187 réponses à ce sujet

[Senya]

@Lobsel

Actually, Templars want people to be protected (the ideal one, anyway). Even Meredith, the most insane one there is, comes off as one who doesn't know any other way in this statement: "I know, and it breaks my heart to do it, but we must be vigilant. If you cannot tell me a better way, do not brand me a tyrant!"

Now, I always sided against her in all my playthroughs. I don't like or support her. But if this comes from the most militant Knight-Commander so far, then I think other, less psycho Templars, might be for a middle ground.

Not to mention Thrask. No one can deny he tried a middle ground. From the wiki: "Six years later, in Act 3, Thrask reappears as the leader of a slowly growing rebellion force against Meredith consisting of mages and templars together with Grace, even allowing blood magic. His motivation for starting this is his belief that templars and mages should work together, not let the latter be oppressed."

So, I think compromise is realistic. If you want, I can go into Asunder.

So, I will have my Inquisitor try for a compromise and peaceful solution.

Modifié par almostinsane99, 12 avril 2013 - 08:29 .

[Iakus]

 Well the ideal solution would be to forcibly merge everyone on Thedas into abominations.  COnflict will end and everyone will achieve their highest potential.

Now that that we know it is possible, it's inevitable 

But seriously, I hope we can call out both sides on their, un, more extreme views and hopefully show that both sides have their points and their crazytalk.

[Herr Uhl]

There hasn't even been an official statement on what we'll be playing in the game past "human". Seems a bit early to be complaining about the lack of choices.

[esper]

almostinsane99 wrote...

@Lobsel

Actually, Templars want people to be protected (the ideal one, anyway). Even Meredith, the most insane one there is, comes off as one who doesn't know any other way in this statement: "I know, and it breaks my heart to do it, but we must be vigilant. If you cannot tell me a better way, do not brand me a tyrant!"

Now, I always sided against her in all my playthroughs. I don't like or support her. But if this comes from the most militant Knight-Commander so far, then I think other, less psycho Templars, might be for a middle ground.

Not to mention Thrask. No one can deny he tried a middle ground. From the wiki: "Six years later, in Act 3, Thrask reappears as the leader of a slowly growing rebellion force against Meredith consisting of mages and templars together with Grace, even allowing blood magic. His motivation for starting this is his belief that templars and mages should work together, not let the latter be oppressed."

So, I think compromise is realistic. If you want, I can go into Asunder.

So, I will have my Inquisitor try for a compromise and peaceful solution.

I deny, that Trask was a middle ground. He just didn't like blantant abuse of power Meiridith represented. Which simply showed how inhuman Meridith had become. He was still pro-circle and was in fact rebelling because he didn't like to kill people.

Meridith was pro-having as much power as she could grab (which she properly always have been since her first coup.)

Modifié par esper, 12 avril 2013 - 08:43 .

[LobselVith8]

almostinsane99 wrote...

@Lobsel

Actually, Templars want people to be protected (the ideal one, anyway). Even Meredith, the most insane one there is, comes off as one who doesn't know any other way in this statement: "I know, and it breaks my heart to do it, but we must be vigilant. If you cannot tell me a better way, do not brand me a tyrant!"

Cullen, who the developers have claimed is supposed to be the moderate, says that templars have "dominion over mages by divine right". Apparently, this is what the Chantry preaches to their military arm. Regardless of how you might view it or phrase it, the templars want to be in charge over the mages, while the mages want to be free of being under the rule of the Chantry and the templars. Clearly, not everyone feels the same way, but most likely do when you consider that the two factions have split from the Chantry and are said to be at the brink of war with each other.

almostinsane99 wrote...

Now, I always sided against her in all my playthroughs. I don't like or support her. But if this comes from the most militant Knight-Commander so far, then I think other, less psycho Templars, might be for a middle ground.

I never really saw siding against Meredith as a pro-mage decision. You can agree with the Chantry controlled Circle and think that Meredith is completely wrong to condemn the Circle for the actions of one single man who isn't even a member of said Circle. I'm not sure why the developers didn't recognize this, though.

almostinsane99 wrote...

Not to mention Thrask. No one can deny he tried a middle ground. From the wiki: "Six years later, in Act 3, Thrask reappears as the leader of a slowly growing rebellion force against Meredith consisting of mages and templars together with Grace, even allowing blood magic. His motivation for starting this is his belief that templars and mages should work together, not let the latter be oppressed."

Except Thrask is dead (unfortunately), and the mages and templars are at the brink of war. The Circles have broken free from the Chantry, and the templars have defected from the Chantry in order to "hunt down the mages" (as Varric termed it). It's not the same scenario.

almostinsane99 wrote...

So, I think compromise is realistic. If you want, I can go into Asunder.

So, I will have my Inquisitor try for a compromise and peaceful solution.

You and I will have to agree to disagree, then.

[Senya]

^^

Well, it seems we will. I believe that peace can be achieved through compromise where the rights of mages are respected while there is some sort of system set up to monitor mages, preferably made up by both mages and templars. The former keep the system from being tyrannical and thel latter keep it from being ineffective.

That or maybe the Inquisition can take over overseeing mages where mages and non-mages share power. Or it may be that it is lessened to hunting down mage criminals. And maybe overseeing relations between Mages and non-Mages. The Inquisition would include Templars and Mages too.

[Palidane]

I'm sympathetic to the mages plight, but they have to realize the immense power they hold in comparison to average folks. With that power comes the potential for abuse of a million different kinds. Every mage is a loaded weapon, and they cannot be allowed to roam about freely like normal people.

[Sutamina]

LobselVith8 wrote...
I don't think a compromise is realistic when the mages want to be free of the templars,

Are you saying all mages want the exact same thing ?

and the templars want dominion over the mages.

Are you saying all templars want the exact same thing ?

The two groups want the exact opposite of the other.

Since when was there only two groups? isnt this a gross simplification

And for people to want to side with one over the other, it would make our actions meaningless to reset everything back to the status quo.

whats the status quo? mage-templar war or pre mage-templar war

[esper]

Palidane wrote...

I'm sympathetic to the mages plight, but they have to realize the immense power they hold in comparison to average folks. With that power comes the potential for abuse of a million different kinds. Every mage is a loaded weapon, and they cannot be allowed to roam about freely like normal people.

If you treat a person like they are a loaded weapon and not a person, that person have no reason to treat you like a person either.

The only way to prevent mages from abusing their power is having other mages who cares enough about mundane and wants to combat the evil mages, and the only way to do that is to have enough mages to do that, is to have mages be part of society and treated like any other person.

If you treat them like a loaded weapon they are not going to help, you defend about those who goes bad.

[Noctis Augustus]

almostinsane99 wrote...

^^

Well, it seems we will. I believe that peace can be achieved through compromise where the rights of mages are respected while there is some sort of system set up to monitor mages, preferably made up by both mages and templars. The former keep the system from being tyrannical and thel latter keep it from being ineffective.

That or maybe the Inquisition can take over overseeing mages where mages and non-mages share power. Or it may be that it is lessened to hunting down mage criminals. And maybe overseeing relations between Mages and non-Mages. The Inquisition would include Templars and Mages too.

Mages want freedom, I can assume they want the same rights as the non-mages: having a family, being able to rule, not being locked up... They never spoke out against some sort of "magic police force", better if it consists of mage and non-mage. As long as they are not opressed, prosecuted and discriminated, I'm sure they will be satisfied.

Modifié par ibbikiookami, 12 avril 2013 - 09:10 .

[Iakus]

esper wrote....

Meridith was pro-having as much power as she could grab (which she properly always have been since her first coup.)

I recently did a pro-templar run in DA2, and was suprised to see the new details that emerged about Meredith.

She comes off as a far more tragic figure, trying to do what's right, but is ultimately consumed by paranoia (and the corrupting influence of the red lyrium idol). 

If the details about her sister and her own self-doubts had been more widely accessible to the players, I think her actions become far more understandable than, say, Orsino's 

I do think Thrask was something of a middle ground, but an overly idealistic version.  He was right that mages and templars should work together, but Grace proved that however that there are those who will misuse their powerand attempt to rule over others.  And those people aren't all templars.

[Senya]

^^

Then we are in agreement.

[10K]

ibbikiookami wrote...

almostinsane99 wrote...

^^

Well, it seems we will. I believe that peace can be achieved through compromise where the rights of mages are respected while there is some sort of system set up to monitor mages, preferably made up by both mages and templars. The former keep the system from being tyrannical and thel latter keep it from being ineffective.

That or maybe the Inquisition can take over overseeing mages where mages and non-mages share power. Or it may be that it is lessened to hunting down mage criminals. And maybe overseeing relations between Mages and non-Mages. The Inquisition would include Templars and Mages too.

Mages want freedom, I can assume they want the same rights as the non-mages: having a family, being able to rule, not being locked up... They never spoke out against some sort of "magic police force", better if it consists of mage and non-mage. As long as they are not opressed, prosecuted and discriminated, I'm sure they will be satisfied.

This would be a perfect solution. A magical police force that consist of both mages and templars. It would even give the mages a chance to show society that all mages aren't power hungry.

[esper]

iakus wrote...

esper wrote....

Meridith was pro-having as much power as she could grab (which she properly always have been since her first coup.)

I recently did a pro-templar run in DA2, and was suprised to see the new details that emerged about Meredith.

She comes off as a far more tragic figure, trying to do what's right, but is ultimately consumed by paranoia (and the corrupting influence of the red lyrium idol). 

If the details about her sister and her own self-doubts had been more widely accessible to the players, I think her actions become far more understandable than, say, Orsino's 

I do think Thrask was something of a middle ground, but an overly idealistic version.  He was right that mages and templars should work together, but Grace proved that however that there are those who will misuse their powerand attempt to rule over others.  And those people aren't all templars.

Yes, I know her oh-so-tragic background. It still does not migate the fact that she kicked out the former Viscount simply because he was going to challenge the templars power, hold the current vicount at sword point (so to speak) and prevented the nobles from selecting a new one when the line broke. The last thing had nothing to do with her sister and was a pure grab for more power, the other are highly debatable too.

Don't get me wrong, she properly believed in the templar cause, but her power grabble had nothing to do with that, something which I think the idol muddled in her mind. (She seems a much more shrew politican in act 2)

Trask represent a middle ground between Meridith and Orsino, but Orsino is not the mages fight. Trask represent those who think that they should treat mages with respect, but he is still pro-circle. Heck, his whole group is not anti-circle or pro-mage freedom, they are anti-meridith. Which is something Orsino points out when you accidentily destroys them. The current fight is, however, between mage freedom or not, in which a compromise simply doesn't exist. Since Trask seems to favour non-violence he would properly had withdrawn from the templars and either stopped fighting or had turned to protecting civilians. Perhaps he would have joined either cause reculantly, but he none of these options are an middle ground.

[-TC1989-]

iakus wrote...

esper wrote....

Meridith was pro-having as much power as she could grab (which she properly always have been since her first coup.)

I recently did a pro-templar run in DA2, and was suprised to see the new details that emerged about Meredith.

She comes off as a far more tragic figure, trying to do what's right, but is ultimately consumed by paranoia (and the corrupting influence of the red lyrium idol). 

If the details about her sister and her own self-doubts had been more widely accessible to the players, I think her actions become far more understandable than, say, Orsino's 

I do think Thrask was something of a middle ground, but an overly idealistic version.  He was right that mages and templars should work together, but Grace proved that however that there are those who will misuse their powerand attempt to rule over others.  And those people aren't all templars.

I noticed this too, by the end Meredith started really annoying me. But I did sympathize with her for the majority of the time. Grace personally played a factor in me supporting the Templars. I went out of my way to protect her, and her companions (even killing Templars), and she goes and kidnaps my sister? Screw that, I made sure she died that time.

[Iakus]

esper wrote...


Yes, I know her oh-so-tragic background. It still does not migate the fact that she kicked out the former Viscount simply because he was going to challenge the templars power, hold the current vicount at sword point (so to speak) and prevented the nobles from selecting a new one when the line broke. The last thing had nothing to do with her sister and was a pure grab for more power, the other are highly debatable too.

Don't get me wrong, she properly believed in the templar cause, but her power grabble had nothing to do with that, something which I think the idol muddled in her mind. (She seems a much more shrew politican in act 2)

I never said Meredith was a paarticularly nice person, or even a good person.  But that information makes her actions more understandable.  It even shows that in her own way, she thought she was protecting mages by hunting down (often overzealously) those who would abuse their powers. 

Trask represent a middle ground between Meridith and Orsino, but Orsino is not the mages fight. Trask represent those who think that they should treat mages with respect, but he is still pro-circle. Heck, his whole group is not anti-circle or pro-mage freedom, they are anti-meridith. Which is something Orsino points out when you accidentily destroys them. The current fight is, however, between mage freedom or not, in which a compromise simply doesn't exist. Since Trask seems to favour non-violence he would properly had withdrawn from the templars and either stopped fighting or had turned to protecting civilians. Perhaps he would have joined either cause reculantly, but he none of these options are an middle ground.

Thrask and his group were those who thought the Circles could still be salvaged.  I think at this point it goes without saying he was wrong in this.  Nevertheless, I believed he was trying to put mages and templars on a more equal footing within the system.  that in itself would have been a big step towards freedom.  Remember, Thrask's own daughter was a mage, he wanted to do right by them.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Plaintiff wrote...

Allowing a "neutral" path is a total cop-out and would totally defeat the purpose of giving the player difficult questions to answer.

What if the neutral path was necessarily unsuccessful?

UNlike DA2, which forced you to oppose anyone who sought compromise, DA3 could allow you to seek compromise, only to ultimately fail.

[Sutamina]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
What if the neutral path was necessarily unsuccessful?

UNlike DA2, which forced you to oppose anyone who sought compromise, DA3 could allow you to seek compromise, only to ultimately fail.

Depends on the details of how that compromise was achieved, as there are many ways one could acheive compromise.

[Sylvius the Mad]

My point is that compromise doesn't need to be achievable - it only needs to be seekable.

Just because the PC has the opportunity to try something does not require that it be possible to succeed at it.

[Fast Jimmy]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Allowing a "neutral" path is a total cop-out and would totally defeat the purpose of giving the player difficult questions to answer.

What if the neutral path was necessarily unsuccessful?

UNlike DA2, which forced you to oppose anyone who sought compromise, DA3 could allow you to seek compromise, only to ultimately fail.

Arguably, I'd say DA2 forced you to compromise, taking no side at all leading up to Act 3 (nor any of the obvious steps to help one side or the other), but then at the end forced you to take a side.

If the option is given, I'd like to see it be an actual option, not a "On Your Mark, Get Set... Wait for it..." kind of scenario where you can't express a given preference on something until it is the designated time... and then limit what those expressions can be (extremes on either side, no neutral way to diffuse the situation).

The game nearly forces you to be a passive, neutral bystander until it then forces you to join one extremist side verse another.

[Lazy Jer]

Not sure if this has been said yet or not (and I'm too damn lazy to research the thread) but technically there are three sides to this conflict.  The mages have broken away from the Chantry and so have the Templars.  Thus there is the Templar Order, the Circle of Magi and the Chantry.  The Chantry is, as far as I can tell, trying to get everyone back together to play nice again, the Circle is trying to remain separate and rule themselves, the Templar Order wants to retake the Circle of Magi, be free from requiring influence from the chantry and wants free cookies and ice cream served every Thursday in the Templar Break Room (That last part is purely speculation on my part, but it's what I would want if I was a Templar.

[Iakus]

Yes, from what we know, the Chantry is a third side to this conflict. The current Divine, seemed receptive towards reforming the Circles. But the templars thought she was being too soft on the mages. The mages didn't think she was going to make any real changes. We may never know who if either was right, as the whole split happened before anything could really get done.

[Il Divo]

^ Potentially, would love to see the Black Divine brought into the picture to liven things up. Tevinter Imperium vs Orlais could make for some interesting politics.

[Noctis Augustus]

Il Divo wrote...

^ Potentially, would love to see the Black Divine brought into the picture to liven things up. Tevinter Imperium vs Orlais could make for some interesting politics.

I don't think that's possible, Tevinter is busy fighting the Qunari. But the Black Divine? That's more likely. You could even ask for his support. Can you imagine the imperial chantry taking over the chantry (=/= Tevinter taking over)? Their views are more mage friendly.

Modifié par ibbikiookami, 13 avril 2013 - 12:28 .

[Leones Maneres]

Hopefully - as the producers claim they will do - they will take a page out of the Elder Scrolls series and let players choose their path - make the Big Quest non-War related, and make choosing a side in the war a secondary quest option. Giving the players more choice as opposed to less is what made Skyrim the best RPG since, well, Oblivion.