1470 réponses à ce sujet

[Archereon]

@Steelcan: Oh really? Honestly DA2 was a big case of moral relativism rearing it's ugly head for me. The templars were awful, horrible people, irredeemably evil by modern standards. But the alternative was even worse, thus I consider them the lesser of the two evils.

[Steelcan]

Archereon wrote...

@Steelcan: Oh really? Honestly DA2 was a big case of moral relativism rearing it's ugly head for me. The templars were awful, horrible people, irredeemably evil by modern standards. But the alternative was even worse, thus I consider them the lesser of the two evils.

Yeah no.

I'm going to side with the ones who are only persecuted because their jailor has gone insane.

[Steelcan]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

BUT since an infant, usually do not have any magical abilities manifested yet, there is absolutely no reason to beleive the Templars would kill the children.

The templars are so well known for their mercy towards mages who pose no harm....

oh wait...



Even Alistair isn't too against killing Connor

Modifié par Steelcan, 02 septembre 2013 - 11:40 .

[cjones91]

Steelcan wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

BUT since an infant, usually do not have any magical abilities manifested yet, there is absolutely no reason to beleive the Templars would kill the children.

The templars are so well known for their mercy towards mages who pose no harm....

oh wait...



Even Alistair isn't too against killing Connor

Besides don't templars kill Circle mage children during the Rite of Annulment?

[Steelcan]

cjones91 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

BUT since an infant, usually do not have any magical abilities manifested yet, there is absolutely no reason to beleive the Templars would kill the children.

The templars are so well known for their mercy towards mages who pose no harm....

oh wait...



Even Alistair isn't too against killing Connor

Besides don't templars kill Circle mage children during the Rite of Annulment?

Well its described as "every living thing"

[EmperorSahlertz]

Steelcan wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

BUT since an infant, usually do not have any magical abilities manifested yet, there is absolutely no reason to beleive the Templars would kill the children.

The templars are so well known for their mercy towards mages who pose no harm....

oh wait...



Even Alistair isn't too against killing Connor

Connor was an Abomination. If it wasn't for the "third magical saving option", that quest would actually have had some impact. But since they implemented a "right" choice in taht quest, it is now useless. But that is besides the point.

I didn't say that Templars would show mercy to the mages, now did I? As a matter of fact, that is exactly what I didn't do. However, since the Templars' beef is with the mages, any child in the mage camp, who shows no signs of magical talent, probably doesn't have to fear death from the Templars. As a matter of fact, these children even represents exactly what the Templars are fighting to protect. The future generations of mundanes.

[cjones91]

Steelcan wrote...

cjones91 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

BUT since an infant, usually do not have any magical abilities manifested yet, there is absolutely no reason to beleive the Templars would kill the children.

The templars are so well known for their mercy towards mages who pose no harm....

oh wait...



Even Alistair isn't too against killing Connor

Besides don't templars kill Circle mage children during the Rite of Annulment?

Well its described as "every living thing"

And that's why the Rite sickens me...killing children is something no one can justify.

[Steelcan]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Connor was an Abomination. If it wasn't for the "third magical saving option", that quest would actually have had some impact. But since they implemented a "right" choice in taht quest, it is now useless. But that is besides the point.

I didn't say that Templars would show mercy to the mages, now did I? As a matter of fact, that is exactly what I didn't do. However, since the Templars' beef is with the mages, any child in the mage camp, who shows no signs of magical talent, probably doesn't have to fear death from the Templars. As a matter of fact, these children even represents exactly what the Templars are fighting to protect. The future generations of mundanes.

The templars are not known for their sense of mercy..... At all...

And Connor is merely a symptom of the Circle system.  To avoid losing her son forever Isolde tried to have him educated to keep it hidden.

[cjones91]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

BUT since an infant, usually do not have any magical abilities manifested yet, there is absolutely no reason to beleive the Templars would kill the children.

The templars are so well known for their mercy towards mages who pose no harm....

oh wait...



Even Alistair isn't too against killing Connor

Connor was an Abomination. If it wasn't for the "third magical saving option", that quest would actually have had some impact. But since they implemented a "right" choice in taht quest, it is now useless. But that is besides the point.

I didn't say that Templars would show mercy to the mages, now did I? As a matter of fact, that is exactly what I didn't do. However, since the Templars' beef is with the mages, any child in the mage camp, who shows no signs of magical talent, probably doesn't have to fear death from the Templars. As a matter of fact, these children even represents exactly what the Templars are fighting to protect. The future generations of mundanes.

I imagine templars don't give a damn if mages are children or not,they will kill/imprison every single one and if they would do the same to all mages if they had the power.

[Cainhurst Crow]

How pro-mages see the conflict.






How pro-templars see the conflict.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Again, since this is apparently a hard concept to fathom. Templars ARE ruthless towards mages, despite the age of the mage (even that is such a broad generalization, that it is probably incorrect). However, they are not beyond mercy, especially not towards mundanes, and I'd imagine particularly children. The non-mage children of a mage camp, would probably not be killed, I doubt even the actual mage-children would, rather they would be captured, and then Maker knows what would happen. Probably be dropped off at some orphanage.
The Templars' MO is not the total extermination of mages after all. They want the mages contained again, like they used to be. As such, I'd imagine they actually show mercy to the amges who surrender willingly. Again, that is also a broad generalization, since that probably also varries.

[Steelcan]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Again, since this is apparently a hard concept to fathom. Templars ARE ruthless towards mages, despite the age of the mage (even that is such a broad generalization, that it is probably incorrect). However, they are not beyond mercy, especially not towards mundanes, and I'd imagine particularly children. The non-mage children of a mage camp, would probably not be killed, I doubt even the actual mage-children would, rather they would be captured, and then Maker knows what would happen. Probably be dropped off at some orphanage.
The Templars' MO is not the total extermination of mages after all. They want the mages contained again, like they used to be. As such, I'd imagine they actually show mercy to the amges who surrender willingly. Again, that is also a broad generalization, since that probably also varries.

Show me an example of such mercy.  Beyond your own headcanon

Modifié par Steelcan, 03 septembre 2013 - 12:00 .

[cjones91]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Again, since this is apparently a hard concept to fathom. Templars ARE ruthless towards mages, despite the age of the mage (even that is such a broad generalization, that it is probably incorrect). However, they are not beyond mercy, especially not towards mundanes, and I'd imagine particularly children. The non-mage children of a mage camp, would probably not be killed, I doubt even the actual mage-children would, rather they would be captured, and then Maker knows what would happen. Probably be dropped off at some orphanage.
The Templars' MO is not the total extermination of mages after all. They want the mages contained again, like they used to be. As such, I'd imagine they actually show mercy to the amges who surrender willingly. Again, that is also a broad generalization, since that probably also varries.

Show me one example of when templars have ever shown mercy to a mage and/or their relatives?And do you honestly believe a group of lyrium crazed fanatics is going to care if the mages surrender or not?

Modifié par cjones91, 03 septembre 2013 - 12:02 .

[OLDIRTYBARON]

cjones91 wrote...

I imagine templars don't give a damn if mages are children or not,they will kill/imprison every single one and if they would do the same to all mages if they had the power.

Probably not. Just like with everything in this world, there are varying degrees. Shades of grey. In Dragon Age for instance, the Templars who recovered Wynne were kind and understood how frightening such a situation could be. I imagine there are more of them than there are Alriks, just by the fact that there are more decent people in this world than outright psychotic bastards.

[cjones91]

OLDIRTYBARON wrote...

cjones91 wrote...

I imagine templars don't give a damn if mages are children or not,they will kill/imprison every single one and if they would do the same to all mages if they had the power.

Probably not. Just like with everything in this world, there are varying degrees. Shades of grey. In Dragon Age for instance, the Templars who recovered Wynne were kind and understood how frightening such a situation could be. I imagine there are more of them than there are Alriks, just by the fact that there are more decent people in this world than outright psychotic bastards.

I agree but how many templars are going to be in lyrium withdrawal?I've seen what happens firsthand when junkies are desperate for a fix and it's not pretty.

[Archereon]

@Darth Brotarian: Finally, how the conflict actually is in the gameworld's "reality" if Dragon Age 2 is any indicator:



[/quote]

There really is no good side to all this. Just lawful evil and chaotic evil.

Modifié par Archereon, 03 septembre 2013 - 12:07 .

[Steelcan]

OLDIRTYBARON wrote...

cjones91 wrote...

I imagine templars don't give a damn if mages are children or not,they will kill/imprison every single one and if they would do the same to all mages if they had the power.

Probably not. Just like with everything in this world, there are varying degrees. Shades of grey. In Dragon Age for instance, the Templars who recovered Wynne were kind and understood how frightening such a situation could be. I imagine there are more of them than there are Alriks, just by the fact that there are more decent people in this world than outright psychotic bastards.

And those Templars would have no issues butchering her at the slightest hint of blood magic use, if the Circle fell into chaos, if they were ordered to, etc...

Don't pretty it up.  The Templars are jailors armed authorized to use lethal force in almost every instance

Modifié par Steelcan, 03 septembre 2013 - 12:07 .

[wolfhowwl]

Steelcan wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Again, since this is apparently a hard concept to fathom. Templars ARE ruthless towards mages, despite the age of the mage (even that is such a broad generalization, that it is probably incorrect). However, they are not beyond mercy, especially not towards mundanes, and I'd imagine particularly children. The non-mage children of a mage camp, would probably not be killed, I doubt even the actual mage-children would, rather they would be captured, and then Maker knows what would happen. Probably be dropped off at some orphanage.
The Templars' MO is not the total extermination of mages after all. They want the mages contained again, like they used to be. As such, I'd imagine they actually show mercy to the amges who surrender willingly. Again, that is also a broad generalization, since that probably also varries.

Show me an example of such mercy.  Beyond your own headcanon

Sure. In DA2 you raid a blood base with some Templars. After you eliminate resistance there are Mage sympathizes and relatives surrendering. The male officer wants to kill them but he female officer objects and even fights him to stop the massacre.

[cjones91]

wolfhowwl wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Again, since this is apparently a hard concept to fathom. Templars ARE ruthless towards mages, despite the age of the mage (even that is such a broad generalization, that it is probably incorrect). However, they are not beyond mercy, especially not towards mundanes, and I'd imagine particularly children. The non-mage children of a mage camp, would probably not be killed, I doubt even the actual mage-children would, rather they would be captured, and then Maker knows what would happen. Probably be dropped off at some orphanage.
The Templars' MO is not the total extermination of mages after all. They want the mages contained again, like they used to be. As such, I'd imagine they actually show mercy to the amges who surrender willingly. Again, that is also a broad generalization, since that probably also varries.

Show me an example of such mercy.  Beyond your own headcanon

Sure. In DA2 you raid a blood base with some Templars. After you eliminate resistance there are Mage sympathizes and relatives surrendering. The male officer wants to kill them but he female officer objects and even fights him to stop the massacre.

That's the exception not the rule as many pro templars like to say whenever pro mages show examples of mages being good.

[Steelcan]

@Wolfhowwl I don't recall this mission

[cjones91]

Steelcan wrote...

@Wolfhowwl I don't recall this mission

I believe it's a act 3 side quest you can only get by playing as a Pro Templar Hawke.

[OLDIRTYBARON]

Steelcan wrote...

And those Templars would have no issues butchering her at the slightest hint of blood magic use, if the Circle fell into chaos, if they were ordered to, etc...

Don't pretty it up.  The Templars are jailors armed authorized to use lethal force in almost every instance

Pray tell, how many 10 year olds have you seen that practice blood magic? That's a ridiculous argument. This idea that Templars just hang around itching for the chance to go murder-crazy on robes is weird as well. In both cases we've seen the Rite of Annulment invoked, it is because there is absolutely no other choice. In Ferelden, Uldred unleashed dozens of abominations and forced Greigor to seal the tower (and the Rite is revoked immediately once Greigor is assured the tower is free, due to Irving's say so). In Kirkwall, the Rite is invoked because of Anders. He blew up the Chantry and thus damned the entire Circle. 

I'm not saying their job is easy, but the Templars are not jailors, and they're most definitely not eager to murder mages. They also don't seek to rob mages of precious freedom. They're a necessary component to protect the mages and the world outside the circle from each other. I've heard of mages being compared to loaded guns. You wouldn't want just anyone carrying one, let alone walking around and doing as they please. The same goes for mages and magic. While in most people's hands it is no doubt a useful tool for the benefit of all, that doesn't excuse the handful it takes to cause widespread mayhem.

[cjones91]

OLDIRTYBARON wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

And those Templars would have no issues butchering her at the slightest hint of blood magic use, if the Circle fell into chaos, if they were ordered to, etc...

Don't pretty it up.  The Templars are jailors armed authorized to use lethal force in almost every instance

Pray tell, how many 10 year olds have you seen that practice blood magic? That's a ridiculous argument. This idea that Templars just hang around itching for the chance to go murder-crazy on robes is weird as well. In both cases we've seen the Rite of Annulment invoked, it is because there is absolutely no other choice. In Ferelden, Uldred unleashed dozens of abominations and forced Greigor to seal the tower (and the Rite is revoked immediately once Greigor is assured the tower is free, due to Irving's say so). In Kirkwall, the Rite is invoked because of Anders. He blew up the Chantry and thus damned the entire Circle. 

I'm not saying their job is easy, but the Templars are not jailors, and they're most definitely not eager to murder mages. They also don't seek to rob mages of precious freedom. They're a necessary component to protect the mages and the world outside the circle from each other. I've heard of mages being compared to loaded guns. You wouldn't want just anyone carrying one, let alone walking around and doing as they please. The same goes for mages and magic. While in most people's hands it is no doubt a useful tool for the benefit of all, that doesn't excuse the handful it takes to cause widespread mayhem.

Cullen states to the Mage Warden that many templars gleefully kill mages who don't pass their Harrowing during the Magi Origin.

[llandwynwyn]

It's amazing how some people are in deep denial that mages are dangerous and should be watched in some way.
No, the actual system isn't working and many mages are being abused. It's nothing compared to the chaos that would follow letting they go free without supervision.