4643 réponses à ce sujet

[Medhia Nox]

@Kaiser Arian: Have you played X-com - there's a reason they don't obliterate you from the beginning.

The game makes it VERY clear that they're capable of it.

[DKJaigen]

hhh89 wrote...

DKJaigen wrote...

Because starting a war that will no doubt will severly damage Orlais while Orlais was gracious enough to house the templars within their country is treason.

For this reason, they should be considered traitors by every country where the war will be present, not only Orlais.
Regardless, I disagree. The templars weren't part of the Orlesian army. They were free to declaring war to the mages as they wish. Of course, Orlais has every right to drive them out of their borders if they wish (sadly Orlais is busy in its own civil war), but the former isn't betraying the latter. A betrayal is based on a relationship between two person/groups. There was none between templars and Orlais. 
There isn't even a betrayal of the templars to the Chantry, since the Nevarran Accord established the templars/Seekers as being under the Chantry in exchange of the former having the role of guarding mages. With the Chantry changing their stance and helping mages escape, as well as agreeig to their indipendance, the templars have every right to revoke the Accord.
I'm not sided with either the templars or the Chantry (as well as the mages), but there isn't any betrayal involved. The two groups grown to have different stances over mages, making the cooperation they had impossible to mantain.

Yeah whatever. it doesnt its stil very likely that both the chantry and Orlais want the templars death.

[Medhia Nox]

@DKJaigen: I'd say they want the Templars back in the fold.

Of course, hang the ring leaders - purge the red lyrium addiction - and likely have severe reforms, but I doubt they want the templars annihilated as a group.

I think putting their mage policing under the jurisdiction of the First Enchanter - and their military action under the jurisdiction of the Divine might be a good start.

[DKJaigen]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

DKJaigen wrote...
And the templars a started a war that is more destructive then anything the mages have done. templars need to die period.

The Darkspawn want to say hi.

Mages are the biggest blight the world of TheDas faced. And yet they still tolerate them - even tough it would be much safer and simpler for the world to just kill them.
But no, that is not enough.

The mage-templar was is nothing but a drop in a bucket.
Not nearly as big as you think it is (mages are an extreeme minority and a lot of them don't wnat to fight the templars, making that minority even smaller)

Compared to blights or qunari invasions, this war barely registers.

Darkspawn are created by the golden city whatever that is. And i dont doubt thedas has more nasty stuff for the mundanes . You can either master magic or you can, well like the templars : stupidly and millions will die. I choose to understand the dangers of magic instead of denying it. And indeed the mage/templar ar is insignificant and was only the prologue to a demonic invasion which supports the theory that the templar order is being manipulated.

[DKJaigen]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@DKJaigen: I'd say they want the Templars back in the fold.

Of course, hang the ring leaders - purge the red lyrium addiction - and likely have severe reforms, but I doubt they want the templars annihilated as a group.

I think putting their mage policing under the jurisdiction of the First Enchanter - and their military action under the jurisdiction of the Divine might be a good start.

Dpends i first need to see the empress celene before i can judge what is going to happen next. whatever the chantry wants pales in comparison on what the empress wants . and if the empress demands the heads of every single templar it will happen.

[The Elder King]

@DkJaigen: they both surely want to stop them. The Chantry would likely wants to find a peaceful solution, since the Divine wanted Hakwe because she believed he could stop the war.
I don't really know what Orlais wants to do, considering the civil war, and the fact that so far we have no clue what are Celene and Gaspard's stance on mages and templars.

[ianvillan]

hhh89 wrote...

DKJaigen wrote...

Because starting a war that will no doubt will severly damage Orlais while Orlais was gracious enough to house the templars within their country is treason.

For this reason, they should be considered traitors by every country where the war will be present, not only Orlais.
Regardless, I disagree. The templars weren't part of the Orlesian army. They were free to declaring war to the mages as they wish. Of course, Orlais has every right to drive them out of their borders if they wish (sadly Orlais is busy in its own civil war), but the former isn't betraying the latter. A betrayal is based on a relationship between two person/groups. There was none between templars and Orlais. 
There isn't even a betrayal of the templars to the Chantry, since the Nevarran Accord established the templars/Seekers as being under the Chantry in exchange of the former having the role of guarding mages. With the Chantry changing their stance and helping mages escape, as well as agreeing to their indipendance, the templars have every right to revoke the Accord.
I'm not sided with either the templars or the Chantry (as well as the mages), but there isn't any betrayal involved. The two groups grown to have different stances over mages, making the cooperation they had impossible to maintain.

The mages voluntary joined the circles when they were formed, they had an agreement with the Chantry for housing and safety in exchange for staying in the circles. If the Templars are free to leave and revoke the accords then the Mages should be free to leave and break their agreement with the Chantry too.

So the Templars might not be betrayers to the Chantry but they are the biggest hypocrites in all of Thedas and have caused huge death and destruction because of their hypocrisy.

[The Elder King]

 @ianvillain: the templars don't have the right to secede whenever they want. They had this right when the Chantry changed its stance on mages and are fine with them being free. Their goals are incompatible, so the templars have no reason to remain under them. If the mages left the Circles but the Chantry supported the templars in bringing them back, they couldn't leave.

[ianvillan]

hhh89 wrote...

 @ianvillain: the templars don't have the right to secede whenever they want. They had this right when the Chantry changed its stance on mages and are fine with them being free. Their goals are incompatible, so the templars have no reason to remain under them. If the mages left the Circles but the Chantry supported the templars in bringing them back, they couldn't leave.

The Chantry did not let the mages leave, they allowed the mages to gather together and say what the problems with the circles were and how they could change them.

It was the Templars who decided that the mages were not allowed to meet up so they attacked them and killed their leadership which caused the mages to rebel from the Chantry.

If the Templars would of stayed out of it and obeyed the Devine which they had sworn to do then mages might not of left the Chantry or if they did the Devine might of ordered the Templars to act.

The Templars proved there deceit and that they are not able to be trusted when they disobeyed the Divines orders  and attacked a lawful mage gathering all because they did not want mages to get back the rights they had and that they were afraid of loosing the power to treat mages however they wanted. 

[MisterJB]

That is a complete exageration. Not only have the Templars never treated mages "however they wanted", they interrupted the conclave because the very reason it was being held had been destroyed when Pharamond was assassinated by a mage.
The mages gathered there under the pretext to discvuss what was to be done to the Rite of Tranquility now that there was evidence that it was faulty; when the only person capable of restoring a person's connection to the Fade was murdered, there was no longer any reason for the conclave to be held and were the mages honest, they would have agreed to return to their towers.

The evidence that indicated Pharamond had been assassinated by a mage plus the fact the mages refused to end their meeting simply confirmed Lambert's suspicion that the mages were plotting rebellion; which they were.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@Kaiser Arian: Have you played X-com - there's a reason they don't obliterate you from the beginning.

The game makes it VERY clear that they're capable of it.

I've played Enemy Unknown only. My stress was about destroying the XCom base easily. For example by nuking from orbit or firing giant laser from space. It would make the game pointless. Because you're doomed.
I think normal invasion to your base is cool though.

[Cainhurst Crow]

MisterJB wrote...

That is a complete exageration. Not only have the Templars never treated mages "however they wanted", they interrupted the conclave because the very reason it was being held had been destroyed when Pharamond was assassinated by a mage.
The mages gathered there under the pretext to discvuss what was to be done to the Rite of Tranquility now that there was evidence that it was faulty; when the only person capable of restoring a person's connection to the Fade was murdered, there was no longer any reason for the conclave to be held and were the mages honest, they would have agreed to return to their towers.

The evidence that indicated Pharamond had been assassinated by a mage plus the fact the mages refused to end their meeting simply confirmed Lambert's suspicion that the mages were plotting rebellion; which they were.

I don't know. That sounds a bit sketchy/farfetched to believe.  And why shoukd the mages have believed lambert about rhys being the murderer. If there was, say, a united nations meeting in new york and the NYPD stormed the place and declared china and russia under arrest for murder and the meeting suspended, I imagine things would equally go to ****. Its less rebellion and more basic human reaction if were all being honest. Why lambert couldn't wait until after the meeting and had to cause an international incident and possess the tact of a bumbling drunkard is beyond me.

[MisterJB]

I won't deny Lambert handled it poorly but it was the duty of the Templars to suspend the meeting and arrest Rhys. By refusing to do both, the mages were going against the law.
As to why the mages should believe Lambert, that's because he is a dully appointed authority. If a policeman attempts to arrest someone on the basis a bloodied knife has beendiscovered in their private belongings after a man has been gutted and his family attacks the police, they won't get off easy on the basis that "we thought the policeman had planted that evidence."

Plus, some of the mages were planning rebellion. It is the very first thing Fiona says "Let's rebel."

[DKJaigen]

MisterJB wrote...

I won't deny Lambert handled it poorly but it was the duty of the Templars to suspend the meeting and arrest Rhys. By refusing to do both, the mages were going against the law.
As to why the mages should believe Lambert, that's because he is a dully appointed authority. If a policeman attempts to arrest someone on the basis a bloodied knife has beendiscovered in their private belongings after a man has been gutted and his family attacks the police, they won't get off easy on the basis that "we thought the policeman had planted that evidence."

Plus, some of the mages were planning rebellion. It is the very first thing Fiona says "Let's rebel."

Lambert handeld the situation as a typicla templar with all the tact and finesse of tactical nuke. And it once again shows the how incompetent the templars are. What possibly could Rhys's motives be to kill pharamond? nothing. Templars have commited numerous warcrimes and DAI they will al be corrupted by red lyrium and twisted into abominations because they are so easy to manipulate./

This was not their duty this was the action of an idiotic overzealous bigot who went against the chanty's wishes and they dont have the right what they did at the conclave.

[TK514]

DKJaigen wrote...

This was not their duty this was the action of an idiotic overzealous bigot who went against the chanty's wishes and they dont have the right what they did at the conclave.

Actually, the Templars were the only ones with the right to do what they did.  But I don't expect you to believe it.  It's clear from your other posts in this thread that you and logic are not on speaking terms.

[Hellion Rex]

MisterJB wrote...

I won't deny Lambert handled it poorly but it was the duty of the Templars to suspend the meeting and arrest Rhys. By refusing to do both, the mages were going against the law.
As to why the mages should believe Lambert, that's because he is a dully appointed authority. If a policeman attempts to arrest someone on the basis a bloodied knife has beendiscovered in their private belongings after a man has been gutted and his family attacks the police, they won't get off easy on the basis that "we thought the policeman had planted that evidence."

Plus, some of the mages were planning rebellion. It is the very first thing Fiona says "Let's rebel."

Duly appointed authority or no, after nearly deciding to kill the mages during that audience with the Divine, like heck Adrian was going to let that go.

[Cainhurst Crow]

MisterJB wrote...

I won't deny Lambert handled it poorly but it was the duty of the Templars to suspend the meeting and arrest Rhys. By refusing to do both, the mages were going against the law.
As to why the mages should believe Lambert, that's because he is a dully appointed authority. If a policeman attempts to arrest someone on the basis a bloodied knife has beendiscovered in their private belongings after a man has been gutted and his family attacks the police, they won't get off easy on the basis that "we thought the policeman had planted that evidence."

Plus, some of the mages were planning rebellion. It is the very first thing Fiona says "Let's rebel."

Police usually arrest someone in way that won't cause massive incidents, waiting inside lobbys if a person is in a meeting, going to the persons home in order to locate them, and I don't think they make habbits of storming into places full force and seizing people suddenly. It was also not the templars duty to suspend the meeting, they had no orders to do so and they in fact had every reason to not suspend the meeting as to ensure the least amount of trouble occur. Jowan's attempted tranquiling, for example, or mages harrowings, aren't done in the middle of meetings or instructions in which the templars come in and seize a person and drag them off in front of everyone, because they know such actions will only cause problems.

Lambert is the leader of the templars, it is his duty to ensure the templars are able to do their job of enforcing the rules AND ensure the mages aren't put into bad situations. Lambert had one goal in mind, making the templars authority known, and deciding giving the mages the middle finger to any sense of autonomy or agreed upon respect was the worse thing to do in such sensitive times, and even a low ranked templar like cullen or carver hawke would probably have known to wait and then arrest rhys for questioning.

You can say that lambert handled it badly but that makes it okay, but I will tell you no it does not. Acting out of incompetence or willful ignorance does not absolve him of pretty much causing the biggest blunder of the chantry's long and colorful history.

[The Baconer]

I don't know the fine details of the event, since I haven't read the book, but from what I have read of what happened, it seemed like Lambert would be well within his authority to suspend the vote in order to investigate Pharamond's murder. Of course, his nullifying of the Nevarran Accord could be seen as a usurpation of power so I imagine there could potentially be many hangings in Inquisition.

[MisterJB]

Darth Brotarian wrote...
Police usually arrest someone in way that won't cause massive incidents, waiting inside lobbys if a person is in a meeting, going to the persons home in order to locate them, and I don't think they make habbits of storming into places full force and seizing people suddenly. It was also not the templars duty to suspend the meeting, they had no orders to do so and they in fact had every reason to not suspend the meeting as to ensure the least amount of trouble occur. Jowan's attempted tranquiling, for example, or mages harrowings, aren't done in the middle of meetings or instructions in which the templars come in and seize a person and drag them off in front of everyone, because they know such actions will only cause problems.

Lambert is the leader of the templars, it is his duty to ensure the templars are able to do their job of enforcing the rules AND ensure the mages aren't put into bad situations. Lambert had one goal in mind, making the templars authority known, and deciding giving the mages the middle finger to any sense of autonomy or agreed upon respect was the worse thing to do in such sensitive times, and even a low ranked templar like cullen or carver hawke would probably have known to wait and then arrest rhys for questioning.

You can say that lambert handled it badly but that makes it okay, but I will tell you no it does not. Acting out of incompetence or willful ignorance does not absolve him of pretty much causing the biggest blunder of the chantry's long and colorful history.

Ianvillan said that the templars interrupted an "lawful" meeting. However, the meeting became unlawful the second Fiona called for a vote on a matter than had nothing with which the Divine had agreed to let the mages discuss, which was Pharamond's "cure". To make matters even worse, Pharamond's murder efectivelly rendered the meeting pointless because he was the only one capable of performing it. Plus, when they resisted Rhys' lawful arrest, they automatically became criminals which means they also lost the right of gathering.
All in all, that meeting was very much unlawful.

However, I did not say that Lambert's actions were "okay"; i merely remarked upon how he acted well within his legal rights and how he merely fulfilled his duty. However, if I were to give my personal opinion, I think he just made a bad situation worse.
Lambert already feared that the mages would take advantage of the Divine's sympathy to discuss plans for a secession. When Pharamond was murdered and there was no point in discussing the "cure", he saw his fears coming to life.
Yes, chances are he only compelled the mages to vote for secession; altough it is worth noting that, had the Divine not betrayed the templars, Lambert's plan would have worked; but one must not forget that Lambert was willing to abide by the Divine's wish and given the mages a chance.
It were mages like Adrian and Fiona who deliberately did everything in their power to prove how Lambert's low opinion of mages was spot on; they were not forced into blood magic or possession by need of self defense, rather they deliberately sabotaged every chance there was of a compromise and they bear much of the guilt along with Lambert and the Divine.

[MisterJB]

eluvianix wrote...
Duly appointed authority or no, after nearly deciding to kill the mages during that audience with the Divine, like heck Adrian was going to let that go.

Adrian had a complex of superiority and hatred for all those bereft of magic long before Lambert's suggestion.

[Hellion Rex]

The Baconer wrote...

I don't know the fine details of the event, since I haven't read the book, but from what I have read of what happened, it seemed like Lambert would be well within his authority to suspend the vote in order to investigate Pharamond's murder. Of course, his nullifying of the Nevarran Accord could be seen as a usurpation of power so I imagine there could potentially be many hangings in Inquisition.

I agree. Both sides f*cked up. But I am willing to see how things progress in DAI before I start ordering executions.

[Lord Raijin]

Lambert is not the leader of the Templar's but the leader of the Seeker of Truth. The leader of the Templar's is the Knight-Divine second in command is the Knight-Vigilant and third Knight-Commander.

And as far as mages rebelling... if what Lambert did was within the right so were the mages. The person who provoked the war between the mages and the Templar's was in fact a very incompetent Grand Cleric from Kirkwall. She didn't do crap about what her Knight-Commander was doing to the mages, and to the city. She just stood around and done nothing. While she was highly respected in the city people were sending secret letters asking for a replacement.

[Hellion Rex]

MisterJB wrote...

eluvianix wrote...
Duly appointed authority or no, after nearly deciding to kill the mages during that audience with the Divine, like heck Adrian was going to let that go.

Adrian had a complex of superiority and hatred for all those bereft of magic long before Lambert's suggestion.

I'm not justifying what she did, and quite frankly would like to put a lightning bolt through her chest. Although, I still disagree on the bereft of magic thing.

[AresKeith]

Lord Raijin wrote...

The person who provoked the war between the mages and the Templar's was in fact a very incompetent Grand Cleric from Kirkwall. .

lol No

[Hellion Rex]

Lord Raijin wrote...

Lambert is not the leader of the Templar's but the leader of the Seeker of Truth. The leader of the Templar's is the Knight-Divine second in command is the Knight-Vigilant and third Knight-Commander.

And as far as mages rebelling... if what Lambert did was within the right so were the mages. The person who provoked the war between the mages and the Templar's was in fact a very incompetent Grand Cleric from Kirkwall. She didn't do crap about what her Knight-Commander was doing to the mages, and to the city. She just stood around and done nothing. While she was highly respected in the city people were sending secret letters asking for a replacement.

It is my understanding Lambert authority as Lord Seeker overshadows that of the Templar Order, because the Seekers are the overseers of the Order.

Elthina's neutrality didn't provoke the war. Anders did.

Modifié par eluvianix, 21 décembre 2013 - 09:25 .