system?

Lambert's faction is ruled out of fear, they wish to recreate the Circles but with harsher restrictions after the events of Asunder.

Justina's faction is ruled out of loyalty, they wish to recreate the Circles with some leniance in it's restrictions.

There's probably extremists which want to see all mages wiped out but they're likely on Lambert's side.

have a law that states clearly that templars can't decide to treat mages as they wish, and heavy punishment should be given to the templars that violate that rule.

It already exists, technically. Templar are accountible for their charges to the Chantry and the Knight-Commander, who'd punish them for any trangressions. Kirkwall was just one huge cluster**** of incompetence, insanity and extremists.

[The Elder King]

Dave of Canada wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

What is the templar's stance after Asunder? Do they want to exterminate mages or do they want to bring back the Circle system?

Lambert's faction is ruled out of fear, they wish to recreate the Circles but with harsher restrictions after the events of Asunder.

Justina's faction is ruled out of loyalty, they wish to recreate the Circles with some leniance in it's restrictions.

There's probably extremists which want to see all mages wiped out but they're likely on Lambert's side.

Thanks to you (and MisterJB, in his earlier post) for the explanation

It already exists, technically. Templar are accountible for their charges to the Chantry and the Knight-Commander, who'd punish them for any trangressions. Kirkwall was just one huge cluster**** of incompetence, insanity and extremists.

I agree that on your opinion of Kirkwall (and it's not limited on the tempar side, in my opinion), but the problem is that if the KC is an extremist one, he/she'll be more lenient about templar's actions. I though that the Seekers had  the role of controlling templars, but either they don't have that power, or they did they work really bad.

[MisterJB]

hhh89 wrote...
 though the Harrowing is a thing that I hardly digest (expecially because it doesn't seem to make mages better suited to resist possession). I'd like to know how dalish Keepers teach their apprentice to resiste spirits/demons.
About Bethany's Harrowing, it's stated in Legacy that Malcolm supported her? I didn't play the dlc.

The logic behind the Harrowing is sound. If a mage can fight off demons when they are most unprepared and with a time limit, then s/he can be reasonably trusted to be able to resist them at any time. Of course, it's still the equivalent of throwing a teenager unarmed to the middle of a pack of wolves and ask them to kill them with his bare hands. Its...unrefined.
MageHawke and Bethany suggest that Malcolm braved the paths of the Fade with them to teach them how to resist demons and they are both (Bethany for certain, at least) exemplary mages. I'd be willing to hear what Malcolm did to judge if his method is applicable to the mage population at large.

[The Elder King]

MisterJB wrote...

hhh89 wrote...
 though the Harrowing is a thing that I hardly digest (expecially because it doesn't seem to make mages better suited to resist possession). I'd like to know how dalish Keepers teach their apprentice to resiste spirits/demons.
About Bethany's Harrowing, it's stated in Legacy that Malcolm supported her? I didn't play the dlc.

MageHawke and Bethany suggest that Malcolm braved the paths of the Fade with them to teach them how to resist demons and they are both (Bethany for certain, at least) exemplary mages. I'd be willing to hear what Malcolm did to judge if his method is applicable to the mage population at large.

Well, if that's true, anyway, my respect for Malcolm is increased once again.

Modifié par hhh89, 24 octobre 2012 - 01:15 .

[MisterJB]

hhh89 wrote...
Well, if that's true, anyway, my respect for Malcolm is increased once again.

Yep, Malcolm Hawke is, by far, the most remarkable mage that ever lived in Thedas with the possible exception of Andraste. "My magic will serve that which is best in me, not that which is most base."
He is someone I would trust to lead any movement for more mage rights. Not brrr Adrian!
She is a bloody magister in the making.

[Xilizhra]

MisterJB wrote...

hhh89 wrote...
Well, if that's true, anyway, my respect for Malcolm is increased once again.

Yep, Malcolm Hawke is, by far, the most remarkable mage that ever lived in Thedas with the possible exception of Andraste. "My magic will serve that which is best in me, not that which is most base."
He is someone I would trust to lead any movement for more mage rights. Not brrr Adrian!
She is a bloody magister in the making.

Adrian did what was necessary. She'll be a stalwart compatriot in this war.

As for the rest? Of course greyness will exist. Assuming the morality of both sides isn't suddenly switched, it won't affect my actions one iota. Templars who surrender will be spared. Templars who continue to fight will die. Others who try to aid the templars wil be stopped, by whatever means necessary. I'll make sure to find the best solutions and not just the most expedient ones, but I will find solutions.

Also, expect mages to be less problematic than they were in DA2. I suspect the templars may be about the same as they were then.

[MisterJB]

Adrian is an unresonable, hate filled, warmongering, cowardly, manipulative extremist who revels in her perceived superiority and believes the best way to dispell fear and suspicion is to flash fire in the face of mundanes. She is an example of the worst mages can give to Thedas.
So yes, you and her should get along just fine.

Modifié par MisterJB, 24 octobre 2012 - 03:26 .

[Medhia Nox]

While the name suggests otherwise - I truly hope The Inquisition is a secular organization.

Because I'm not on the side of the mages - the Chantry - or the Templars.

They should all be put in their place - utterly crushed in their current forms - and rebuilt.

If I had my way by the end of this war:

- Mages would be back in their Circles - which would not be governed by mages - and each nation would be free to develop their own laws on how to deal with crimes committed by mages.

- Templars would be disbanded as a faction and the abilities of the Templars would be put into the hands of the rulers of the various nations. Templars would still be a mage police - but governed not by religious dogma - but by the mighty coin (another form of relgion to be sure)

- The Chantry would be "just a religion" - people are free to worship - but get out of the politics of nations.

[Xilizhra]

MisterJB wrote...

Adrian is an unresonable, hate filled, warmongering, cowardly, manipulative extremist who revels in her perceived superiority and believes the best way to dispell fear and suspicion is to flash fire in the face of mundanes. She is an example of the worst mages can give to Thedas.
So yes, you and her should get along just fine.

She has a role to play, that won't be the diplomatic one. She's pretty much a pure warrior, and I believe she can accept that.

[LobselVith8]

MisterJB wrote...

Adrian is an unresonable, hate filled, warmongering, cowardly, manipulative extremist who revels in her perceived superiority and believes the best way to dispell fear and suspicion is to flash fire in the face of mundanes. She is an example of the worst mages can give to Thedas.
So yes, you and her should get along just fine.

Your opinion on Adrian is simply that; not everyone shares it. More to the point, some people strongly disagree with the Chantry controlled Circles, and would prefer to have their protagonist fight for mage autonomy.

[The Elder King]

LobselVith8 wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

Adrian is an unresonable, hate filled, warmongering, cowardly, manipulative extremist who revels in her perceived superiority and believes the best way to dispell fear and suspicion is to flash fire in the face of mundanes. She is an example of the worst mages can give to Thedas.
So yes, you and her should get along just fine.

Your opinion on Adrian is simply that; not everyone shares it. More to the point, some people strongly disagree with the Chantry controlled Circles, and would prefer to have their protagonist fight for mage autonomy.

Why the protagonist wouldn't have the choice of fighting with the side he/she prefers? I'll be greatly disappointed if we'll not have the option of choosing the side to aid in the war (if the war will be one of the main plots of DA2).
And about Adrian, does the wiki explain clearly her character? Or do I have to find another source?

Modifié par hhh89, 24 octobre 2012 - 04:03 .

[Maclimes]

Honestly, I know the mods probably get sick of seeing this same argument over and over (and often having to shut it down when it gets out of hand), but I think it's something of a compliment to the writing staff.

The point was to make the Templar/Mage decision be a difficult one. If one side was obviously evil to everyone, and the other side obviously good to everyone, it would be a far less interesting game setting.

The fact that these threads pop up at a near-continuous rate means that the writers did it right. Well done, Gaider and team.

[MisterJB]

LobselVith8 wrote...
Your opinion on Adrian is simply that; not everyone shares it. More to the point, some people strongly disagree with the Chantry controlled Circles, and would prefer to have their protagonist fight for mage autonomy.

Have I ever denied anyone the right to choose the actions of their PCs? If you found anything you disagreed with in my analysis of Adrian's character, you are free to contest it. I've never tried to silence anyone from debating.

[Xilizhra]

MisterJB wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...
Your opinion on Adrian is simply that; not everyone shares it. More to the point, some people strongly disagree with the Chantry controlled Circles, and would prefer to have their protagonist fight for mage autonomy.

Have I ever denied anyone the right to choose the actions of their PCs? If you found anything you disagreed with in my analysis of Adrian's character, you are free to contest it. I've never tried to silence anyone from debating.

Well, you did once advocate that we be forced to kill her.

[MisterJB]

Xilizhra wrote...
Well, you did once advocate that we be forced to kill her.

I'm fairly certain I didn't. What I said was that I wanted to Tranquilize her.
However, I acknowledge the possibility that, considering your constant demand that we be forced to fight the templars, I may have lost my patience once and said something to the effect. Do you have a link to the post in question?

[Xilizhra]

MisterJB wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
Well, you did once advocate that we be forced to kill her.

I'm fairly certain I didn't. What I said was that I wanted to Tranquilize her.
However, I acknowledge the possibility that, considering your constant demand that we be forced to fight the templars, I may have lost my patience once and said something to the effect. Do you have a link to the post in question?

No, and it's not a point worth arguing enough for me to look for it. However, I would consider the option of Tranquilizing someone about the same way that I'd consider the option to rape someone, and will treat the game and the people asking for it accordingly.

[Dave of Canada]

If you want to help Adrian, feel free. Just don't come crying when everybody turns against the mages as the Templar are proven right.

[Xilizhra]

Dave of Canada wrote...

If you want to help Adrian, feel free. Just don't come crying when everybody turns against the mages as the Templar are proven right.

Pleasantly, it won't happen, for out-of-game reasons (more people want to help the mages than the templars) if nothing else.