1656 réponses à ce sujet

[EmperorSahlertz]

cjones91 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Templars are completely different.
They are not at risk of possesion like mages are, they cannot use blood magic or summon demons, and what pwoers they do have are practicly all either protection (resistances, barriers) or dispelling.

Holy Smite begs to differ.

Also, you don't know if templars are prone to possession. They use lyrium to enhance their power, so it's magic, and if it's magic, then they shine in the Fade like mages do. I wonder if the Chantry hides their possessed templars better, or if they have some special training they deny the mages so that they can keep justifying their system of oppression.

What Templars do IS magic. But it is powered purely by the Lyrium, and not by their mana. A Templar is NOT a mage, and thus he does not have an attractive reflection in the Fade, for demons to lock on to. And the Circles don't teach the Templar talents to its mages for obvious reasons. They are powered purely by Lyrium, which would mean you would ahve to make the amges addicted to Lyrium, and Lyrium will eventually horribly mutated any mage who uses it for prolonged amoutns of time. Also, the Templars abilities disrupt mana, which is soemthing all mages rely on, so if a mage learned to be a Templar, he might potentially hurt himself, with his own skills.
And yes, a Templar can be possessed, just like anyhting else in the world of Thedas. However, the Templars are not actively sought out by demons, and will only be possessed, if the demons can find no other mage host, or the demon is forced inside of them.

There are some schools of magic that can disrupt spells and mana like the Spirit School.

There are indeed. And those spells are probably far safer for the mage to learn than Templar abilities, since these spells are powered by actual mana, instead of purely by lyrium.

[Ieldra]

^You mean that Templars learning those spells make them more prone to possession? If you say so...

Seriously, these abilites are magic and there is no reason why they wouldn't had the same side effects, including the risk of possession. Also, they aren't powered purely by Lyrium, as Alistair tells you in DAO. They're just more effective with Lyrium.

[The Hierophant]

Unlike a mage a mundane isn't a natural gateway to or from the Fade, while there's no mention amongst DA's media that Templar abilities attract demons. Plus Alistair's capabilities are not the norm if you take "Those Who Speak" into consideration.

[cjones91]

The Hierophant wrote...

Unlike a mage a mundane isn't a natural gateway to or from the Fade, while there's no mention amongst DA's media that Templar abilities attract demons. Plus Alistair's capabilities are not the norm if you take "Those Who Speak" into consideration.

I think I read somewhere that mundanes attract demons too(some demons even view a mundane's dreams) but mages are a much better target for possession.However if a demon wanted to possess someone of importance like a noble or ruler then a demon will possess that person.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Ieldra2 wrote...

^You mean that Templars learning those spells make them more prone to possession? If you say so...

Seriously, these abilites are magic and there is no reason why they wouldn't had the same side effects, including the risk of possession. Also, they aren't powered purely by Lyrium, as Alistair tells you in DAO. They're just more effective with Lyrium.

Yes there is a very good reason for why the Templar abilities don't attract demons. It is because Templars aren't mages. It is that simple. WHile what a Templar do, is magical abilities, his mana holds no "spark" in the Fade, and thus he hold absolutely zero interrest fora  demon. A demon wants magical potential within their hosts, if tehy possessed a Templar, all they would get, is a Lyrium addiction. Which needless to say, is not what the demon is looking for.

cjones91 wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

Unlike a mage a mundane isn't a natural gateway to or from the Fade, while there's no mention amongst DA's media that Templar abilities attract demons. Plus Alistair's capabilities are not the norm if you take "Those Who Speak" into consideration.

I think I read somewhere that mundanes attract demons too(some demons even view a mundane's dreams) but mages are a much better target for possession.However if a demon wanted to possess someone of importance like a noble or ruler then a demon will possess that person.

No, mundanes don't attract demons. The demons can see them, but they hold no interrest for the mundanes, since they don't have that special "spark". And while perhaps theoretically true, that a demon COULD possess a mundane, they won't ever do so, and havn't ever done so in over 2000 years of history. Long story short, the demons hold no interrest in possession of a mundane, as long as the demon is within the Fade.

[cjones91]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

^You mean that Templars learning those spells make them more prone to possession? If you say so...

Seriously, these abilites are magic and there is no reason why they wouldn't had the same side effects, including the risk of possession. Also, they aren't powered purely by Lyrium, as Alistair tells you in DAO. They're just more effective with Lyrium.

Yes there is a very good reason for why the Templar abilities don't attract demons. It is because Templars aren't mages. It is that simple. WHile what a Templar do, is magical abilities, his mana holds no "spark" in the Fade, and thus he hold absolutely zero interrest fora  demon. A demon wants magical potential within their hosts, if tehy possessed a Templar, all they would get, is a Lyrium addiction. Which needless to say, is not what the demon is looking for.

cjones91 wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

Unlike a mage a mundane isn't a natural gateway to or from the Fade, while there's no mention amongst DA's media that Templar abilities attract demons. Plus Alistair's capabilities are not the norm if you take "Those Who Speak" into consideration.

I think I read somewhere that mundanes attract demons too(some demons even view a mundane's dreams) but mages are a much better target for possession.However if a demon wanted to possess someone of importance like a noble or ruler then a demon will possess that person.

No, mundanes don't attract demons. The demons can see them, but they hold no interrest for the mundanes, since they don't have that special "spark". And while perhaps theoretically true, that a demon COULD possess a mundane, they won't ever do so, and havn't ever done so in over 2000 years of history. Long story short, the demons hold no interrest in possession of a mundane, as long as the demon is within the Fade.

But what if that particular mundane is a king or queen or some other ruler?Surely some demons would have a interest in possessing them so that they could have alot of influence and  a army to command.

[EmperorSahlertz]

They still hold no interest to the demon. The demon want taht magical connection. If the mage in question happens to be a king or queen, that mage will be a far more attractive target, than the Circle mage, with no tittle or rank.

However, if the demon has already crossed the veil, I'd imagine it would prefer the more powerful the host it can find.

Modifié par EmperorSahlertz, 14 juillet 2013 - 09:49 .

[vpacheco1984]

Demons prefer magical talent in the host but any will do really. And a king, queen or high ranking clergy be like hitting the lottery. Mages are just easier to find in the fade.

Modifié par vpacheco1984, 15 juillet 2013 - 04:01 .

[BlueMagitek]

Ieldra2 wrote...

^You mean that Templars learning those spells make them more prone to possession? If you say so...

Seriously, these abilites are magic and there is no reason why they wouldn't had the same side effects, including the risk of possession. Also, they aren't powered purely by Lyrium, as Alistair tells you in DAO. They're just more effective with Lyrium.

That has since been retconned.

[EmperorSahlertz]

vpacheco1984 wrote...

Demons prefer magical talent in the host but any will do really. And a king, queen or high ranking clergy would do. Mages are just easier to find in the fade.

No. While a demon is still in the Fade, the ONLY host it will ever actively search out, is a mage. There is no buts, or ifs. This is the way it is, and that is the way demons work, simple as that. However, if a demon has crossed the Veil, and is in the physical world of Thedas, any host will suffice. In these cases, I also imagine, though there is no way to be sure, that a demon would pick the more powerful, again prioritizing mages above all others, if it was given the choice.

[vpacheco1984]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

vpacheco1984 wrote...

Demons prefer magical talent in the host but any will do really. And a king, queen or high ranking clergy would do. Mages are just easier to find in the fade.

No. While a demon is still in the Fade, the ONLY host it will ever actively search out, is a mage. There is no buts, or ifs. This is the way it is, and that is the way demons work, simple as that. However, if a demon has crossed the Veil, and is in the physical world of Thedas, any host will suffice. In these cases, I also imagine, though there is no way to be sure, that a demon would pick the more powerful, again prioritizing mages above all others, if it was given the choice.

Yeah because they are easier to find. Like shine like a beceon. So the attract more demons. But since everyone but dwarves and tranquil go to the fade when they sleep it would go to reason anyone can be possessed in the fade but mundane are usually ignored because they don't "shine"

I think that was in the codex somewhere but I'm half a sleep right now so I don't know.

Modifié par vpacheco1984, 15 juillet 2013 - 04:11 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

IIRC, demons can't tell a mundane from a tree.
Mages are like beacons.

This is why mundanes are at such low risk of possesion. Templars even less so, given their resistancs.

[Ieldra]

cjones91 wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

Unlike a mage a mundane isn't a natural gateway to or from the Fade, while there's no mention amongst DA's media that Templar abilities attract demons. Plus Alistair's capabilities are not the norm if you take "Those Who Speak" into consideration.

I think I read somewhere that mundanes attract demons too(some demons even view a mundane's dreams) but mages are a much better target for possession.However if a demon wanted to possess someone of importance like a noble or ruler then a demon will possess that person.

It's the use of magic which makes mages a beacon for demons. Thus, if Templars use magic, they become attractive, too. Possibly they're just been lucky because they only use their abilities when they're tracking or fighting mages.

Also, if Templar training gives them a higher resistance to possession, why deny that training to mages? That makes no sense, unless control is the issue, not protection.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 15 juillet 2013 - 07:08 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

No, it's not the use of magic, otherwise a use of a mgical items of any kind would draw demons.

It's the mages connection to the Fade that draws demons. Templars don't have it.

There is simply NOTHING to back up your theory. Templars have been around for 1000 years and there is no indication that demons like to posses them at all.

Also, templars and mages are different in many ways.There is no indication that mages getting templar training is even possible, as lyrium doesn't seem to affect the mundane and mage the same way

[vpacheco1984]

Everyone and everything in Thedas had magic, except for Tranquil, even dwarves to much lesser extent. Some of the abilities of Templars are a kind of magic, since they have to create artificial mana pool using lyrium.

[Ieldra]

Everyone has a connection to the Fade. Mages just have one that's easier to access, a stronger one or whatever. I don't even think it's a digital switch "strong connection/weak connection" but that there is a continuum. Generally those to whom magical abilities come easier have a stronger connection and are more attractive to spirits. Templars would have to rank somewhere in the middle.

Also, it is said there was a time when the Veil didn't exist, and Sandal's prophecy appears to hint at a return of those times. I think it is quite possible that interactions with spirits were once much more commonplace than it is now and that the lack of knowledge of the spirit realm after thousands of years of safety behind the Veil plays a big role in the disasters resulting from demonic possession. After all, both the elves and the Rivaini have their magical traditions, and while they recognize dangers, disasters appear to have been much rarer among them.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Appear. Key word.

Again, every scrap of info we have from DA seems to indicate templars are not only uninteresting to demons, they are also hard to posses.

[vpacheco1984]

Then why were so many templars possessed and thralled by demons in Broken Circle?

[MisterJB]

Enthralled is not the same as possessed. There were Templars enthralled by demons but not a single one was possessed. And even then, only by Desire Demons. The only templars who were ever possessed were those who had demons forced into them by mages.
Compare that with mages being flat out possessed by Rage, Hunger, Sloth, Desire and Pride demons plus Shades and it's not hard to figure out who is more dangerous and merits greater security around.

Modifié par MisterJB, 15 juillet 2013 - 10:44 .

[Ieldra]

MisterJB wrote...
Enthralled is not the same as possessed. There were Templars enthralled by demons but not a single one was possessed. And even then, only by Desire Demons. The only templars who were ever possessed were those who had demons forced into them by mages.
Compare that with mages being flat out possessed by Rage, Hunger, Sloth, Desire and Pride demons plus Shades and it's not hard to figure out who is more dangerous and merits greater security around.

Strange...I clearly recall enemies called "Possessed Templar" in DAO's Broken Circle questline.... and those were a great deal more dangerous than abominations. In fact, I found the fight against those more difficult than the fight against Uldred.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 15 juillet 2013 - 11:01 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

vpacheco1984 wrote...

Then why were so many templars possessed and thralled by demons in Broken Circle?

Becasue the level needed more enemies than rage demons. And because blood mages and Uldred?


DA2 showed how hard it is to posses a mage. Several blood mages had to resort to rituals, magic and prolonged torture to get a tempalr forcibly possesed.
The blood mage leader there specificly sez she devised a method to posses EVEN templars. Her emphasis. And why would she do that if templars were easy to posses?

[vpacheco1984]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

vpacheco1984 wrote...

Then why were so many templars possessed and thralled by demons in Broken Circle?

Becasue the level needed more enemies than rage demons. And because blood mages and Uldred?


DA2 showed how hard it is to posses a mage. Several blood mages had to resort to rituals, magic and prolonged torture to get a tempalr forcibly possesed.
The blood mage leader there specificly sez she devised a method to posses EVEN templars. Her emphasis. And why would she do that if templars were easy to posses?

The mages were also using demons directly from the Fade and so the ritual was needed but I think it would be a little easier for a demon outside the veil or where the veil is torn to possess and influnce templars and other mundane. Like what happened in Broken Circle.

Modifié par vpacheco1984, 15 juillet 2013 - 11:07 .

[MisterJB]

Ieldra2 wrote...
Strange...I clearly recall enemies called "Possessed Templar" in DAO's Broken Circle questline.... and those were a great deal more dangerous than abominations. In fact, I found the fight against those more difficult than the fight against Uldred.

Gameplay-story segregation. It's a well-known problem that Abominations just don't come across as dangerous as they truly are, lore-wise. I had more problems killing a large group of wolves and a bear in a random encounter than I had killing the Archdemon but it doesn't mean a corrupted old god isn't, as far as the lore go, far more dangerous than woodland creatures.

As for the names, I don't recall any templars growing a bulbous back/floating (turning into a Shade) or using spells as Wilmod does. Therefore, either it's a misnaming or they were killed and then possessed since corpses also, mostly, don't use spells.
And hey, if they were possessed and still didn't use spells, that could mean demons lose their magical abilities when possessing a non-mage meaning they would still be far less dangerous than actual Abominations. But, since Revenants can use telekinesis and Wilmod was capable of using spells, that's not the case. Which likely means they weren't possessed.

[Inprea]

MisterJB wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...
Strange...I clearly recall enemies called "Possessed Templar" in DAO's Broken Circle questline.... and those were a great deal more dangerous than abominations. In fact, I found the fight against those more difficult than the fight against Uldred.

Gameplay-story segregation. It's a well-known problem that Abominations just don't come across as dangerous as they truly are, lore-wise. I had more problems killing a large group of wolves and a bear in a random encounter than I had killing the Archdemon but it doesn't mean a corrupted old god isn't, as far as the lore go, far more dangerous than woodland creatures.

As for the names, I don't recall any templars growing a bulbous back/floating (turning into a Shade) or using spells as Wilmod does. Therefore, either it's a misnaming or they were killed and then possessed since corpses also, mostly, don't use spells.
And hey, if they were possessed and still didn't use spells, that could mean demons lose their magical abilities when possessing a non-mage meaning they would still be far less dangerous than actual Abominations. But, since Revenants can use telekinesis and Wilmod was capable of using spells, that's not the case. Which likely means they weren't possessed.

Game play lore segregation. The reason the posessed templars didn't transform in broken circle is the developers didn't want to expend resources on such a rare transformation sequence. As far as the magic goes. If I remember correctly the posessed templars could still use their templar abilities. How do you know a demon simply doesn't make use of and augment the most powerful abilities that a person knows whenever they're posessed? Thus an abomination tends to use magic while posessing a mage while using melee skills while posessing a templar.

[DKJaigen]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

vpacheco1984 wrote...

Then why were so many templars possessed and thralled by demons in Broken Circle?

Becasue the level needed more enemies than rage demons. And because blood mages and Uldred?


DA2 showed how hard it is to posses a mage. Several blood mages had to resort to rituals, magic and prolonged torture to get a tempalr forcibly possesed.
The blood mage leader there specificly sez she devised a method to posses EVEN templars. Her emphasis. And why would she do that if templars were easy to posses?

Because the demon was still in the fade. Kerran said he was being tortured by desire demons but he doesnt show such symptons in his prison. The ritual was intended to bridge the gap between mundane and fade demon which is considrable more difficult.  when demons touch down at the end of da2 you see templar being possesed enmass by demons.

The theory that templars are resistant to possesion is false.