121 réponses à ce sujet

[Sir JK]

While Wynne was certainly a moderate voice among the other mages that expressed their political views on the circle debate, I'd, like some others in this thread, would argue that in the end of the events of Asunder she too would have voted for rebellion (if grudgingly). Instead I suspect that the real question is not whom to take her place, but rather if we will have a "work-within-the-system"-position among the mages.

Obviously working within the system is now a moot point, since the system does not exist and the circles as a collective are at war with the templars. So the position would probably be more akin to "end the war and then work out a compromise with the Chantry", something I can see Aequitarians (not all of them), Lucrosians, Isolationists and Loyalists supporting.

*Note: I use adjective-Fraternity to describe political views, since no Fraternity is monolithical*

Hopefully it's a position we see covered, since we've never actually met a mage that could be pegged as Loyalist (or a Lucrosian for that matter). In our party we've had a reformist Aequitarian (Wynne), a passive later turned militant Libertarian, two apostates similar to Libertarians and three unknowns (Finn, Sketch, Bethany). Irving and Torrin were both Aequitarians, Niall Isolationist and Orsino unknown (Aequitarian?). In the book we also had Rhys (Libertarian then turned schismatic Aequitarian), Adrian (militant Libertarian) and Fiona (Libertarian, not sure if she's militant or moderate). The warden and mage Hawke could be any policial colour.
Some people peg Keili as a Loyalist, but I'm unsure about that. For one, she's an apprentice and thus not eligle and secondly there's a fair chance she'd choose to become tranquil.
So it's a position not exactly covered. The only loyalist we actually know of is the First enchanter of the Anderfel circle (Hossberg?). But not his views.

So yeah, I do hope that position is covered or expressed. Not neccessarily companion material but someone we could talk with about their view, kind of like with Torrin or Irving.

[Xilizhra]

Obviously working within the system is now a moot point, since the system does not exist and the circles as a collective are at war with the templars. So the position would probably be more akin to "end the war and then work out a compromise with the Chantry", something I can see Aequitarians (not all of them), Lucrosians, Isolationists and Loyalists supporting.

But those are separate goals, as reaching a compromise with the Chantry wouldn't help their issues with the templars, and vice versa. The templars want control of any and all deals made here.

[Sir JK]

Xilizhra wrote...

But those are separate goals, as reaching a compromise with the Chantry wouldn't help their issues with the templars, and vice versa. The templars want control of any and all deals made here.

Well... yes and no. It's a question of nuance, not goals. Even the loyalists by now, ought to realize (there's no doubt some that don't) that their lives would take a dramatic downturn if they surrendered. They might be willing to return to the status quo (sort of), but they're not terribly interested in becoming andrastian saarebas.
So even they have a motivation for fighting (even if they voted against it). However, they only need to win a negotiating position and one with far less leverage than the libertarians. They really only need the templars to agree to lenient terms, no more.

They need a considerably less complete victory than the most militant Libertarians does. They do however, much like all other mages, need a victory.

[Xilizhra]

Sir JK wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

But those are separate goals, as reaching a compromise with the Chantry wouldn't help their issues with the templars, and vice versa. The templars want control of any and all deals made here.

Well... yes and no. It's a question of nuance, not goals. Even the loyalists by now, ought to realize (there's no doubt some that don't) that their lives would take a dramatic downturn if they surrendered. They might be willing to return to the status quo (sort of), but they're not terribly interested in becoming andrastian saarebas.
So even they have a motivation for fighting (even if they voted against it). However, they only need to win a negotiating position and one with far less leverage than the libertarians. They really only need the templars to agree to lenient terms, no more.

They need a considerably less complete victory than the most militant Libertarians does. They do however, much like all other mages, need a victory.

If that's the case, eliminating this fifth column from the revolution would probably be ideal. While having a wide range of opinions is useful, if they go into outright treachery, then they'll need to go.

[Sir JK]

Xilizhra wrote...

If that's the case, eliminating this fifth column from the revolution would probably be ideal. While having a wide range of opinions is useful, if they go into outright treachery, then they'll need to go.

Treachery is not quite the word for it. That would mean they'd actively undermine the war effort, rather than bring it to a swift (but small) victory. They'll still fight for mages, maybe even more fervently and with more dedication since they're the lot that has something to lose.

But if you consider any political striving for anything short of complete eradication of templars and complete separation of the Chantry to be defaitism or treachery then I have some unfortunate news for you:

The Isolationists are proponents of complete isolation from Andrastian society.
The Lucrosians are interested in using the skills and talents for business.
The Aequitarians are proponents of a regulatory body and managing magic.

Weaken the templars enough and the Chantry could buy peace by accomodating these three factions. The Loyalists would support it in a heartbeat. It has the contacts to serve as the Lucrosians intermediates, It has the power to isolate the mages and it can provide the means for regulation for the Aequitarians.

None of these factions are, at the core, really that interested in separation from the Chantry. Only the Libertarians are. A swift war that allows a compromise to be made is in line with all their interests and political goals, as long as the worst abuses of the past system is purged from it.

You need to make the war really bitter and bloody for that to be completely out of question.

[berelinde]

As an Aequitarian, Wynne seemed to want what was best for the Circle as an entity - a body of mages governed by laws that enforce responsible magic use and protect the Circle. Throughout most of her life, the Chantry served that purpose, so she supported Chantry oversight. When the Chantry (or the templars claiming Chantry sanction) tried to destroy the Circle, she sided against them. I do not like Wynne for a number of reasons, but I must concede that everything she did, she did because she believed that it benefited the Circle.

Loyalists are not quite the same. They seem to believe that the Chantry (and the templars) rule the Circle by divine right, not because it was good for the Circle. Even after the templars started hunting mages, the Loyalist fraternity wanted to submit to them, even knowing that they would be killed if they did so... or at least that's the impression I took away from the last chapter of Asunder. My reading comprehension skills are poor, so it is possible that I misinterpreted.

So, if you're looking for a mage who fills the role Wynne had, as a moderate who supports the Circle system because it regulates mages and prevents them from harming themselves or others, I think Galyan would be a good pick. When you meet him, he is part of a group of mages who actively hunt blood mages and try to take them down before the templars even find out about them. He isn't doing this because blood magic is against Chantry law. He's doing it because he fears that their actions will hurt the cause of mages everywhere. He's even in Orlais... although I'm not sure whether that's relevant anymore. Most mages who escaped the mass Annulment at the end of Asunder fled to Andoral's Reach, so that's pretty much where you would expect to find any of them. Plus, he has a history with Cassandra and I would expect some interesting tension there.

This is just my opinion, but I'm not overly fond of Rhys. I don't like him for a lot of the same reasons I don't like Wynne. He's kinda bland and a bit preachy. It's too late to make requests, in any case. The cast of characters is decided, so if Rhys is in (or Galyan, for that matter), there isn't much we can do about it.

[Xilizhra]

Weaken the templars enough and the Chantry could buy peace by accomodating these three factions. The Loyalists would support it in a heartbeat. It has the contacts to serve as the Lucrosians intermediates, It has the power to isolate the mages and it can provide the means for regulation for the Aequitarians.

The Lucrosians and Isolationists are too small to be relevant, and the Loyalists should have their, well, loyalties heavily assessed if they want to be part of this revolution at all. The Aequitarians are theoretically a problem, but are more concerned with mage welfare than compromise, so the question is how to ensure that they know that compromise can't be reached.

You need to make the war really bitter and bloody for that to be completely out of question.

Thankfully, the templars will do half of that themselves. For the rest... I don't believe that we'd ever get any advantageous peace deals with the templars at all, so what we'd need is to enrage them so much that every mage could see it. The challenge there is that we have to find a way to enrage them without attacking civilians or damaging our own reputation... and I think one of the best ways to do that is to cut off their lyrium supply, if that can be done, then launch as many attacks as can be managed. I want to harry them and make them more inclined to lash out than to seek to negotiate their way out of this setback. And if we can get that... if we can somehow use this to attack their reputation as well... then it might be possible to hold public opinion against them, and with that, we have a huge advantage in the war without negotiation being necessary.

Of course, the presence of large amounts of demons could change this equation in any number of ways... however, if the templars don't break off from fighting the mages to fight the demons, it'll ruin their reputation and it's a win for us.

[Uccio]

Filament wrote...

Mykel54 wrote...

After Wynne died, the only other mage character i know with similar views may be circle bethany in the templar ending.

The one with a hole in her chest, thanks to her big sibling? 

I can't wrap my head aroud what kind of person would let his sister to be ran through with a sword?
I mean seriously, that's just messed up.

Modifié par Ukki, 05 juillet 2013 - 12:33 .

[nightscrawl]

cosima wrote...

I personally would love to see Galyan from Dawn of the Seeker implemented at some stage, particularly in light of his history with Cassandra. He's a happy-go-lucky type of character much like Anders was in Awakening, minus the parochial bigotry and short-sightedness. The kind that you could picture being able to improve Mage-Templar relations through diplomacy.

Totally support this!

[Xilizhra]

Ukki wrote...

Filament wrote...

Mykel54 wrote...

After Wynne died, the only other mage character i know with similar views may be circle bethany in the templar ending.

The one with a hole in her chest, thanks to her big sibling? 

I can't wrap my head aroud what kind of person would let his sister to be ran through with a sword?
I mean seriously, that's just messed up.

Don't be surprised, the entire templar ending is messed up.

[Sir JK]

Xilizhra wrote...

The Lucrosians and Isolationists are too small to be relevant,

From what I understand, they seem to have roughly the same voting power as the libertarians does. Together at least.

and the Loyalists should have their, well, loyalties heavily assessed if they want to be part of this revolution at all.

Umm... Xil? Want to be part of...? Want Did you miss that they were essentially conscripted by Fiona's declaration and Rhys' vote? They absolutely do not want this war. That's the point.

The Aequitarians are theoretically a problem, but are more concerned with mage welfare than compromise, so the question is how to ensure that they know that compromise can't be reached.

Thankfully, the templars will do half of that themselves. For the rest... I don't believe that we'd ever get any advantageous peace deals with the templars at all, so what we'd need is to enrage them so much that every mage could see it. The challenge there is that we have to find a way to enrage them without attacking civilians or damaging our own reputation... and I think one of the best ways to do that is to cut off their lyrium supply, if that can be done, then launch as many attacks as can be managed. I want to harry them and make them more inclined to lash out than to seek to negotiate their way out of this setback. And if we can get that... if we can somehow use this to attack their reputation as well... then it might be possible to hold public opinion against them, and with that, we have a huge advantage in the war without negotiation being necessary.

Of course, the presence of large amounts of demons could change this equation in any number of ways... however, if the templars don't break off from fighting the mages to fight the demons, it'll ruin their reputation and it's a win for us.

You're pretty much correct on the premise. For a complete Libertarian victory, you need to convince the Aequitarians that compromise is impossible.

However... weakening the templars and depriving them of support will not achieve that. Because if the templars are weakened, the Chantry can start pulling strings to bring them to heel. Once that happens, the Chantry can start buying votes.

A quick templar surrender will mean the Loyalists and the Chantry wins.

Instead you need to push the Chantry itself towards the reactionary, to make them refuse compromise.

Or you could ask the secular states for help. It comes with a massive cost in regards to freedom though.

Or you eliminate the vote. Making sure only Libertarians dictate the agenda. Or juts plain decieve the others.

It's all very dirty politics, but that's war supported by a miniority for you. The Libertarians absolutely cannot play this one fair if they want to push through their agenda. And they absolutely cannot expect anyone else doing their work for them. They need to fight dirty, lie, cheat, attack civilians and innocents. They need to push for a longer, bloodier, more bitter and less forgiving war. They cannot hold back anything.

Or you know... as you say... the big scary demons from the sky changes everything...

[Rawgrim]

I doubt Rhys would show up in the game. Evangeline as well, for that matter. They are both pretty much alive due to Wynne. But let say Wynne died in your DA:O playthrough...that would mean the Asunder story never happened the way it did etc.

[Xilizhra]

From what I understand, they seem to have roughly the same voting power as the libertarians does. Together at least.

Together with the Loyalists, maybe.

Umm... Xil? Want to be part of...? Want Did you miss that they were essentially conscripted by Fiona's declaration and Rhys' vote? They absolutely do not want this war. That's the point.

They probably should want to, because if they don't stand with the Circle, they're potential enemies. If they leave Andoral's Reach immediately and never do anything in the war, then fine. But if they do anything to help the templars, they're fair game. This is the classic line-in-the-sand moment.

However... weakening the templars and depriving them of support will not achieve that. Because if the templars are weakened, the Chantry can start pulling strings to bring them to heel. Once that happens, the Chantry can start buying votes.

The Chantry let the mages go, is utterly defanged, and might have had its leadership blown up anyway, so I'm frankly not worried. I very much doubt they can get the templars to go back into their bottle any more than they could get the mages back; the templars want control and will take it.

A quick templar surrender will mean the Loyalists and the Chantry wins.

That's why I'm not after a templar surrender, I'm after templar eradication and the dissolution of their order. Individual surrenders and disarmament is fine, but if the Chantry wants its army back? No way, no how.

Instead you need to push the Chantry itself towards the reactionary, to make them refuse compromise.

The Chantry is utterly powerless and compromise is all it can push for, so that won't happen.

It's all very dirty politics, but that's war supported by a miniority for you. The Libertarians absolutely cannot play this one fair if they want to push through their agenda. And they absolutely cannot expect anyone else doing their work for them. They need to fight dirty, lie, cheat, attack civilians and innocents. They need to push for a longer, bloodier, more bitter and less forgiving war. They cannot hold back anything.

I disagree. With the templars gone, that's basically it. The Chantry will still not have an army, not be able to force anything on the mages, and I doubt they'd want to provoke another war by trying to rearm, nor do I believe Justinia would even want that.

[Sir JK]

Xilizhra wrote...

Together with the Loyalists, maybe.

I interpreted Asunder to mean that the three outweighed the Libertarians but that it didn't matter since the Aequitarians were enough to win the vote on their own.

They probably should want to, because if they don't stand with the Circle, they're potential enemies. If they leave Andoral's Reach immediately and never do anything in the war, then fine. But if they do anything to help the templars, they're fair game. This is the classic line-in-the-sand moment.

Thing is though, they can't leave. Fiona made them the target of templars. So they have to fight, and aside from a handful of individuals likely will. On the circles side.

The Chantry let the mages go, is utterly defanged, and might have had its leadership blown up anyway, so I'm frankly not worried. I very much doubt they can get the templars to go back into their bottle any more than they could get the mages back; the templars want control and will take it.

The Chantry is utterly powerless and compromise is all it can push for, so that won't happen.

The templars are military though, if the officers orders it then the ranks obeys. In theory anyways. The mages however are political, and thus can splinter. Convincing the former to surrender is far easier than the latter.

Given that the Chantry has representatives in almost every village, lines of communication between every city, the ears of monarchs and likely collects taxes... they're far from weak just because the templars left. They lost their army, but not their powerbase. That one is virtually intact. And of they need an army, they can simply lean on Anderfels or Orlais (or the Bannorn in Ferelden, or buy the Antivan Crows)... you know... war by proxy.
However... there's probably a significant amount of orthodox and conservative clerics that do not approve of this latest idea of the Divine.

I admit though that if the Chantry leadership blows up then it cannot. I hope not, that would be the cheap way out. But I acknowledge that I might be a bit disappointed there.

That's why I'm not after a templar surrender, I'm after templar eradication and the dissolution of their order. Individual surrenders and disarmament is fine, but if the Chantry wants its army back? No way, no how.

Sure, but it won't sit and roll it's thumbs if you weaken the order to the degree that it can take them back. Unless you can wipe out the order in one swift stroke the situation can change

I disagree. With the templars gone, that's basically it. The Chantry will still not have an army, not be able to force anything on the mages, and I doubt they'd want to provoke another war by trying to rearm, nor do I believe Justinia would even want that.

I mentioned what assets the Chantry sits on besides it's army above. You might have a point about Justinia though. If she's really radical then she might actually accept complete separation. It won't make her very loved I imagine, but I doubt she cares. Barring any assassination that could mean the Chantry only involves itself in an advisory position.

[Xilizhra]

I interpreted Asunder to mean that the three outweighed the Libertarians but that it didn't matter since the Aequitarians were enough to win the vote on their own.

Basically, no one's vote mattered except for the Aequitarians' in that situation.

Thing is though, they can't leave. Fiona made them the target of templars. So they have to fight, and aside from a handful of individuals likely will. On the circles side.

And that's all I meant; they need to have their loyalties assessed (and they were targets of the templars anyway).

Given that the Chantry has representatives in almost every village, lines of communication between every city, the ears of monarchs and likely collects taxes... they're far from weak just because the templars left. They lost their army, but not their powerbase. That one is virtually intact. And of they need an army, they can simply lean on Anderfels or Orlais (or the Bannorn in Ferelden, or buy the Antivan Crows)... you know... war by proxy.

You would think, but Varric says that the Chantry has "fallen to pieces," and I think Morrigan says something to that effect as well in the trailer, so evidently things didn't go so smoothly for them. Probably doctrinal splits (Petrice mentions this in Act 3 if she survives) combined with their sudden lack of any real military power.

Sure, but it won't sit and roll it's thumbs if you weaken the order to the degree that it can take them back. Unless you can wipe out the order in one swift stroke the situation can change

As mentioned prior, I really don't think that it can.

[Sir JK]

Xilizhra wrote...

Basically, no one's vote mattered except for the Aequitarians' in that situation.

Pretty much. Putting all of the votes of the Aequitarians in one person's hands is a losing prospect for all other fraternities.

You would think, but Varric says that the Chantry has "fallen to pieces," and I think Morrigan says something to that effect as well in the trailer, so evidently things didn't go so smoothly for them. Probably doctrinal splits (Petrice mentions this in Act 3 if she survives) combined with their sudden lack of any real military power.

Heh... that's it's too internally divided to be able to utilise it's massive resources is something I can definantely accept. Somehow I suspect that the Divine is largely way too busy protecting her allies and her own life to be much use (or much of an obstacle) for the mages.

Not that it's a situation that can't change though...

Regardless, whether or not the Chantry can pull it off I don't expect the Loyalist hope and aspirations to change much. And it's one I'd love to hear, if only to be able to evaluate it myself.

[DarthLaxian]

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

Probably just random mage or no one but in latter case events in Asunder would go in way different way that if she dies.If she is alive in asunder she may be replaced by Rhys in DAI but if we will play as pro mage i can imagine that we will able to affect on him to be more libertarian than aequitarian and vice versa.

bah - not Rhys please...that character is such a WHIMP IMHO...he does what the templars tell him like a lapdog IMHO (i like his ex-girlfriend from the liberarians much more)...so whipped *pukes*

i mean, he only votes for independence, when the templars have all but declared war already, while i myself would have made my play after they disbanded the council of the first enchanters (and forbade them from meeting again)...not after they killed a large portion of the white spire mages and a lot of senior and first enchanters!)

greetings LAX
ps: that is why i like the ex-greywarden elf-mage (i tend to forget her name though)...also with the added mystery of her potentially being Allistair's mother
pps: i liked wynne for her integrity, but her chantry appologist behavior (also she was not 100% in line with them) got on my nerves (enough that on my last play-through i used cheats to make Morrigan into my healer (also i still took Wynne along)...same for not using Leliana (i took the elf, after i got him)

Modifié par DarthLaxian, 05 juillet 2013 - 02:25 .

[Xilizhra]

Regardless, whether or not the Chantry can pull it off I don't expect the Loyalist hope and aspirations to change much. And it's one I'd love to hear, if only to be able to evaluate it myself.

Whatever the case, I seriously doubt it can be achieved; I don't think the situation is right for it in any way.

[lil yonce]

Xilizhra wrote...
They want to bully the Chantry into submission.

However they're trying to go about it, they're still trying to get back with them.

Assuming that she doesn't get blown up by the magical explosion that survey mentioned.

Let's hope Fiona is killed instead.

They instigated nothing that hadn't already been provoked thousands of times over, and the war itself was wholly Lambert's doing and declaration.

Instigators, they are. No doubt in my mind. They hijacked Wynne's conclave and forced their BS on every mage.

You can't avoid confrontation; the entire world is confrontation now between the mages and templars. You can't just stop a war that's been this long in coming.

And maybe you can avoid confrontation if you try. If the Libertarians want war with the templars, I won't stop them. I don't care about them. They shouldn't get to force what they want on everyone else though. Its not right. If those mages want to leave, they need a leader who is willing to work with the Chantry and their seekers and templars, and templars like Cullen or Greagoir.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 05 juillet 2013 - 08:06 .

[Xilizhra]

However they're trying to go about it, they're still trying to get back with them.

Probably not in a way that Justinia would survive.

Let's hope Fiona is killed instead.

The odds seem low.

Instigators, they are. No doubt in my mind. They hijacked Wynne's conclave and forced their BS on every mage.

For the benefit of every mage. The others can't hold them back any longer. And it wasn't instigation to begin with.

And maybe can avoid confrontation if you try. If the Libertarians want war with the templars, I won't stop them. I don't care about them. They shouldn't get to force what they want on everyone else though. Its not right. If those mages want to leave they need a leader who is willing to work with the Chantry and their seekers and tempalrs and templars like Cullen or Greagoir.

Cullen and Greagoir will fall like all the others. And by this point, the templars are targeting all mages; the dissenters are in this until the end, like it or not.

[lil yonce]

Sir JK wrote...
While Wynne was certainly a moderate voice among the other mages that expressed their political views on the circle debate, I'd, like some others in this thread, would argue that in the end of the events of Asunder she too would have voted for rebellion (if grudgingly).

Disagree completely. She ran off to save Rhys from Lambert. She destroyed the phylacteries to save the Enchanters from what she believed Lambert would do to them-- this particularly low opinion brought on by Pharamond's murder. She doesn't even think he did it initially-- Evangeline coaxes her into that opinion. The wool has been pulled over everyone's eyes by Adrian at this point. If Wynne were still alive and found out what really went down in the White Spire, I do not at all believe she would support the Libertarians. They're fanatics who will screw everyone else over to get what they want. And when she on a tear, her attitude was nothing along the lines of "**** the Divine." Her entire bent in the DA universe has been avoiding confrontation to save lives. Voting for rebellion goes against that completely. I think she would say no and do everything she could to get a compromise in the works with the Chantry.

Obviously working within the system is now a moot point, since the system does not exist and the circles as a collective are at war with the templars. So the position would probably be more akin to "end the war and then work out a compromise with the Chantry", something I can see Aequitarians (not all of them), Lucrosians, Isolationists and Loyalists supporting.

I think that is way too late to start working on compromise. Most of the mages will be dead by this time. The mages who don't want any part of this Libertarian revolt should stand up before the templars show up on their doorstep. The Aequitarian fraternity should split up and a new vote should be called.

Hopefully it's a position we see covered, since we've never actually met a mage that could be pegged as Loyalist (or a Lucrosian for that matter).

A Lucrosian leader is my ideal reformer.

[Xilizhra]

I think that is way too late to start working on compromise. Most of the mages will be dead by this time. The mages who don't want any part of this Libertarian revolt should stand up before the templars show up on their doorstep. The Aequitarian fraternity should split up and a new vote should be called.

They appointed Rhys to begin with; the system worked exactly as it should.

[lil yonce]

Xilizhra wrote...
They appointed Rhys to begin with; the system worked exactly as it should.

So. Appointed or not, they pull a coup if there are enough people against his decision. Those Aequitarians can leave their fraternity and join another or start their own if they want to. They can raise a stink and something will have to be done.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 05 juillet 2013 - 05:04 .

[Beerfish]

Xilizhra wrote...

I think that is way too late to start working on compromise. Most of the mages will be dead by this time. The mages who don't want any part of this Libertarian revolt should stand up before the templars show up on their doorstep. The Aequitarian fraternity should split up and a new vote should be called.

They appointed Rhys to begin with; the system worked exactly as it should.

Yeah the fools, they somehow thought he would follow along in his moms footsteps.  Now they're screwed.

[Xilizhra]

Youth4Ever wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
They appointed Rhys to begin with; the system worked exactly as it should.

So. Appointed or not, they pull a coup if there are enough people against his decision. Those Aequitarians can leave their fraternity and join another or start their own if they want to. They can raise a stink and something will have to be done.

You assume a significant number of Aequitarians would want to.