1297 réponses à ce sujet

[Auintus]

LinksOcarina wrote...

So why does this thread exist then? It seems pointless to me. 

We know that we don't have to be pro-templar. I'm assuming the OP did not...It blew up from there.
Very pointless. Also quite entertaining. We're all just blowing wind, so to speak.

[Dabrikishaw]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Auintus wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

I think and maybe is not giving me great confidence...

That said, does that mean were pro templar at all, since the Templars is an organization as much as the inqusitors? 

It shouldn't. I made most of that up. We still aren't entirely sure what the Inquisition's true goal is.
No. One of the devs explicitly said we are not following the Chantry. Hence, not pro-templar by default.

So why does this thread exist then? It seems pointless to me. 

Asking Gaider for reassurance that the player won't be forced to agree with the templars.

[The Hierophant]

LinksOcarina wrote...

So why does this thread exist then? It seems pointless to me. 

It was a baseless assumption that turned into a mage rights debate thread # 231,037. For now our goal should be to increase this thread's post count because there's no concrete info that's worth discussing in this section.

[silentassassin264]

Auintus you do what heretic means? The codex said that they were against tyranny of magic in any form which included heretics. If you didn't agree with their line you are a heretic to be culled just like a blood mages. That is why I said DAA Anders not DA2 Anders. They are completely different characters.

[Fredward]

Guuuuuyyyyyyyyyyssssss you're gonna get the thread locked and then I'll have nowhere to have roundabout quasi-arguments with dem evil Templar supporters! XD

[Iakus]

silentassassin264 wrote...

Yes it is independent but naming it the Inquisition is like Germany collapsing and some party started claiming they would create a fourth Reich. Even if their policy was not the same they would be identifying with the party that shall not be named just by terminology.

Doesn't really compare, as that's way to recent, historicaly.  the Inquisition was well over a thousand years ago on Thedas.  Heck, it started up not long after the Grey Wardens were first founded.

to compare that to the real world, historically, we'd be looking at something more along the lines of reforming the Carolingian Paladins or the Knights of the Round Table.  Half-legendary, highly romanticized groups formed with the passing of an empire as a dark age looms.  And who's true history is likely more...complicated...than the literature says.

Modifié par iakus, 24 novembre 2012 - 10:51 .

[Auintus]

silentassassin264 wrote...

Auintus you do what heretic means? The codex said that they were against tyranny of magic in any form which included heretics. If you didn't agree with their line you are a heretic to be culled just like a blood mages. That is why I said DAA Anders not DA2 Anders. They are completely different characters.

It's a rank of Covenant Sangheili, right?

Heretic: noun. One who stands or acts against established doctrine.
It gives heretics as an example of the tyranny of magic. Being a heretic does not immediately imply that one supported mage rule, or magic-assisted chaos. The Inquisition had bigger issues than the roadside spellweaver who didn't follow Andraste. The primary enemy was chaos, some heretics caused that chaos. Until you find a more definitive source, you should probably quit painting the Inquisition based on your own interpretation.

[Adanu]

silentassassin264 wrote...

Auintus you do what heretic means? The codex said that they were against tyranny of magic in any form which included heretics. If you didn't agree with their line you are a heretic to be culled just like a blood mages. That is why I said DAA Anders not DA2 Anders. They are completely different characters.

This is something that keeps bugging me. ANders didn't change all that much about his bliefs and his passion... but in Awakening he hid his pain under sarcasm and pretending to not care. It's not a very big step to go from that to the rebel he became. He was already a rebel... he just didn't think trying to free other mages was worthwhile. That changed, nothing more.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Herr Uhl wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Logicly speaking, there is no reason why the frequency should be higher in the Circles as opposed to anywhere else. A person outside the Circle can be just as easily abused.

The main difference is the stricter delegation of power. Where power gaps exist there tends to be more abuse. A templar could possibly "see" a mage doing blood magic, and the mage would most likely be put under stricter watch at least. I'm not sure what happens to a mage that attacks a templar, but I imagine that it isn't pleasant. This mirrors society, with nobles being able to do this to the poor, for example. But that is a more open system, and more importantly, has less authority figures per person.

Another problem seems to be the tendency for templars (it is understandable if they've had a friend or two being killed by abominations) to hold mages in contempt.

I'd expect cases of rape to be higher inside a circle than outside.

Really?

A commoner has NO protection whatsoever against lords, rulers and generally the rich and influental .Even a city guardsman can technicly abuse you.

Futhermore, commoners are not all in one tower - such density and proximity makes getting away with the crime actually HARDER.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Adanu wrote...
And so the Ad Hominem attack starts.

You started them a LOOOONG time ago.

Nothing about the mage situation is easy, but denying mages freedom and pressing them into a circle system of slavery yet again is not going to work without major reforms and new checks. People like you aren't willing to acknowldge that, therefore the war continues.

It's not slavery and you can't come up with a better system that can actually work in practice.
People like *you* aren't willing to acknowldge that, therefore the war continues.

[silentassassin264]

The Codex Seekers of truth says the inquisition hunted heretics and cultists as well as mages. That is what it says word for word. Anders was a heretic because he did not accept their interpretation of magic shall not rule over man. If you don't see that then I have nothing left to say.

And yes Anders was a different character. DAA Anders cared only about his own freedom and would have never become an abomination willfully. He even had a convo with Justice explaining that. That guy I'm DA2 is crazy Steve.

[Auintus]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Nothing about the mage situation is easy, but denying mages freedom and pressing them into a circle system of slavery yet again is not going to work without major reforms and new checks. People like you aren't willing to acknowldge that, therefore the war continues.

It's not slavery and you can't come up with a better system that can actually work in practice.
People like *you* aren't willing to acknowldge that, therefore the war continues.

Takes two to tango.
The Circles are not slavery. They are prisons. Important difference.
And Sorronar's too much of a misanthrope to understand that you can trust people, even powerful people.

[Auintus]

silentassassin264 wrote...

The Codex Seekers of truth says the inquisition hunted heretics and cultists as well as mages. That is what it says word for word. Anders was a heretic because he did not accept their interpretation of magic shall not rule over man. If you don't see that then I have nothing left to say.

And yes Anders was a different character. DAA Anders cared only about his own freedom and would have never become an abomination willfully. He even had a convo with Justice explaining that. That guy I'm DA2 is crazy Steve.

And "hunted" meant "killed" since when exactly? Templars hunt mages. More often then not, they intend to bring them back to the Circle. And since when did Anders want to rule over man?
Anders made the mistake of differenciating between spirits and demons. The results of the possession are what you see in DA2.

Modifié par Auintus, 24 novembre 2012 - 11:08 .

[silentassassin264]

There was no circle back then. They didn't make circles until the Nevarran Accords which turned the Inquisition into the Templars. So they were obviously killing them.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

silentassassin264 wrote...

There was no circle back then. They didn't make circles until the Nevarran Accords which turned the Inquisition into the Templars. So they were obviously killing them.

No, the lack of Circles means they were probably killing them. In most cases, at least. They probably made use of a few mages, otherwise their project would have gone nowhere.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 24 novembre 2012 - 11:27 .

[Inquisitor Arc]

Auintus wrote...

silentassassin264 wrote...

Auintus you do what heretic means? The codex said that they were against tyranny of magic in any form which included heretics. If you didn't agree with their line you are a heretic to be culled just like a blood mages. That is why I said DAA Anders not DA2 Anders. They are completely different characters.

It's a rank of Covenant Sangheili, right?

Sorry just had to

Auintus wrote...
Takes two to tango.
The Circles are not slavery. They are prisons. Important difference.

^ This, very much this. Mages are not slaves they're prisoners. Stop creating this farce.

[Adanu]

Tiger Ace 32 wrote...

Auintus wrote...

silentassassin264 wrote...

Auintus you do what heretic means? The codex said that they were against tyranny of magic in any form which included heretics. If you didn't agree with their line you are a heretic to be culled just like a blood mages. That is why I said DAA Anders not DA2 Anders. They are completely different characters.

It's a rank of Covenant Sangheili, right?

Sorry just had to

Auintus wrote...
Takes two to tango.
The Circles are not slavery. They are prisons. Important difference.

^ This, very much this. Mages are not slaves they're prisoners. Stop creating this farce.

Debating with you people is like hitting my head against a wall.

[Auintus]

silentassassin264 wrote...

There was no circle back then. They didn't make circles until the Nevarran Accords which turned the Inquisition into the Templars. So they were obviously killing them.

So people are incapable of being contained without killing them? I wonder what prisons are for then...The Circle is an institute. There is no reason to believe that a proto-Circle did not exist prior to the Nevarran Accords.

[MisterJB]

You mean we're not willing to accept your argument-free convictions as fact?
Shocking.

Modifié par MisterJB, 25 novembre 2012 - 12:35 .

[TEWR]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

And you're trying to make the Circles sound like a happy boarding school, which it ain't.

They're treated better than everyone excluding nobility and they get to learn their abilities. It's a school for rich kids but you don't need to be rich to apply.

But if you are a Mage that comes from a rich family, you get perks that are denied to the rest of the Mages. Not because of any merit as a Mage -- well, not usually -- but simply because of who your family is.

MisterJB wrote...

Their aid is requested in times of war, not forced. And even then, only in the time of utmost need such as the Bligths or Exalthed Marches. Most mages are eager to go since it will help improve the standing of the Circle.

To be fair, the Chantry isn't even willing to send the Mages out in enough numbers to make a difference during a Blight. They sent only 7 Mages -- 8 if you're one -- to fight the Blight.

Whereas if they had sent the majority of Harrowed Mages and a crapton of Templars, Ostagar might've turned out differently -- since Loghain would've accounted for those forces in his plans, being a general and all.

MisterJB wrote...

I expect they have a choice. They can't be forced to do magic if they don't want to and if their aid is needed, the Chantry can't exactly send Templars to force the issue because they will probrably be busy fighting the war.

For some reason my mind is telling me that there was some in-game source that stated they don't really have a choice if the Chantry tells them to fight.

Herr Uhl wrote...

They're not the typical mage, no. But Ines was allowed to travel without any oversight

Eh, given the Templars' presence in Amaranthine I'd conjecture that she did have some form of oversight. Just not in the Wending Wood -- or if she did, they were in other areas of the Wending Wood that we couldn't explore.

MisterJB wrote...

And his granddaughter is potentially possessed by a demon he released. I think there is a lesson here.

A demon he trapped for thirty years, who only possesses someone if the Warden helps it.

The lesson is that if the Chantry sanctioned Demonology -- which is not the same thing as blood magic like the Chantry likes to believe, though they do sometimes work in conjunction -- incidents like that wouldn't happen.

The lesson is that the Warden's a douchebag if he lets the demon possess her. So it has nothing to really do with mages or magic in the grand scheme of things, as its simply the avarice of the Warden that caused it.

Herr Uhl wrote...

Could you please stop being condescending? You add nothing of worth by doing it other than poinless vitriol.

This is especially annoying considering you make things up and then treat them as facts.

That's his entire MO for these types of debates. He never brings up anything addressed in-game for a discussion, wants other people to do the work for him, insults other peoples' positions and sometimes the people themselves, strikes up strawmen arguments, cites his "arguments" as "common sense", and the like.

It's pointless discussing Mages and Templars with him. 

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 25 novembre 2012 - 01:08 .

[Auintus]

Adanu wrote...



Debating with you people is like hitting my head against a wall.

Prisoner: One who is deprived of liberty against their will.  While some mages would submit to the Circle, few have a choice in the matter.
Slave: One bound in servitude as property.   I don't think that is an entirely accurate descripter for the mages' situation.

How am I wrong?

[TEWR]

MisterJB wrote...

silentassassin264 wrote...

Auintus they didn't just get rid of any tyranny of magic they were killing people who didn't agree with their religious views. DAA Anders was a devout Andrastian and was just trying to be a normal person. The fact that he didn't want to be subjugated would have been enough to kill him in the Inquisition. I doubt many mages would want to be associated with that.

Source?

David Gaider in a thread some months ago. 

EDIT: Well, the Inquisition being the cause of a lot of fear and whatnot, anyway. Not sure about what silentassassin264 is saying, but the Inquisition weren't really noble souls. Their goals, while noble at times, had some horrific methods employed.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 25 novembre 2012 - 01:18 .

[Auintus]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

silentassassin264 wrote...

Auintus they didn't just get rid of any tyranny of magic they were killing people who didn't agree with their religious views. DAA Anders was a devout Andrastian and was just trying to be a normal person. The fact that he didn't want to be subjugated would have been enough to kill him in the Inquisition. I doubt many mages would want to be associated with that.

Source?

David Gaider in a thread some months ago. 

Which one? I don't remember anything about the Inquisition acting that fanatical. Extreme measures were taken, but I never heard anything about killing everyone who believed differently.

[Sabariel]

FaWa wrote...

 This better not be the case... The one thing Bioware let us choose our stance on in DA2...

Yup. You will be forced to be pro-templar, pro-socks, pro-pie, and pro-bronto.