17 réponses à ce sujet

[Senya]

Alright, I have noticed that there are three hypothetical choices that are tossed around in the forums:

1. Brokering a peace and new way in which Magic is regulated, usually with the Templars and Mages making peace and learning to work together.

2. Stricter Templar rule/return to the status quo. The Circles are reestablish, possibly with many Mages killed or tranquilized.

3. Complete dissolution of non-Mage oversight over Mages with the forced abolution of the Templars/Chantry (depending on who you ask). Presumably, the Inquisition enforces this and executes/imprisons many Templars and possibly priests as well. Mages watch over themselves.

The first option seems to be what the Inquisition's purpose is: to save the world from itself and stem the chaos while forming a new system to replace/correct the old. The consequence for this is, of course, trying to balance personal freedom with people's safety. But the last two seem to go against this purpose by overtly favoring one side or the other. I thin there should be consequences as well, perhaps bigger ones for going against your duty.

If Templar rule is chosen, I think there should be rebellion with mage sympathizers and those haboring them. The Templars and Inquisition tries to snuff these out, but they still remain. If the third option is chosen, I think there should be resentment among the common populace. They will see the Inquisition and the new Mage organization as another Tevinter. Templar remnants and common people rebel and the Inquisition Mages are forced to put these down, adding fuel to the fire.

This is what I see realistically happening. If one side is supported at the expense of the duty of finding a more just balance, then the problem isn't solved. It is merely pushed under the rug for a time. But that's personal opinion.

Edit: Of course, the middle ground isn't without its consequences. Extremists on both sides will try to upset it and it takes the full force of the Inquisition to keep the peace.

Modifié par almostinsane99, 16 mai 2013 - 03:18 .

[Chiramu]

Where's the "bias" in the OP?

[Plaintiff]

What you mean is "There should be consequences for making a choice that I personally disagree with".

[Senya]

I think that the purpose is to find a solution to the chaos. Favoring any one side is realistically going to have negative consequences. Is killing every mage and enforcing even stricter regulations on Mages going to solve things?

[Senya]

Hmm... Perhaps. The way I've read the summary and the information, it's about finding a solution to the chaos. A balanced approach seems to be the duty of the Inquisition as it does not elevate one group to dictate the direction of the world. Slaughtering your way to Mage freedom, will not lead it to being sustainable unless you're willing to keep slaughtering for it.

And, the same goes for giving the Templars full authority to govern magic.

Modifié par almostinsane99, 16 mai 2013 - 03:17 .

[FINE HERE]

almostinsane99 wrote...

I think that the purpose is to find a solution to the chaos. Favoring any one side is realistically going to have negative consequences. Is killing every mage and enforcing even stricter regulations on Mages going to solve things?

The middle ground should still face the consequences from the extremists from either the Mage or the Templar side that don't want to make everything and everyone 'equal.'  Also, please stop asking for the game to be more linear. Everyone should be able to make their own choices(within the limits of the game, of course.) Don't ask for one way to be easier than all the others.

[Senya]

True. I should add that there.

[NoForgiveness]

Plaintiff wrote...

What you mean is "There should be consequences for making a choice that I personally disagree with".

seconded.

[Plaintiff]

I don't anticipate that we'll get a choice in how the mage/templar war turns out, anyway. Bioware is looking to create more Dragon Age games after this one, and wildly differing world-states are not conducive to that goal.

I don't know what will happen, but I doubt it will be a return to the "status quo".

[UnderlAlDyingSun]

For all practical purposes your choices and their consequences will never be that meaningful.

Honestly this is one aspect of BW's games now I'm just kind of meh about ( especially after Mass Effecft ), I just care that I'm emotionally involved in what's going on.

[Senya]

Hm, true. It seems that no matter what happens, Mages will be outside the Circle for future games' purposes and there will probably be or not be conflict according to the plot of Dragon Age 4.

[ArcaneJTM]

Plaintiff wrote...

I don't anticipate that we'll get a choice in how the mage/templar war turns out, anyway. Bioware is looking to create more Dragon Age games after this one, and wildly differing world-states are not conducive to that goal.

I don't know what will happen, but I doubt it will be a return to the "status quo".

Not necessarily.  They could, for example, have the next game take place in Tevinter.  Or perhaps have it take place at some period in time where the outcome of the war is esentially meaningless to the current world state.

[NoForgiveness]

ArcaneJTM wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

I don't anticipate that we'll get a choice in how the mage/templar war turns out, anyway. Bioware is looking to create more Dragon Age games after this one, and wildly differing world-states are not conducive to that goal.

I don't know what will happen, but I doubt it will be a return to the "status quo".

Not necessarily.  They could, for example, have the next game take place in Tevinter.  Or perhaps have it take place at some period in time where the outcome of the war is esentially meaningless to the current world state.

I doubt that could happen within the dragon age.

[Plaintiff]

ArcaneJTM wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

I don't anticipate that we'll get a choice in how the mage/templar war turns out, anyway. Bioware is looking to create more Dragon Age games after this one, and wildly differing world-states are not conducive to that goal.

I don't know what will happen, but I doubt it will be a return to the "status quo".

Not necessarily.  They could, for example, have the next game take place in Tevinter.  Or perhaps have it take place at some period in time where the outcome of the war is esentially meaningless to the current world state.

They could, but it wouldn't be the Dragon Age anymore. It's already close to half-over as it is.

[ArcaneJTM]

It's just an example. They could just as easily make it so there's a faction or a companion that you can't interact with depending on the outcome of the war.

Although come to think of it, no matter who wins, mages will still be feared and templars would still be self-righteous jerks.  So practically speaking unless each and every one of the losing side was captured and executed, it makes little difference who wins as far as common folk are concerned.

Modifié par ArcaneJTM, 16 mai 2013 - 04:10 .