398 réponses à ce sujet

[Lotion Soronarr]

The tower is supposedly larger than you see it in-game from what I understand. You'll always run into some restrictions with the medium.

Did you see how tall the tower was?

4 floors? Yeah, right....

[Althernai]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Stupidity yes. She let her fear run rampant. Loosing him? Yes, cause him being raised in a circle is such a horrifying prospect compared to what happened.

You just don't get it, do you? Try to think of it from a mother's point of view.

If she does nothing, people will eventually figure out Connor is a mage and he will be sent to the Tower. Maybe he will survive it without being made a Tranquil, maybe not -- but either way, she will not see him for years at a time (I'm not sure of the Tower's policy on visitors, but I didn't get the feeling that parents were welcome to stay). When (if?!) he grows up, he will be a prisoner in the Tower for the rest of his life.

On the other hand, if she hires the tutor and manages to teach Connor enough to control his magic and never use it, she will be able to continue raising him. He won't be taken away from her and when Eamon dies, Connor will become the Arl. Of course, if the tutor fails to teach him, things can go very wrong (essentially as they did in the game), but it's not guaranteed to be that way whereas if she does nothing, the outcome is awful no matter what.

Isolde took a gamble and lost; the extent to which it went badly is probably beyond her wildest imaginings. However, that doesn't mean the gamble isn't worth taking -- were I in her shoes (and obviously without the foreknowledge), I would have done exactly as she did.

[robertthebard]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

The tower is supposedly larger than you see it in-game from what I understand. You'll always run into some restrictions with the medium.
Did you see how tall the tower was?
4 floors? Yeah, right....

Who really cares?  You do realize that you have the same credibility as a walnut at this point, right?

[Xandurpein]

Althernai wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Stupidity yes. She let her fear run rampant. Loosing him? Yes, cause him being raised in a circle is such a horrifying prospect compared to what happened.

You just don't get it, do you? Try to think of it from a mother's point of view.

Come on. He has already written that he coludn't find anything the Templars in the mage orgin said was callous or cold hearted. He has decided that the templars are right, so they are infallible and anyone who disagrees are just idiots. He argues like this all the time. Anyone who disagrees with him must have exact proof or he"knows" they are wrong, but he can assume anything he wants without a shred of evidence. And then he has the gall to claim he is objective and anyone who disagrees with him is subjective.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Althernai wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Stupidity yes. She let her fear run rampant. Loosing him? Yes, cause him being raised in a circle is such a horrifying prospect compared to what happened.

You just don't get it, do you? Try to think of it from a mother's point of view.

If she does nothing, people will eventually figure out Connor is a mage and he will be sent to the Tower. Maybe he will survive it without being made a Tranquil, maybe not -- but either way, she will not see him for years at a time (I'm not sure of the Tower's policy on visitors, but I didn't get the feeling that parents were welcome to stay). When (if?!) he grows up, he will be a prisoner in the Tower for the rest of his life.

On the other hand, if she hires the tutor and manages to teach Connor enough to control his magic and never use it, she will be able to continue raising him. He won't be taken away from her and when Eamon dies, Connor will become the Arl. Of course, if the tutor fails to teach him, things can go very wrong (essentially as they did in the game), but it's not guaranteed to be that way whereas if she does nothing, the outcome is awful no matter what.

Isolde took a gamble and lost; the extent to which it went badly is probably beyond her wildest imaginings. However, that doesn't mean the gamble isn't worth taking -- were I in her shoes (and obviously without the foreknowledge), I would have done exactly as she did.

Of course that's from a mother's point of view (which is obviously not stupid).
If you take the perspective of a person living in Redcliff however, where his family is killed by Connor, you could also understand why such a person is going to side with the Templars and ensure that something as horrible as this won't happen again.
It's never black and white.

[Tirigon]

I see it quite simply like that:

Templars killing demons and Bloodmages for terrorizing innocents: Good thing, My bloodmage PC supports this and quite happily helps them doing so on the Occasions you can (Alienage orphanage or the Bloodmage in a house in Denerim, for example)

Templars killing demons and bloodmages simply for being demons and bloodmages, and all the "imprison mages" stuff in the tower: Bad. It´s a little like racism, just that it´s directed against people with different skills instead of against people with different skin color.

[beelzeybob]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

The tower is supposedly larger than you see it in-game from what I understand. You'll always run into some restrictions with the medium.
Did you see how tall the tower was?
4 floors? Yeah, right....

Did you see how high the ceiling of each floor was?

It's more than possible the tower is just 4 floors of high reaching rooms.

[Tirigon]

13eelzebub wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

The tower is supposedly larger than you see it in-game from what I understand. You'll always run into some restrictions with the medium.
Did you see how tall the tower was?
4 floors? Yeah, right....

Did you see how high the ceiling of each floor was?

It's more than possible the tower is just 4 floors of high reaching rooms.

Why does the height of the tower matter if the topic is "Why are templars seen as bad?"

[beelzeybob]

Because apparently there are strict rules that all topics have to be adhered to. Jesus... It's not that off topic. Templars live in the tower as well as mages?

Modifié par 13eelzebub, 17 janvier 2010 - 09:52 .

[Althernai]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Of course that's from a mother's point of view (which is obviously not stupid).
If you take the perspective of a person living in Redcliff however, where his family is killed by Connor, you could also understand why such a person is going to side with the Templars and ensure that something as horrible as this won't happen again.

A person in Redcliff might think that, but he'd be wrong: as long as the Chantry-Circle system is as it is in the game and as long as parents love their children, this will happen again and again and again. Not everyone has the resources to pull it off and some buy into the Chantry's propaganda (although that's a two-edged sword: Isolde is described as very devout and this was part of the reason she tried to hide that her son was a mage), but many will try to protect their children.

[RevengeofNewton]

Templars are seen as bad people because they are the military arm of a religion. How are they any different than jihadists or the inquisition?

[Realmzmaster]

Interesting discussion!

But basically the templars are seen as bad people because they are an arm of the Chantry. The Chantry is seen as being detrimental therefore guilt by association.

Whether the templars are evil or not is a moot point, since the Chantry is viewed as evil.

Individual templars can be either good or bad. The game makes a point that some templars are more fanatical in their duties than others.

Note that the PC can either help or try to destroy the Mage Collective depending to which Knight-Commander they speak.

Note that some control must be established. The control of mages can be either top down or bottom up. But the question is who establishes the controls: Is it society as a whole or only a select group of people?

If the society is magic fearing what type of controls do you think they would enact? It could be even more oppressive than the Circle, perhaps the Quanri system. Society may think that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Having a Circle with templars overseeing is the lesser of two evils.

If mages are allowed to police themselves that means they would need a RRS (rapid response system) in case one of their own decides to level a town, city etc. But this could lead to magical dogfights with spells being thrown left and right. We already know what damage AOE spells can do. Think of the collateral damage. It could be on a massive scale.

A solution would be a mage suppression unit not under Chantry control. The unit would have powers like the templars without the addiction and be under government control. Unfortuately that could lead to a whole set of abuses depending on government corruption. If a group of mages in my city will not submit to my evil will I send out the mage supression unit to eliminate the threat.

Human rights? In a medieval society the only right is the might at the edge of the sword. When the oppressed become more powerful than the oppressor then they can talk about human rights. Or the oppressed gives a compelling reason why they should not be oppressed.

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

[DanaScu]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

DanaScu wrote...
I also know how many abominations and demons were in the tower. Without reloading or or changing difficulty or cheats or mods or god-items, 4 non-templars killed them all. [I only wish a couple of my pcs were uber god-like; I still haven't managed to save all the villagers at Redcliffe. I would rather fight abominations than the undead at the village.]

That's because you're the player and you have to win. If Bio made that unwinnable you'd be cursing. The player is the Hero. So the challange always has to be such that he can overcome it, logic and realism be dammned.
Realisticly, a 4-man party should have been dead a billion times in half of the battles the player was involved.

Name anyone in the game who is actually competent by that criteria? Everyone apparently can't do anything in-game wihout the palyer.

As I said, your mileage may vary. People do have their own opinions, and opinions aren't usually easily changed. I don't like the templars and consider them at least marginally incompetent. Nothing in the game has really changed that. From how Jowan was handled [they knew why they were going to make him a Tranquil] to running a 14 year old runaway through and leaving him for dead, their performance of "templar" duties didn't exactly dazzle me.

If encounters are supposed to be so winnable for the hero, why does the militia keep keeling over right, left, and center in Redcliffe? I'm holding out hope that this "last one for a while" character will make it through without anyone other than Lloyd dying. I tend not to cuss at games; there is usually a way to get through something. But the templars are supposed to be all so "mage-killer powers" and uber and all and they didn't attempt anything more than using "templar plan B", as Alistair said. Oh well. Maybe its time to see whether templars can do anything against darkspawn emissaries....

[Antigone2283]

Lord Phoebus wrote...

One might also point out that if all the mages weren't concentrated in one location, then Uldred wouldn't have had any mages to turn into abominations. A good deal of the reason why things got so out of hand with Uldred is that the mages didn't have any room to run. One might also point out that there must be some serious cases of cabin fever in that tower and I can't imagine any of them being all that sane after spending their lives in an environment with no privacy or personal space under armed guard, with Tranquil walking around as a constant reminder to them of what will happen to them if they mess up. I'm pretty surprised they don't have mages wigging out and trying to kill everyone every couple of months, the suicide rate in that place must be phenomenal.

I was thinking about this, too.  By keeping the mages all in one area, they pretty much ensure that when anything does go bad EVERYone is exposed to it, and EVERYone, regardless of guilt or innocence, ends up facing the consequences.

When you ask Templar Bran (who is apparently neither cold nor callous) if there's any other way out of the Tower, he replies that one could always jump from the upper story windows, but that this never goes well.  Not "that wouldn't go well" but "it never goes well"...so apparently its been tried more than once. 

I really don't think it matters how big the Tower actually is....4 stories or 10, after 20+ years, it'd get a bit old.  Apprentices don't even have doors for the toilet and bathtub! 

[Laurelinde]

I have to admit, I wasn't particularly poorly-disposed towards the Templars when I first played through, as a human noble who wans't a fervent believer but generally followed the Chantry. I thought some of them seemed obnoxious and bullying - the templar by the boat to the Tower, for example - but I could understand that for your average citizen, mages and magic could be quite frightening, and letting people with such special powers have free reign to do whatever they pleased could lead to some bad stuff.



When I played through the mage origin though, you really get to see just how rubbish the Circle mages are treated. You're kept a prisoner in the tower your whole life; your blood, your life essence is preserved by the templars like a hostage, as a kind of blackmail against evildoing; you're restricted in who you can associate with, and you can't really marry or have children - if you do, they are taken away from you at birth whether you like it or not. On top of that, if you're suspected of blood magic by that bloodhound of a Greagoir, or if you're just not quite good enough as a mage, you get made Tranquil, which really is almost a fate worse than death (unless you're a really fervent Stoic, or possibly Vulcan.) Wynne is surprisingly well-balanced, considering.



As with most things in life, it really does depend on your point of view.

[RangerSG]

1) I think many people see the Templars as "Inquisitors" and take their RL view of the one into the game.



2) Both Irving and Wynne say the Templars perform a necessary function. That should tell you that they are not entirely evil.



3) Before judging the Templars, one should understand that 'they' in turn are held on a tight leash by the Chantry.



4) If you talk to Irving about the Tranquil, he will make clear he's not opposed to the rite. Nor is he opposed to the phylacteries either. Now you may decide that's because Irving is a stooge, but the simple fact is, he does not believe that the Tower 'should' police itself without the Templars or the tools they have.



Please note, that my mage Caranar (to left) 'did' choose to 'free' the Circle from Chantry supervision in the end. But most of the Circle believes that the Chantry's oversight is a good thing. I think they'd say that it is excessively restrictive, and thus has caused tensions to boil over at times. But the idea that somehow the isolationists or libertarians should have their way? Not a popular assumption in the Circle. So the Templars are hardly 'evil.'



Look how Greagoir responds when he sees Irving again at the end. He's genuinely relieved he doesn't have to conduct the Rite of Annulment, and sides against his own to preserve the Tower. So like any organization, there's good and bad. And Greagoir isn't all 'bad' by any stretch.

[I Valente I]

RangerSG wrote...


3) Before judging the Templars, one should understand that 'they' in turn are held on a tight leash by the Chantry.

This is a very good point.

You know, I would say that Templars were displayed overall positively in the game. I mean, there were plenty of Templars that were "nice". Gregoar, Cullen, the blind templar in the Alienage (Otto?), Ser Bryant and even the helmeted Templars in most of the cities were agreeable. You only ever hear of the horrible fanatics in characters' stories (like Wynne's) or in their own lore. Even during the Mage's Tower the Templars didn't seem that horrible. It's not to say that they are not horrible, just commented on the way they were portrayed in the actual game.

[draxynnus]

Regarding the Templars... I'm inclined to say that they're simply people. Some are horrible, some genuinely want to do the best for people.



As a group, I'd say that they do perform a valuable role - but that they probably shouldn't have the power over the mages that they do - a Templar shouldn't be able to overrule the First Enchanter when it comes to internal affairs (such as deciding if a particular apprentice should be made Tranquil without being given the opportunity to attempt the Harrowing). However, they can certainly act as partners to the Circle in dealing with maleficarum, and as an additional safeguard in case something causes the entire (or majority) of the Circle to go bad. (While Uldred is a product of the existing system, we don't know that a different system wouldn't still produce the occasional individual willing to summon demons in order to attempt to seize control.) For general mages policing mages, however - while I advocate Templars assisting the Circle in policing its ranks, if the spell mechanics stay as they are I would assume a mage-hunting mage would be looking to grab Mana Clash as soon as possible, and most battles would be over quite quickly with no collateral damage among the non-mage population.



Regarding the argument that the Templars should have cleared the tower themselves - I don't recall their exact numbers, but I do recall that most of them were white rather than yellow or orange. Given the number of white enemies I've mown through, I'm reasonably confident that a handful of white Templars couldn't have reproduced my feat. Realistically speaking, I expect they would have fallen to the sloth demon if not before.



Also, regarding freeing Abominations - I think there may be different degrees of abomination. The desire demon was only riding Conner lightly and hadn't gained full control, so her control can be broken. At the point where the demon goes beyond simple posessing and starts causing major physical changes to the body, however, I suspect that's a point of no return - even if the demon can be expelled, the host's body and spirit may well have been irrevocably damaged beyond the point of being able to sustain life without the demon's power.

[IronCladNinja]

 I got a morality police vibe off of them. They're ultra cool though.

[legbamel]

That is a good point. If the mages weren't all in the same place, under constant surveillance and having no privacy (have you SEEN their rooms?), they would not have had the same motivations.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Althernai wrote...
You just don't get it, do you? Try to think of it from a mother's point of view.

If she does nothing, people will eventually figure out Connor is a mage and he will be sent to the Tower. Maybe he will survive it without being made a Tranquil, maybe not -- but either way, she will not see him for years at a time (I'm not sure of the Tower's policy on visitors, but I didn't get the feeling that parents were welcome to stay). When (if?!) he grows up, he will be a prisoner in the Tower for the rest of his life.

On the other hand, if she hires the tutor and manages to teach Connor enough to control his magic and never use it, she will be able to continue raising him. He won't be taken away from her and when Eamon dies, Connor will become the Arl. Of course, if the tutor fails to teach him, things can go very wrong (essentially as they did in the game), but it's not guaranteed to be that way whereas if she does nothing, the outcome is awful no matter what.

Isolde took a gamble and lost; the extent to which it went badly is probably beyond her wildest imaginings. However, that doesn't mean the gamble isn't worth taking -- were I in her shoes (and obviously without the foreknowledge), I would have done exactly as she did.

Isolde was gambling with other peoples lives. Let's comapre the best and worst outcomes, shall we?

CONNOR IN THE CIRLCE:
best - Connor becomes a respected mage (and mages can even be advisors of kings)
worst - Connor fails his Harrowing and gets killed

CONNOR ASPOSTATE:
best - Connor inherits his dads title and lands
worst - Connor gets possesed and destroyes the whole village, Connor himself lsot in the process

So yeah. Given that in both worst cases you end up with Connor dead, only with the apostate one teh whole vilalge ends up dead...including the children in the village.

Definately a terrible choice to make. Personally I'd go for the Circel. I'd be devastated, but my child can still have a productive life. But for Isolde, the title and nobiltiy was too important.

robertthebard wrote...
Who really cares?  You do realize that you have the same credibility as a walnut at this point, right?

Still more than you ever hadin your entire life.

Tirigon wrote...
Why does the height of the tower matter if the topic is "Why are templars seen as bad?"

Media limitation. The size of the tower in-game is smaller than it is - look at the model of the tower seen from the outside. It's HUMONGOUS. the size of hte tower is important to asses the number of mages, the living conditions and hte difficulty of actually clearing the tower.

Tirigon wrote...
Templars killing demons and bloodmages
simply for being demons and bloodmages, and all the "imprison mages"
stuff in the tower: Bad. It´s a little like racism, just that it´s
directed against people with different skills instead of against people
with different skin color.

If mages existed in the real world, they would be treated pretty much the same.
You know why? Imagine if some people are born with a flame thrower grafted to their head, and can explode like a A-bomb if the loose control.
Would you ever feel safe if such people were to roam the streets unckecked? Would you even take walks with you children knowing that a person like that is in the park?

Nobody is saying that the resctrictions upon the mages are "good". But they are necessary.

RevengeofNewton wrote...

Templars are seen as bad people
because they are the military arm of a religion. How are they any
different than jihadists or the inquisition?

They protect the world from a very real, very physical danger?
I mean, what word is troubling you here? Military or religion?

[Lotion Soronarr]

Someone mentioned the Circle policing themselves. Possible, but very risky. Why?



Because the control is out of your hands and the temptation is great. Remember the Tevinter Imperium? Mages already tried to conquer everything. You cannot really trust them to police themselves.

But whom can you trust? And herein lies the problem.

Would a mage monitoring unit lead by the king be any more fair or better than the Chantry led one?

How about led by a local Bann? Outsoruce it maybe?



See, no matter whom you choose to hold the reigns, there will always be objections.



Also, another interesting tidbit to note is, that without the templars and the Circle, most mages would never live to adulthood.

[Xandurpein]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Althernai wrote...
You just don't get it, do you? Try to think of it from a mother's point of view.

Definately a terrible choice to make. Personally I'd go for the Circel. I'd be devastated, but my child can still have a productive life. But for Isolde, the title and nobiltiy was too important.

You really don't get it all do you? You only think about outcomes in terms of land and title and ascribe that to Isolde. It's not about title and nobility. I don't know if you cannot even account of a mother's love or just try to ascribe her reasons to make her look bad on purpose. The fact that she is afraid she will be separated from the child she loves doesn't even figure in your equation.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Tirigon wrote...
Templars killing demons and bloodmages
simply for being demons and bloodmages, and all the "imprison mages"
stuff in the tower: Bad. It´s a little like racism, just that it´s
directed against people with different skills instead of against people
with different skin color.

If mages existed in the real world, they would be treated pretty much the same.
You know why? Imagine if some people are born with a flame thrower grafted to their head, and can explode like a A-bomb if the loose control.
Would you ever feel safe if such people were to roam the streets unckecked? Would you even take walks with you children knowing that a person like that is in the park?

Nobody is saying that the resctrictions upon the mages are "good". But they are necessary.

Restrictions are necessary, and given the relativly primitive medieval society Ferelden is, it's understandable it becomes something like the circle. There is still ways to limit mages, that are more humane. There is also the question of the chantry's control of the Templars. That seems unnecessarily inhumane to me, not to mention the fact that enforced control like how the Chantry controls templars with drug addiction in itself would make Templars more prone to abuse themselves. Bullies are most often abused kids themselves.

Modifié par Xandurpein, 18 janvier 2010 - 09:27 .

[wwwwowwww]

Organized religions, wether in a fantasy setting or in real life seem to have one constant. Controlling people via fear of the unknown.

Magic is still something only demonstrated by the few, and for the most part the chantry acts quickly to contain it via the use of the Templars. They brainwash young men, to believe what they Chantry tells them to believe and sends them out to do their bidding.

None of this is any different than the century long battles about religious beliefs that have been going on in our own world.

Are Templars bad people, not inherently no, that explains the acts of kindness they can demonstrate, but they are zeolots in that if you cross their beliefs (ie: practice magic) they are going to come down hard on you and try to control you with an iron fist. After all it's what they were brainwashed to believe was the way you handled such matters. As with any religion you have those that can sympathize and you have your extremists.

[Sabriana]

As far as the player not seeing many 'cold, callous, etc.' templars goes that might be right. But listening to the mages and other people, they don't come off as a particularly caring lot.

My mage wishes she could have kicked that door-man templar in the shin, when told she could try jumping out of a window. The guard at Ostagar tells my PC that the mages are bunched up over yonder with a group of templars 'glaring' at them.

Wynne's pupil, the 14 year old elf must've really loved them.

Alistair really tells some very interesting stories about the templars and the chantry, none of them are good.

It is also pointed out in-game that Irving didn't oppose Uldred's plan to support Loghain for more freedom and self-governing. It seems, from his journal (Irving's Mistake) found in his study, that he was actually quite supportive of Uldred until Wynne showed up.

The addiction can also lead to dangerous activities. Addicts will always follow their suppliers, and are puppets in their hands. I really would like to know what the two non-chantry groups have in mind with the lyrium they get through smuggling. I'm referring to the Dust Town quest, and one of the Mage Collective quests.

The chantry does a lot of wrong and evil things, all covered under religious disguise. Worst of all is the drug addiction that is forced on the templars. I practically cringed when my PC talked to the addled templar in front of Denerim's chantry.

Addicts lose a lot through being addicted. Free will is one of them. They can be as nice as Mother Theresa, but if it means losing their needed supply of drugs, they'll turn on anyone, out of necessity. Addicts are also very susceptible to internalizing the ideas and ideals of the one who holds the leash (lyrium in their cases).

All in all, a dangerous situation. Aside from that, it seems that templars are as (or more) easily to possess as are the mages. True, they won't turn into abominations, but honestly, my PC and her group rather not run into 4 or 5 (I don't remember the actual number) fully trained killing machines, with excellent sword and shield abilities, led by a demon.

The Chantry, in its bid to keep and/or gain more power, has turned into something worse than the Circle of Magi could ever be.

A standing army, fully trained and drug-addled, doing whatever they are told without question and commanded by religious zealots. Yeah, makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.

As far as Isolde goes, yes, I blame her for what happened, but I can't fault her reasoning. I would do anything to keep my children safe. Anything!