4643 réponses à ce sujet

[Xilizhra]

But I do not think it will be easy as you think to defeat them. In fact, if you do defeat them, you are bound to give life to the fear that the people already have towards mages. Sure, Lambert's group can get offed for all I care, but I still think we should not advocate the culling of the ones still loyal to Chantry, and I guarantee you that there are some. To get the world back in order will take BOTH mages and templars. And we can hardly end that Veil tear if we only put our energy into destroying the other group.

My offer is the only way the Chantry will ever be able to peacefully claim any kind of authority over mages, if mages themselves join that authority. If the Chantry genuinely does not want a war, let it prove that.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

eluvianix wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Oversight of templars by mages for those templars who are in the Circle.

That is where it gets tricky. I do not think the Templars would necessarily allow that, no matter what other concessions are. It needs to be a mix of the two, and in such a way as to discourage one group from abusing power over the other.

The Seekers could admit mages.

Then we would still have mages or templars crying foul if something goes wrong, and we might be back to square one. I really hope the Inquisition can do something to help settle this.

The idea, though, is that only the unbiased mages and templars would be admitted. In theory, this should mean that templars and mages get an even shake, with the bonus being that either side will have problems breaking away due to the Seekers' varied resources. Of course, this probably won't completely solve the problem (because nothing is ever solved through simple measures) but it's a step in the right direction.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 10 novembre 2013 - 02:29 .

[Hellion Rex]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Oversight of templars by mages for those templars who are in the Circle.

That is where it gets tricky. I do not think the Templars would necessarily allow that, no matter what other concessions are. It needs to be a mix of the two, and in such a way as to discourage one group from abusing power over the other.

The Seekers could admit mages.

Then we would still have mages or templars crying foul if something goes wrong, and we might be back to square one. I really hope the Inquisition can do something to help settle this.

The idea, though, is that only the unbiased mages and templars would be admitted. In theory, this should mean that templars and mages get an even shake, with the bonus being that either side will have problems breaking away due to the Seekers' varied resources. Of course, this probably won't completely solve the problem (because nothing is ever solved through simple measures) but it's a step in the right direction.

The question still remains: how can we determine who is unbiased?

[TheKomandorShepard]

Icy Magebane wrote...

I still say that the best solution is to add mages to the Templars. Call them by whatever name you want, but this "us" vs. "them" mentality needs to go. I'm sure there are many mages who favor peace and order, so why can't they work alongside non-mages with the current Templar abilities and training to oversee the Circles? If those good-intentioned mages somehow wind up getting possessed (although I see that as unlikely), at least they'd already be in close proximity to people who could put them down quickly...

right why just humans and elves don't sit next to bonfire and don't start sing cheerful songs "oh wait noooo thats reality we are doomed reality found us! "

"because nothing is ever solved through simple measures"
I won't agree my solution is very simple and solve problem.

Modifié par TheKomandorShepard, 10 novembre 2013 - 02:32 .

[Hellion Rex]

Xilizhra wrote...

But I do not think it will be easy as you think to defeat them. In fact, if you do defeat them, you are bound to give life to the fear that the people already have towards mages. Sure, Lambert's group can get offed for all I care, but I still think we should not advocate the culling of the ones still loyal to Chantry, and I guarantee you that there are some. To get the world back in order will take BOTH mages and templars. And we can hardly end that Veil tear if we only put our energy into destroying the other group.

My offer is the only way the Chantry will ever be able to peacefully claim any kind of authority over mages, if mages themselves join that authority. If the Chantry genuinely does not want a war, let it prove that.

And if you are unwilling to unbend a little, then might never get anywhere in this debate.

[Xilizhra]

eluvianix wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

But I do not think it will be easy as you think to defeat them. In fact, if you do defeat them, you are bound to give life to the fear that the people already have towards mages. Sure, Lambert's group can get offed for all I care, but I still think we should not advocate the culling of the ones still loyal to Chantry, and I guarantee you that there are some. To get the world back in order will take BOTH mages and templars. And we can hardly end that Veil tear if we only put our energy into destroying the other group.

My offer is the only way the Chantry will ever be able to peacefully claim any kind of authority over mages, if mages themselves join that authority. If the Chantry genuinely does not want a war, let it prove that.

And if you are unwilling to unbend a little, then might never get anywhere in this debate.

I'm already bending a lot to even allow for the possibility of the Circle and Chantry reuniting. I cannot sacrifice a government representing the people it governs, and if the Chantry purports to govern mages, it must be, at least in part, of mages.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 10 novembre 2013 - 02:45 .

[Icy Magebane]

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

Icy Magebane wrote...

I still say that the best solution is to add mages to the Templars. Call them by whatever name you want, but this "us" vs. "them" mentality needs to go. I'm sure there are many mages who favor peace and order, so why can't they work alongside non-mages with the current Templar abilities and training to oversee the Circles? If those good-intentioned mages somehow wind up getting possessed (although I see that as unlikely), at least they'd already be in close proximity to people who could put them down quickly...

right why just humans and elves don't sit next to bonfire and don't start sing cheerful songs "oh wait noooo thats reality we are doomed reality found us! "

"because nothing is ever solved through simple measures"
I won't agree my solution is very simple and solve problem.

There's no way of knowing something won't work until it's been attempted.  Either in practice or ... well, some kind of virtual reality machine or mathematical proof (in the case of scientific theories).  Also, I don't recall saying your "kill all the mages," plan wouldn't work.  I said that it's barbaric, extreme, and would basically set civilization back to the stone age by depriving them of the reality warping power of magic.  Thedas would be a lot more advanced if the people just opened their minds to the possibilities of magic and didn't let fear keep them locked in the dark ages.

[HiroVoid]

We need templars to watch over the mages who watch over the templars who watch over the mages.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

eluvianix wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

The Seekers could admit mages.

Then we would still have mages or templars crying foul if something goes wrong, and we might be back to square one. I really hope the Inquisition can do something to help settle this.

The idea, though, is that only the unbiased mages and templars would be admitted. In theory, this should mean that templars and mages get an even shake, with the bonus being that either side will have problems breaking away due to the Seekers' varied resources. Of course, this probably won't completely solve the problem (because nothing is ever solved through simple measures) but it's a step in the right direction.

The question still remains: how can we determine who is unbiased?

Since both the mages and templars would be under the Seeker's control in this model, it shouldn't be hard to find the more rational ones out of the group. This won't be perfect, but it's as close as I can think of getting.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

Icy Magebane wrote...

I still say that the best solution is to add mages to the Templars. Call them by whatever name you want, but this "us" vs. "them" mentality needs to go. I'm sure there are many mages who favor peace and order, so why can't they work alongside non-mages with the current Templar abilities and training to oversee the Circles? If those good-intentioned mages somehow wind up getting possessed (although I see that as unlikely), at least they'd already be in close proximity to people who could put them down quickly...

right why just humans and elves don't sit next to bonfire and don't start sing cheerful songs "oh wait noooo thats reality we are doomed reality found us! "

"because nothing is ever solved through simple measures"
I won't agree my solution is very simple and solve problem.

Only until reality finds it and dooms it.

[Hellion Rex]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...


Since both the mages and templars would be under the Seeker's control in this model, it shouldn't be hard to find the more rational ones out of the group. This won't be perfect, but it's as close as I can think of getting.

I see what you are saying, but seeing as the Seekers are under the dominion of the Chantry, and they are the ones who got Dairsmuid annulled, I do not think many would be willing to suffer their dominion.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

eluvianix wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...


Since both the mages and templars would be under the Seeker's control in this model, it shouldn't be hard to find the more rational ones out of the group. This won't be perfect, but it's as close as I can think of getting.

I see what you are saying, but seeing as the Seekers are under the dominion of the Chantry, and they are the ones who got Dairsmuid annulled, I do not think many would be willing to suffer their dominion.

It isn't outside the realm of possibility that a PC could convince them too, since PCs are themselves just on the edge and occasionally a foot outside it. But yes, setting this system up would be the hard part.

[TheKomandorShepard]

Icy Magebane wrote...

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

Icy Magebane wrote...

I still say that the best solution is to add mages to the Templars. Call them by whatever name you want, but this "us" vs. "them" mentality needs to go. I'm sure there are many mages who favor peace and order, so why can't they work alongside non-mages with the current Templar abilities and training to oversee the Circles? If those good-intentioned mages somehow wind up getting possessed (although I see that as unlikely), at least they'd already be in close proximity to people who could put them down quickly...

right why just humans and elves don't sit next to bonfire and don't start sing cheerful songs "oh wait noooo thats reality we are doomed reality found us! "

"because nothing is ever solved through simple measures"
I won't agree my solution is very simple and solve problem.

There's no way of knowing something won't work until it's been attempted.  Either in practice or ... well, some kind of virtual reality machine or mathematical proof (in the case of scientific theories).  Also, I don't recall saying your "kill all the mages," plan wouldn't work.  I said that it's barbaric, extreme, and would basically set civilization back to the stone age by depriving them of the reality warping power of magic.  Thedas would be a lot more advanced if the people just opened their minds to the possibilities of magic and didn't let fear keep them locked in the dark ages.

I don't need be hit by the car to understand that running on the highway is stupid idea.My plan don't have weak sides except perhaps moral side which depend on VP.Nah humans are barbaric even now but they won't admit it like orlesians and still that doesn't set civilization back to the stone age and point to our civilization was bulit on wars and genocides and smiliar stuffs.I don't see tevinter much advanced and few mages are enough for veil problems.

HiroVoid wrote...

We need templars to watch over the mages who watch over the templars who watch over the mages.

Naiveeee help me i m i'm drowning in the ocean of naivety most seriously your proposal is that same what chantry tried to do and didn't handle reality and well have  

[Hellion Rex]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...


Since both the mages and templars would be under the Seeker's control in this model, it shouldn't be hard to find the more rational ones out of the group. This won't be perfect, but it's as close as I can think of getting.

I see what you are saying, but seeing as the Seekers are under the dominion of the Chantry, and they are the ones who got Dairsmuid annulled, I do not think many would be willing to suffer their dominion.

It isn't outside the realm of possibility that a PC could convince them too, since PCs are themselves just on the edge and occasionally a foot outside it. But yes, setting this system up would be the hard part.

Yes, I think it will require a PC to hold people at gunpoint (or staff point), tie them all down to chairs, and not let them leave till they can agree on something.

[Icy Magebane]

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

I don't need be hit by the car to understand that running on the highway is stupid idea.My plan don't have weak sides except perhaps moral side which depend on VP.Nah humans are barbaric even now but they won't admit it like orlesians and still that doesn't set civilization back to the stone age and point to our civilization was bulit on wars and genocides and smiliar stuffs.I don't see tevinter much advanced and few mages are enough for veil problems.

You don't need to be hit because you already know that avoiding death is a good thing. "Avoid death = good" has already been proven.  <_<  But yeah, let's totally not work with beings capable of generating electricy through the force of their will.  That can't possibly lead to technological advancements or improve our lives in any way.

[Hazegurl]

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

Hazegurl wrote...

Actually Fenris tells Hawke that he understands that there are good mages. But there are also weak minded mages, and those are the ones to be fearful of. I also don't see how Fenris could have exaggerated much about Tevinter.

His master was a snake who killed a child to entertain guests. Most likely other members of high society in Tevinter. His sister tells him that becoming a slave was actually much better than not being one in Tevinter. Lambert gave his own account of how the things were there. I think it's safe to assume that Tevinter is a rotten place for those with no real power.

Well i would have issues trusing guy who crush peoples hearts even if he promised not and try vilify every mage hawke goal and his view point is from slave side also lambert were naive enough to belive in tevinter so rather things wasn't so obvious until he was betrayed but still it is rather horrible place but i don't think it is much worse than orlais for non-nobles or antiva. So practically every country is horrible in some way some less others more with ferelden being most "nice" country and we don't know much about nevarra.   

You might as well say you can't trust Varric, Aveline, Merrill or anyone else cause they kill people as well. At the very least Fenris has never crushed the heart of anyone who didn't deserve it.  Also, just because he crushes people's hearts doesn't mean his account of his own life in Tevinter can't be trusted. Is his pov from that of a slave? Yes. But combined with other people's accounts. His sister, the slave girl we meet during Fenris' quest, Lambert, the deeds of Hadriana, etc. You can tell that unless you have a lot of power your life is screwed.
 
Fenris doesn't vilify every mage. He says weak minded mages are the threat. Now unless they can read every mage's mind to know whether they are strong or weak then he feels the Circle is a better alternative than taking a chance on letting them roam free and unchecked.

As for the other topics here: I don't know if I would like the idea of Mages becoming Templars. All it would take is for a mage to just simply tell the Templars what they want to hear to become one and then let a bunch of mages go free or plant demons in Templars etc. I don't know if I would take a chance on that. I think there needs to be support programs for Lyrium addiction, a careful screening of men and women before hiring them, and an evaluation of them once hired.  or just give the Mages their own land to do whatever they want with it. Their own alienage.

Modifié par Hazegurl, 10 novembre 2013 - 03:14 .

[TheKomandorShepard]

Icy Magebane wrote...

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

I don't need be hit by the car to understand that running on the highway is stupid idea.My plan don't have weak sides except perhaps moral side which depend on VP.Nah humans are barbaric even now but they won't admit it like orlesians and still that doesn't set civilization back to the stone age and point to our civilization was bulit on wars and genocides and smiliar stuffs.I don't see tevinter much advanced and few mages are enough for veil problems.

You don't need to be hit because you already know that avoiding death is a good thing. "Avoid death = good" has already been proven.  <_<  But yeah, let's totally not work with beings capable of generating electricy through the force of their will.  That can't possibly lead to technological advancements or improve our lives in any way.

Avoiding death is instinct. First they can create electricy only for short period of time due to mana second they tear veil by doing that , third they are darn dangerous and unstable , fourth technology do better job.

Hazegurl wrote...

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

Hazegurl wrote...

Actually
Fenris tells Hawke that he understands that there are good mages. But
there are also weak minded mages, and those are the ones to be fearful
of. I also don't see how Fenris could have exaggerated much about
Tevinter.

His master was a snake who killed a child to entertain
guests. Most likely other members of high society in Tevinter. His
sister tells him that becoming a slave was actually much better than not
being one in Tevinter. Lambert gave his own account of how the things
were there. I think it's safe to assume that Tevinter is a rotten place
for those with no real power.

Well i would have issues
trusing guy who crush peoples hearts even if he promised not and try
vilify every mage hawke goal and his view point is from slave side also
lambert were naive enough to belive in tevinter so rather things wasn't
so obvious until he was betrayed but still it is rather horrible place
but i don't think it is much worse than orlais for non-nobles or antiva.
So practically every country is horrible in some way some less others
more with ferelden being most "nice" country and we don't know much
about nevarra.   

You might as well say you
can't trust Varric, Aveline, Merrill or anyone else cause they kill
people as well. At the very least Fenris has never crushed the heart of
anyone who didn't deserve it.  Also, just because he crushes people's
hearts doesn't mean his account of his own life in Tevinter can't be
trusted. Is his pov from that of a slave? Yes. But combined with other
people's accounts. His sister, the slave girl we meet during Fenris'
quest, Lambert, the deeds of Hadriana, etc. You can tell that unless you
have a lot of power your life is screwed.
 
Fenris doesn't vilify
every mage. He says weak minded mages are the threat. Now unless they
can read every mage's mind to know whether they are strong or weak then
he feels the Circle is a better alternative than taking a chance on
letting them roam free and unchecked.

funnily that you mentioned varric and merril because they aren't high in my trustworthy ranking due varric being liar and merril well girl who makes deal with demons.Aveline i don't see why don't trust her she is honest woman and mostly normal her biggest problem is incapability express her feeling but i don't see why not. Now i don't entirely trust psycho with anger problems that betrayed own friends and then he killed them but that may be just my paranoia.No he doesn't well that must escape me when he literally attacked every mage hawke goal in life that he can tell fenris.  

[Hazegurl]

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

funnily that you mentioned varric and merril because they aren't high in my trustworthy ranking due varric being liar and merril well girl who makes deal with demons.Aveline i don't see why don't trust her she is honest woman and mostly normal her biggest problem is incapability express her feeling but i don't see why not. Now i don't entirely trust psycho with anger problems that betrayed own friends and then he killed them but that may be just my paranoia.No he doesn't well that must escape me when he literally attacked every mage hawke goal in life that he can tell fenris.  

I can understand that.  I didn't mention Aveline because she's a guard who has shown to be far more trustworthy than anyone when it comes to killing people. Varric is an admitted liar, Merrill deals with demons, Anders is a liar and murderer of innocents, Isabella will betray you. Seems like all the companions aren't completely trustworthy aside from Aveline and the Hawke sibling. That's why my point has more to do with trust based on killing than all the other traits. You claimed Fenris wasn't trustworthy based on his ability to crush hearts. Well if trustworthiness is based on killing then none of the friends can be trusted. Neither can Hawke. Considering the fact that Hawke could kill innocent people and betray his companions when it suits him/her to do it.  Also, how does Fenris attack every mage? Fenris may express himself verbally against mages but the only time Fenris has attacked Mages is when Hawke leads him into battle with them. The only person who has attacked a an innocent mage without Hawke's order is Anders.

[TheKomandorShepard]

Hazegurl wrote...

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

funnily that you mentioned varric and merril because they aren't high in my trustworthy ranking due varric being liar and merril well girl who makes deal with demons.Aveline i don't see why don't trust her she is honest woman and mostly normal her biggest problem is incapability express her feeling but i don't see why not. Now i don't entirely trust psycho with anger problems that betrayed own friends and then he killed them but that may be just my paranoia.No he doesn't well that must escape me when he literally attacked every mage hawke goal in life that he can tell fenris.  

I can understand that.  I didn't mention Aveline because she's a guard who has shown to be far more trustworthy than anyone when it comes to killing people. Varric is an admitted liar, Merrill deals with demons, Anders is a liar and murderer of innocents, Isabella will betray you. Seems like all the companions aren't completely trustworthy aside from Aveline and the Hawke sibling. That's why my point has more to do with trust based on killing than all the other traits. You claimed Fenris wasn't trustworthy based on his ability to crush hearts. Well if trustworthiness is based on killing then none of the friends can be trusted. Neither can Hawke. Considering the fact that Hawke could kill innocent people and betray his companions when it suits him/her to do it.  Also, how does Fenris attack every mage? Fenris may express himself verbally against mages but the only time Fenris has attacked Mages is when Hawke leads him into battle with them. The only person who has attacked a an innocent mage without Hawke's order is Anders.

I didn't say that he isn't trustworthy because he kills peoples because he kills peoples who previously promise he won't hurt them but still did that also because he have anger problems so he isn't trustworthy.About mages i wasn't speaking about mages i was speaking about mage hawke goals when fenris asks hawke we have possibility tell him one of few and every is attacked by him. 

[durasteel]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
Since both the mages and templars would be under the Seeker's control in this model, it shouldn't be hard to find the more rational ones out of the group. This won't be perfect, but it's as close as I can think of getting.

As I understand it, Seekers often come from the Templar order. Until it becomes possible for a mage to become a Seeker, and the mages join and rise to share positions of authority within the organisation, then the Seekers cannot be an impartial arbiter between Temple and Circle.

Modifié par durasteel, 10 novembre 2013 - 04:15 .

[Hazegurl]

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

Hazegurl wrote...

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

funnily that you mentioned varric and merril because they aren't high in my trustworthy ranking due varric being liar and merril well girl who makes deal with demons.Aveline i don't see why don't trust her she is honest woman and mostly normal her biggest problem is incapability express her feeling but i don't see why not. Now i don't entirely trust psycho with anger problems that betrayed own friends and then he killed them but that may be just my paranoia.No he doesn't well that must escape me when he literally attacked every mage hawke goal in life that he can tell fenris.  

I can understand that.  I didn't mention Aveline because she's a guard who has shown to be far more trustworthy than anyone when it comes to killing people. Varric is an admitted liar, Merrill deals with demons, Anders is a liar and murderer of innocents, Isabella will betray you. Seems like all the companions aren't completely trustworthy aside from Aveline and the Hawke sibling. That's why my point has more to do with trust based on killing than all the other traits. You claimed Fenris wasn't trustworthy based on his ability to crush hearts. Well if trustworthiness is based on killing then none of the friends can be trusted. Neither can Hawke. Considering the fact that Hawke could kill innocent people and betray his companions when it suits him/her to do it.  Also, how does Fenris attack every mage? Fenris may express himself verbally against mages but the only time Fenris has attacked Mages is when Hawke leads him into battle with them. The only person who has attacked a an innocent mage without Hawke's order is Anders.

I didn't say that he isn't trustworthy because he kills peoples because he kills peoples who previously promise he won't hurt them but still did that also because he have anger problems so he isn't trustworthy.About mages i wasn't speaking about mages i was speaking about mage hawke goals when fenris asks hawke we have possibility tell him one of few and every is attacked by him. 

You said because he crushes people's hearts. But anyway, yeah he made a promise and broke it, it's up to you to determine if that makes him untrustworthy. IMO, None of the people he made a promise to is worth him keeping it to. They all deserved to die. He keeps his word to Hawke so that's what matters the most to me. The only times he is not loyal to Hawke is when Hawke shows that he/she is not loyal to him.

 I stand corrected on the whole attacking mages thing, I misunderstood. However, disagreeing with someone doesn't make a person untrustworthy. Anders agrees with a Pro mage Hawke and still lies and betrays them. 

Overall, I don't see how any of this discredits Fenris' account of his own life experiences within Tevinter. He knows more about it than Hawke that's for sure. Now if you had said that his word about Tevinter doesn't count based on his memories being wiped most of the time then I would agree to a point. But to claim that his word doesn't count based on him breaking a promise, crushing hearts, and disagreeing with a pro mage Hawke doesn't hold much water, imo.   

Modifié par Hazegurl, 10 novembre 2013 - 04:17 .

[durasteel]

Merrill never betrays anyone, and when she deals with demons, she does so very carefully. Remember, she told Anders he was an idiot for trusting Justice, because all fade spirits are dangerous. She interacted with a demon once before you met her, and when she tried to do so a second time she took ample precautions. That ended in tragedy because of Marethari, not Merrill.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

durasteel wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
Since both the mages and templars would be under the Seeker's control in this model, it shouldn't be hard to find the more rational ones out of the group. This won't be perfect, but it's as close as I can think of getting.

As I understand it, Seekers often come from the Templar order. Until it becomes possible for a mage to become a Seeker, and the mages join and rise to share positions of authority within the organisation, then the Seekers cannot be an impartial arbiter between Temple and Circle.

That's the idea.

[Hellion Rex]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

durasteel wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
Since both the mages and templars would be under the Seeker's control in this model, it shouldn't be hard to find the more rational ones out of the group. This won't be perfect, but it's as close as I can think of getting.

As I understand it, Seekers often come from the Templar order. Until it becomes possible for a mage to become a Seeker, and the mages join and rise to share positions of authority within the organisation, then the Seekers cannot be an impartial arbiter between Temple and Circle.

That's the idea.

That is actually not that bad of an idea, now that I think about it. Having mages become seekers could be very good, considering the Seekers seem to be the Templars watchdogs.

[dragonflight288]

eluvianix wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

Yes back on topic! Ok, if it came down to it, and new Circle systems were to made and improved, what is one thing that both sides could agree upon that needs to be fixed?

Tighter oversight on Templars.
A conclave on other changes and re-evaluation of efectinvess and necessity of various rules.

Oversight of templars by mages for those templars who are in the Circle.

That is where it gets tricky. I do not think the Templars would necessarily allow that, no matter what other concessions are. It needs to be a mix of the two, and in such a way as to discourage one group from abusing power over the other.

That wasn't a request. It is, in fact, tremendous leniency on my part for not trying to grind the entire Order into dust.

But I do not think it will be easy as you think to defeat them. In fact, if you do defeat them, you are bound to give life to the fear that the people already have towards mages. Sure, Lambert's group can get offed for all I care, but I still think we should not advocate the culling of the ones still loyal to Chantry, and I guarantee you that there are some. To get the world back in order will take BOTH mages and templars. And we can hardly end that Veil tear if we only put our energy into destroying the other group.

What we would ultimately have is the exact same situation that Ferelden was in during a blight. Loghain and his followers were so busy putting down the nobles who declared war on him (and yes, they amassed their armies to fight the Queen's Regent before he fought them....he was just incredibly undiplomatic about getting them to follow him at the Landsmeet,) and they in turn were so busy fighting Loghain that no one but two Grey Wardens, a dog and an apostate were doing anything to gather followers and build armies to stop th blight.

If mages and templars spend so much time fighting each other and trying to wipe the other out, the demons simply won't be stopped, and the veil tear never sealed.