4643 réponses à ce sujet

[dragonflight288]

LOLandStuff wrote...

If she really wanted to help, she should've remained neutral and searched for a solution instead of joining a mage rebellion. That's why I see her as a bad example of a good templar.

I think she kind of was forced into it during Lambert's attack when she felt his attack was unjustified and planned, and went about her duty protecting innocent mages from slaughter. Something she is supposed to do as a templar in the first place.

And if she did stay neutral, Lambert could easily have had her executed anyway for not supporting him. He does have authority over templars after all as the Lord High Seeker.

[dragonflight288]

eluvianix wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

Lord Raijin wrote...

LOLandStuff wrote...
So how does Uldred being a Libertarian excuse him from trying to put demons into people and trying to kill you? Oh wait, right...Templars and Chantry opression. Nor the Chantry or the Templars intervened between the mages. You can't even accept that there are bad mages and keep coming up with the dumbest excuses.
Besides, if you trust a man who let his king die because of paranoia then you're a moron and deserve what you get.

People do things that are completely abnormal when it comes to desperation, even entrusting of someone that gives them false hope and security. I've tried so hard to be pro-Templar and pro-chantry, but I notice that with each gameplay from both games: DAO and DA2 I see and hear things that I didn't even heard of from my previous games. Yes no matter how you view things the Chantries oppression is a large part of the problem at why mages fight back with any available skill that they know of. Call it excuses all you like but if you were in the same position as the mages I would be certain you would join the same bandwagon as the rest of the mages.

You keep using that word oppression, but then only cite fanatics as people who actually claim it? Do you have anyone that is not you or fanatic that acutally screams about oppression? And the appearance of said fanatics from laws does not excuse their actions. Have you noticed that such people spring up even in this country? Are they excused from the mass killings that they do, simply becasue of "oppression?" 

Mages can be raped without any consequences to the raper, they can be beaten for simply talking to civilians, they are denied the right to leave or visit families, their children are taken from their arms almost immediately after the birth of said childrn, and are called weapons and cannot be treated as people.

....I call that oppression. Alongside mental and emotional abuse.

We have only really been exposed to 3 out of 15 Circles in the Andrastian Chantry (4 if you include the Starkhaven lot), but I am hesitant to call this behavior (the bolded) common. While it certainly has happened in the Circles we have seen, all other information that we have been given is secondhand, by word of mouth. I do not think we have enough info to really say that it is commonplace in each of the Circles, not to discount what we have seen though.

True.

I do know that the devs called Ferelden one of the most liberal circles, I think Rivain was the MOST liberal. I know Fiona preferred being a sex slave in Orlais than being in the circle she was from.

It just feels like Kirkwall was closer to the norm than Ferelden, minus the templars being so involved in politics in the area.

[dragonflight288]

LOLandStuff wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...


Mages can be raped without any consequences to the raper, they can be beaten for simply talking to civilians, they are denied the right to leave or visit families, their children are taken from their arms almost immediately after the birth of said childrn, and are called weapons and cannot be treated as people.

....I call that oppression. Alongside mental and emotional abuse.

So does that mean the types of Uldred, Anders and who else there is get a free pass for their actions?

Heck no. Just because I focus on templars abuses doesn't mean I give mages a free pass either. I almost always kill Anders, and I relished killing Uldred.

Actually, I think I only let Anders live once in one of my playthroughs, and it was in the one where I was supporting the templars, so he had to help with the Annulment he provoked.

[MisterJB]

dragonflight288 wrote...
I think she kind of was forced into it during Lambert's attack when she felt his attack was unjustified and planned, and went about her duty protecting innocent mages from slaughter. Something she is supposed to do as a templar in the first place.

Not if it's done at the expense of everyone else. Evangeline helped start a war that will lead to the slaugther of many innocents and she should hang.

[Xilizhra]

eluvianix wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

LOLandStuff wrote...

Evangeline is a "good templar" only because she fell in love with Rhys and joined the mage rebellion.

Keran as well.

Ser Otto as well. And Ser Thrask.

Otto is inconclusive, as we haven't seen his conduct with imprisoned mages.

Not if it's done at the expense of everyone else. Evangeline helped
start a war that will lead to the slaugther of many innocents and she
should hang.

Except that it was the templars who attacked, and Evangeline wasn't involved with any of the provocations.

I also suspect that Evangeline will be unkillable in DAI.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 06 novembre 2013 - 03:50 .

[Hellion Rex]

MisterJB wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...
I think she kind of was forced into it during Lambert's attack when she felt his attack was unjustified and planned, and went about her duty protecting innocent mages from slaughter. Something she is supposed to do as a templar in the first place.

Not if it's done at the expense of everyone else. Evangeline helped start a war that will lead to the slaugther of many innocents and she should hang.

Hardly. She should not hang for doing the right thing and not killing the mages when they discovered a way out of Tranquility.

[LOLandStuff]

Fiona just wants to feel miserable no matter what.

[MisterJB]

eluvianix wrote...
Hardly. She should not hang for doing the right thing and not killing the mages when they discovered a way out of Tranquility.

Not killing Wynne&Co then and there was a reprehensible decision but it could be forgiven. Killing her own comrades in an attempt to free the leaders of a faction willing to start a war in order to achieve their goals thus ensuring the war would happen is a betrayal of every vow she ever took as well as of her own people and she should hang for it.
Would you tell the families of those who will die in this war that Evangeline made the right decision?

Modifié par MisterJB, 06 novembre 2013 - 03:59 .

[Xilizhra]

MisterJB wrote...

eluvianix wrote...
Hardly. She should not hang for doing the right thing and not killing the mages when they discovered a way out of Tranquility.

Not killing Wynne&Co then and there was a reprehensible decision but it could be forgiven. Killing her own comrades in an attempt to free the leaders of a faction willing to start a war in order to achieve their goals thus ensuring the war would happen is a betrayal of every vow she ever took as well as of her own people and she should hang for it.
Would you tell the families of those who will die in this war that Evangeline made the right decision?

I would tell them that Lambert made the wrong one. As did you, and every other templar who betrayed even the Chantry.

[ianvillan]

MisterJB wrote...

Honestly, I can accept that the Circle plays a role in creating blood mages and Abominations. No, I don't think mages are being opressed but people will be unhappy about anything so, yes, there will be mages who overglorify life on the rest of Thedas (hint:mages actually live better than most of Thedas) and use violence because of their shortsigthedness.

But it's completely bullsh*t to claim that without Circles or Templars things would be much better. People are selfish, people are greedy, people abuse power and mages have a lot of it. The most obvious example of that is Tevinter but I can also point to Connor and Quention who allowed misfortunes to turn them into monsters.

Bottom line; if my choice is between having closed doors and steels bars preventing mages from commiting immoral actions or trusting on each and every mage's consciousness to prevent each and every mage from commiting said actions, I'll pick the closed doors and steels bars each and every time.

You said it yourself people abuse power especially if they have a lot of it, The Templars have absolute power over mages and with that absolute power they will abuse the people they are supposed to protect. 

If my choice is between having closed doors which gives the Templars the rights and moral decree to commit immoral actions against mages or an open system where the Templars are not in the position to be encouraged to be immoral I would choose the open system.

[dragonflight288]

ianvillan wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

Honestly, I can accept that the Circle plays a role in creating blood mages and Abominations. No, I don't think mages are being opressed but people will be unhappy about anything so, yes, there will be mages who overglorify life on the rest of Thedas (hint:mages actually live better than most of Thedas) and use violence because of their shortsigthedness.

But it's completely bullsh*t to claim that without Circles or Templars things would be much better. People are selfish, people are greedy, people abuse power and mages have a lot of it. The most obvious example of that is Tevinter but I can also point to Connor and Quention who allowed misfortunes to turn them into monsters.

Bottom line; if my choice is between having closed doors and steels bars preventing mages from commiting immoral actions or trusting on each and every mage's consciousness to prevent each and every mage from commiting said actions, I'll pick the closed doors and steels bars each and every time.

You said it yourself people abuse power especially if they have a lot of it, The Templars have absolute power over mages and with that absolute power they will abuse the people they are supposed to protect. 

If my choice is between having closed doors which gives the Templars the rights and moral decree to commit immoral actions against mages or an open system where the Templars are not in the position to be encouraged to be immoral I would choose the open system.

This.

[ianvillan]

MisterJB wrote...

eluvianix wrote...
Hardly. She should not hang for doing the right thing and not killing the mages when they discovered a way out of Tranquility.

Not killing Wynne&Co then and there was a reprehensible decision but it could be forgiven. Killing her own comrades in an attempt to free the leaders of a faction willing to start a war in order to achieve their goals thus ensuring the war would happen is a betrayal of every vow she ever took as well as of her own people and she should hang for it.
Would you tell the families of those who will die in this war that Evangeline made the right decision?

You seem to never value the vow of Templars to protect mages, something Lambert forgot. The Divine was willing to grant the Mages a chance to discuss change, but Lambert fearing loosing his absolute power over mages broke his vows to protect mages (if he even followed them in the first place).

Evangeline should be one of the Templars you could point to mages for a proper Templar yet the Templar that acts like one and upholds her vows is the one you find reprehensible more so than Alrik. 

[The Flying Grey Warden]

MisterJB wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...
I think she kind of was forced into it during Lambert's attack when she felt his attack was unjustified and planned, and went about her duty protecting innocent mages from slaughter. Something she is supposed to do as a templar in the first place.

Not if it's done at the expense of everyone else. Evangeline helped start a war that will lead to the slaugther of many innocents and she should hang.

That's kinda like saying if poland stood up to germany during the start up to world war 2 instead of helping them, that they helped to start world war 2, and not germany going around it's borders invading countries and making them part of their new empire.

It sounds really, really, really bad.

[MisterJB]

ianvillan wrote...
You said it yourself people abuse power especially if they have a lot of it,

Yes.

The Templars have absolute power over mages

 No, mages have many respects that must be respected. It may occur that a templar will violate these rigths but there are examples of assaults and they don't change the fact that these rigths exists which means templars don't have absolute power over mages.
An example of a society where a class has absolute power over others would be Tevinter where mages hold absolute power over their non-mages slaves.

and with that absolute power they will abuse the people they are supposed to protect.

Abuses have happened but not because templars have absolute power. They don't.

If my choice is between having closed doors which gives the Templars the rights and moral decree to commit immoral actions against mages or an open system where the Templars are not in the position to be encouraged to be immoral I would choose the open system.

An understanble position if one is more concerned with the well being of the mages than that of the normal population.

[The Flying Grey Warden]

MisterJB wrote...

eluvianix wrote...
Hardly. She should not hang for doing the right thing and not killing the mages when they discovered a way out of Tranquility.

Not killing Wynne&Co then and there was a reprehensible decision but it could be forgiven. Killing her own comrades in an attempt to free the leaders of a faction willing to start a war in order to achieve their goals thus ensuring the war would happen is a betrayal of every vow she ever took as well as of her own people and she should hang for it.
Would you tell the families of those who will die in this war that Evangeline made the right decision?

Ahh, well there's your problem. Her vows are ****, because they command you to obey a person whose fallen into the depths of their own paranoia and there is 0 ability to recourse their actions legitimately anymore.

[The Flying Grey Warden]

MisterJB wrote...

ianvillan wrote...
You said it yourself people abuse power especially if they have a lot of it,

Yes.

The Templars have absolute power over mages

 No, mages have many respects that must be respected. It may occur that a templar will violate these rigths but there are examples of assaults and they don't change the fact that these rigths exists which means templars don't have absolute power over mages.
An example of a society where a class has absolute power over others would be Tevinter where mages hold absolute power over their non-mages slaves.

and with that absolute power they will abuse the people they are supposed to protect.

Abuses have happened but not because templars have absolute power. They don't.

If my choice is between having closed doors which gives the Templars the rights and moral decree to commit immoral actions against mages or an open system where the Templars are not in the position to be encouraged to be immoral I would choose the open system.

An understanble position if one is more concerned with the well being of the mages than that of the normal population.

Templars in the game world do actually have absolute power, even if it isn't written down on paper. Considering they are in charge of policing themselves, that they can keep the seekers from investigating them(otherwise how did kirkwall happen, unless the seekers have been comprosied by the templars as well.), and can override all decisions made by the first enchanter, I would say they're like a police force without an internal affairs.

And just becasue people have rights, doesn't mean that actually protects them. Rights aren't some magical force that compells people to not hurt them, it requires legal punitive action in order to be worth anything. And when the same people abusing you are the same folks who control who gets what punitive action, you're basically ****ed 4 ways to sunday.

[MisterJB]

The Flying Grey Warden wrote...
Ahh, well there's your problem. Her vows are ****, because they command you to obey a person whose fallen into the depths of their own paranoia and there is 0 ability to recourse their actions legitimately anymore.

Even if Lambert made a mistake in storming the conclave, all that would result in; had no one interfered; would be a dozen deaths at the very most. By aiding the mages, Evangeline will contribute to the death of thousands due to the ensuing conflict. I suspect a Templar's vows place greater importance in the good of the many since that is the very basis of the Circle system.

Also, there were ways of legimitimately impugning Lambert's actions such as appealing to the supreme authority in the Chantry, the Divine. But, of course, the Divine also thought the best solution was to "Mission Impossible" the situation.
It might not have worked but that doesn't mean the option wasn't there.

[Hellion Rex]

MisterJB wrote...

The Flying Grey Warden wrote...
Ahh, well there's your problem. Her vows are ****, because they command you to obey a person whose fallen into the depths of their own paranoia and there is 0 ability to recourse their actions legitimately anymore.

Even if Lambert made a mistake in storming the conclave, all that would result in; had no one interfered; would be a dozen deaths at the very most. By aiding the mages, Evangeline will contribute to the death of thousands due to the ensuing conflict. I suspect a Templar's vows place greater importance in the good of the many since that is the very basis of the Circle system.

Also, there were ways of legimitimately impugning Lambert's actions such as appealing to the supreme authority in the Chantry, the Divine. But, of course, the Divine also thought the best solution was to "Mission Impossible" the situation.
It might not have worked but that doesn't mean the option wasn't there.

Technically Lambert falls under the Divine on the hierarchy, so there was no issue of going to the proper authority. They had every right to appeal to the Divine.

[Xilizhra]

Even if Lambert made a mistake in storming the conclave, all that would result in; had no one interfered; would be a dozen deaths at the very most. By aiding the mages, Evangeline will contribute to the death of thousands due to the ensuing conflict. I suspect a Templar's vows place greater importance in the good of the many since that is the very basis of the Circle system.

Thousands have already died, and thousands more will die under the templars' reign unless this ends now... in addition to the fact that it was the templars who declared war and not the mages in the first place.

Technically Lambert falls under the Divine on the hierarchy, so there
was no issue of going to the proper authority. They had every right to
appeal to the Divine.

Problematically, the Divine was useless until the situation had already fallen apart, at which point she kindasorta came through.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 06 novembre 2013 - 04:30 .

[Hellion Rex]

Xilizhra wrote...

Even if Lambert made a mistake in storming the conclave, all that would result in; had no one interfered; would be a dozen deaths at the very most. By aiding the mages, Evangeline will contribute to the death of thousands due to the ensuing conflict. I suspect a Templar's vows place greater importance in the good of the many since that is the very basis of the Circle system.

Thousands have already died, and thousands more will die under the templars' reign unless this ends now... in addition to the fact that it was the templars who declared war and not the mages in the first place.

Technically Lambert falls under the Divine on the hierarchy, so there
was no issue of going to the proper authority. They had every right to
appeal to the Divine.

Problematically, the Divine was useless until the situation had already fallen apart, at which point she kindasorta came through.

You can hardly complain though. Better late than never. She seriously helped out the mages escape from the White Spire, despite how useless she was before then.

[The Flying Grey Warden]

MisterJB wrote...

The Flying Grey Warden wrote...
Ahh, well there's your problem. Her vows are ****, because they command you to obey a person whose fallen into the depths of their own paranoia and there is 0 ability to recourse their actions legitimately anymore.

Even if Lambert made a mistake in storming the conclave, all that would result in; had no one interfered; would be a dozen deaths at the very most. By aiding the mages, Evangeline will contribute to the death of thousands due to the ensuing conflict. I suspect a Templar's vows place greater importance in the good of the many since that is the very basis of the Circle system.

Also, there were ways of legimitimately impugning Lambert's actions such as appealing to the supreme authority in the Chantry, the Divine. But, of course, the Divine also thought the best solution was to "Mission Impossible" the situation.
It might not have worked but that doesn't mean the option wasn't there.

I don't see what the good of the many benefit from lamberts actions in sparking more rebelleous thoughts, more sympathy for the libertarians, more proof that the system doesn't work and is actively against them, and basically more bad examples of templars over-stepping their bounds in an already tense system. How many blood mages would have come about thanks to lamberts stunt across thedas, as faternities find out he just killed every one of their leaders and fear what will happen to them? How many abominations will be made as people freak out and, in their own paranoia, end up making mistakes the same way lambert and uldred did, that cost hundreds their lives.

Lambert basically created his own delayed version of hellish armageddon when he stormed the meeting. It was going to become a war, and one the templars had no control or advantage over. If you're looking for someone to blame, blame lambert and his direct hand in basically ****ing over thedas no matter what he did next.

And before you go on abotu how lambert would have been punished for going in, detaining, and killing those mages. He is the man who willingly defied the divines orders, and saw no reprocussions from it. I think it's clear lambert is basically a text-book military coup waiting to happen, since he controls the systems the divine and seekers needs in order to do their jobs effectively.

Modifié par The Flying Grey Warden, 06 novembre 2013 - 04:33 .

[Xilizhra]

eluvianix wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Even if Lambert made a mistake in storming the conclave, all that would result in; had no one interfered; would be a dozen deaths at the very most. By aiding the mages, Evangeline will contribute to the death of thousands due to the ensuing conflict. I suspect a Templar's vows place greater importance in the good of the many since that is the very basis of the Circle system.

Thousands have already died, and thousands more will die under the templars' reign unless this ends now... in addition to the fact that it was the templars who declared war and not the mages in the first place.

Technically Lambert falls under the Divine on the hierarchy, so there
was no issue of going to the proper authority. They had every right to
appeal to the Divine.

Problematically, the Divine was useless until the situation had already fallen apart, at which point she kindasorta came through.

You can hardly complain though. Better late than never. She seriously helped out the mages escape from the White Spire, despite how useless she was before then.

I suppose. She's a hopeful sign in that the neutral position is still pro-mage overall.

[MisterJB]

The Flying Grey Warden wrote...
Templars in the game world do actually have absolute power, even if it isn't written down on paper. Considering they are in charge of policing themselves, that they can keep the seekers from investigating them(otherwise how did kirkwall happen, unless the seekers have been comprosied by the templars as well.), and can override all decisions made by the first enchanter, I would say they're like a police force without an internal affairs.

And just becasue people have rights, doesn't mean that actually protects them. Rights aren't some magical force that compells people to not hurt them, it requires legal punitive action in order to be worth anything. And when the same people abusing you are the same folks who control who gets what punitive action, you're basically ****ed 4 ways to sunday.

I actually agree with the second paragraph of your post but the existance of rights mean that, by its very definition, the templars don't hold absolute power. You can, on the other hand, say that there is an issue regarding templar accountability that needs to be worked upon and I will agree with you.

Regarding the first paragraph, Templars are, most definitively, policed by the Seekers which can be seen in "Dawn of the Seeker" but it could be that the Seekers don't actually bother to interfere when it comes to minor transgressions.
Also, there is nothing that indicates the Knight Commander can override decisions made by the First Enchanter. If anything, a great many decisions made by the KC require the approval of the FC like, for instance, whether to pursue an Apostate or Tranquilise a Circle mage.

[MisterJB]

The Flying Grey Warden wrote...
I don't see what the good of the many benefit from lamberts actions in sparking more rebelleous thoughts, more sympathy for the libertarians, more proof that the system doesn't work and is actively against them, and basically more bad examples of templars over-stepping their bounds in an already tense system. How many blood mages would have come about thanks to lamberts stunt across thedas, as faternities find out he just killed every one of their leaders and fear what will happen to them? How many abominations will be made as people freak out and, in their own paranoia, end up making mistakes the same way lambert and uldred did, that cost hundreds their lives.

Lambert basically created his own delayed version of hellish armageddon when he stormed the meeting. It was going to become a war, and one the templars had no control or advantage over. If you're looking for someone to blame, blame lambert and his direct hand in basically ****ing over thedas no matter what he did next.

Mages having rebellious thougths inside the Circles when there are Templars around them to put them down if they turn those thougths into acts of violence is preferable to open war on the outside especially since a great number of mages began this war in an advantageous position ; that is to say, one where there weren't templars around to curb their numbers.

I concur that Lambert made a mistake when he stormed the meeting which doesn't mean I don't consider Evangeline's actions to be far worse.

[dragonflight288]

MisterJB wrote...

The Flying Grey Warden wrote...
I don't see what the good of the many benefit from lamberts actions in sparking more rebelleous thoughts, more sympathy for the libertarians, more proof that the system doesn't work and is actively against them, and basically more bad examples of templars over-stepping their bounds in an already tense system. How many blood mages would have come about thanks to lamberts stunt across thedas, as faternities find out he just killed every one of their leaders and fear what will happen to them? How many abominations will be made as people freak out and, in their own paranoia, end up making mistakes the same way lambert and uldred did, that cost hundreds their lives.

Lambert basically created his own delayed version of hellish armageddon when he stormed the meeting. It was going to become a war, and one the templars had no control or advantage over. If you're looking for someone to blame, blame lambert and his direct hand in basically ****ing over thedas no matter what he did next.

Mages having rebellious thougths inside the Circles when there are Templars around them to put them down if they turn those thougths into acts of violence is preferable to open war on the outside especially since a great number of mages began this war in an advantageous position ; that is to say, one where there weren't templars around to curb their numbers.

I concur that Lambert made a mistake when he stormed the meeting which doesn't mean I don't consider Evangeline's actions to be far worse.

Protecting the innocent from those trying to kill them, standing on principle and doing the right thing is worse than treason against the Chantry, slaughtering innocents, and a military coup?