935 réponses à ce sujet

[LobselVith8]

Sir JK wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Why exactly does Cullen only choose to oppose Meredith the moment she threatens Hawke specifically? If the Champion of Kirkwall sided with Meredith, it's understandable why Cullen would take issue with her trying to kill Hawke, but if the Champion decided to protect the mages and oppose the Right of Annulment, I don't see why the Knight-Captain would decide that this was the last straw. Hundreds of people are being condemned to death for an act they had nothing to do with, but Cullen only decides to stop Meredith when she is about to fight Hawke - a possible apostate - who has been killing every templar in his path?

While this specific example is one I cannot explain, I could see why Cullen would oppose Meredith's order to kill Hawke in general. The answer is that the Rite (not Right) does not apply to Hawke since Hawke is not a member of the circle.

While the Right of Annulment is supposed to focus on members of the Circle of Magi, the templars still have the legal authority to go after mages outside the Circle, as we know when Merrill explains why the Dalish clans are nomadic, and why the elven mages are careful about using magic in public where templars might see them. Even if Hawke isn't an apostate, the Champion is still responsible for killing templars by opposing the Right of Annulment and actively killing members of the Order. It's not as though the player is even given a chance to surrender; Cullen simply decides that trying to kill Hawke is crossing a line, which comes across as strange when Meredith has condemned hundreds to death for the actions of one single man who isn't a member of the Circle of Kirkwall (and Cullen was present when Orsino offered to stand down).

Sir JK wrote...

Meredith may be, in his eyes, well within her rights to annul the circle... but she's not right to kill whomever she pleases. Maybe Hawke is a dangerous apostate, but since Hawke is not at that very moment aggressive there's no reason for summary executions. Capture aand evaluation, sure. But not execution.

Hawke didn't stand down and capitulate to Meredith's authority like The Warden can with Ser Cauthrien.

Sir JK wrote...

It becomes the straw that breaks the camel's back. The final proof he needed to figure out that Meredith is abusing her position. All the others he could excuse, even if just barely. But this was what dispelled the illusion. Plus he knows Hawke and firmly believe that they could handle it properly.

If Hawke sided with Meredith, then I agree. If Hawke didn't, then I see it as a problem. When the straw is the Champion of Kirkwall and not the act of condemning an entire population of people to death for the actions of one single man (who she can easily arrest since he's standing right in front of her) simply because the people of Kirkwall "will demand blood", then I take issue with it.

Sir JK wrote...

But yeah... for some Hawke's this will break down completely. Much like how the friendship and rivalry systems work they don't so much account for what you actually did as much as score (or in this case: that you reached this point of the game).

The entire act of opposing the Right of Annulment and killing the templars to protect the mages makes me think that Cullen opposing Meredith's willingness to kill Hawke (who hasn't surrendered) doesn't make any sense, which is a problem with Dragon Age II with characters taking certain actions because the Plot demands it from them, rather than those actions actually making any sense in the context of the narrative.

[MisterJB]

LobselVith8 wrote...
I'm still wondering why the developers thought it made any sense for Grace to kill Thrask if he fought and killed Kerras and the other templars alongside Hawke to protect the Starkhaven mages. It's like Meredith's decision to purchase a lyrium idol for reasons that are never explained, or even hinted at.

It seems like the developers got the message with Inquisition (with the talk from the creators about not trying to depict any one side as good or evil), which is why I'm hopeful that the new Dragon Age might take a step in the right direction.

Well, maybe Grace was just a manipulative, ungrateful mage who had no qualms with killing people who helped her if they stood in the way of her getting something.
Some people are like that, you know? Or are mages somehow immune to the failings of the lesser mortals?

[Battlebloodmage]

One thing for certain though, Cullen is definitely not as boring as people are accusing of. I doubt boring characters would generate this much discussion about a topic that is not even about him specifically. I think a polar character is a lot better than a neutral character because they generate strong emotions from people regardless of whether they're good or bad. Cullen seems to be that character. If he were to return as a companion, I think he would bring the neutral perspective into the story and not just pro-mage or pro-templar. I feel like he could be the pacifist in the story.

[cjones91]

MisterJB wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...
I'm still wondering why the developers thought it made any sense for Grace to kill Thrask if he fought and killed Kerras and the other templars alongside Hawke to protect the Starkhaven mages. It's like Meredith's decision to purchase a lyrium idol for reasons that are never explained, or even hinted at.

It seems like the developers got the message with Inquisition (with the talk from the creators about not trying to depict any one side as good or evil), which is why I'm hopeful that the new Dragon Age might take a step in the right direction.

Well, maybe Grace was just a manipulative, ungrateful mage who had no qualms with killing people who helped her if they stood in the way of her getting something.
Some people are like that, you know? Or are mages somehow immune to the failings of the lesser mortals?

No one ever said mages are immune from being bad people or making mistakes,of course in your mind they are all bad regardless.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

Wasn't she possessed or under demonic influence? As soon as you kill her a pride abomination rises in her place to fight you. She was bitter and angry after going through all that effort and still be recaptured, so I can see something like that happening to her in Kirkwall at some point, especially if she decided to blame it all on someone killing Decimus in her first escape attempt. I was more baffled to see the rest of the renegade templars and mages there see Grace kill their leader and still fight by her side to kill Hawke and company.

Modifié par Jedi Master of Orion, 21 septembre 2013 - 07:49 .

[cjones91]

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

Wasn't she possessed or under demonic influence? As soon as you kill her a pride abomination rises in her place. She was bitter and angry after being recaptured, so I can see something like that hapening to her in Kirkwall. I was more baffled to see the rest of the templars and mages see Grace kill their leader and still fight by her side to kill Hawke and company.

They were probaly bewitched by Grace but Alain was able to somehow act freely.

[LobselVith8]

MisterJB wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I'm still wondering why the developers thought it made any sense for Grace to kill Thrask if he fought and killed Kerras and the other templars alongside Hawke to protect the Starkhaven mages. It's like Meredith's decision to purchase a lyrium idol for reasons that are never explained, or even hinted at.

It seems like the developers got the message with Inquisition (with the talk from the creators about not trying to depict any one side as good or evil), which is why I'm hopeful that the new Dragon Age might take a step in the right direction. 

Well, maybe Grace was just a manipulative, ungrateful mage who had no qualms with killing people who helped her if they stood in the way of her getting something.

I see Grace as a one-dimensional caricature who made little sense in the narrative with a pro-mage Hawke, and see her actions as a result of the developers railroading the plot into the same outcome, since Grace kills Thrask and tries to murder the Champion whether Hawke decided to help her escape from the templars, or turn her over to the Circle. To have Grace desire revenge against the man who helped her is something that doesn't make sense to me.

MisterJB wrote...

Some people are like that, you know? Or are mages somehow immune to the failings of the lesser mortals?

What the hell are you even talking about here? Honestly, you're welcome to have an actual discussion with me for a change, but you really need to quit with this crap. How does me having an issue with Grace wanting revenge against the man who helped her mean that I think mages are "immune to the failings of the lesser mortals"? That doesn't even remotely make the slightest bit of sense.

[cjones91]

LobselVith8 wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I'm still wondering why the developers thought it made any sense for Grace to kill Thrask if he fought and killed Kerras and the other templars alongside Hawke to protect the Starkhaven mages. It's like Meredith's decision to purchase a lyrium idol for reasons that are never explained, or even hinted at.

It seems like the developers got the message with Inquisition (with the talk from the creators about not trying to depict any one side as good or evil), which is why I'm hopeful that the new Dragon Age might take a step in the right direction. 

Well, maybe Grace was just a manipulative, ungrateful mage who had no qualms with killing people who helped her if they stood in the way of her getting something.

I see Grace as a one-dimensional caricature who made little sense in the narrative with a pro-mage Hawke, and see her actions as a result of the developers railroading the plot into the same outcome, since Grace kills Thrask and tries to murder the Champion whether Hawke decided to help her escape from the templars, or turn her over to the Circle. To have Grace desire revenge against the man who helped her is something that doesn't make sense to me.

MisterJB wrote...

Some people are like that, you know? Or are mages somehow immune to the failings of the lesser mortals?

What the hell are you even talking about here? Honestly, you're welcome to have an actual discussion with me for a change, but you really need to quit with this crap. How does me having an issue with Grace wanting revenge against the man who helped her mean that I think mages are "immune to the failings of the lesser mortals"? That doesn't even remotely make the slightest bit of sense.

Mister JB is a rapid templar fanatic who holds mage to impossible standards that he does'nt hold for everyone else.

He also seems to believe mages deserve to be mistreated simply because they have special talents nobody else has,he even tried to defend the actions of Ser Alrik claiming he would rather have a sadistic rapist defending him if he were a mage.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

Hawke still killed Decimus no matter what his or her politics on mages was. It was his own fault sure, but by that point Grace is just wanting to lash out at anyone for her predicament. Plus she was influenced by a pride demon somehow.

[In Exile]

iakus wrote...
Just to reiterate Cullen's attitude towards the surrendering mages if Hawke sides with the templars:

Hawke:  Is there any way to tell if they are blood mages?
Meredith:  There is not.
Cullen:  But they have not resorted to it, even to save their own livees.  Perhaps if we watched them carefully...
Meredith And if they hope to escape by playing innocent?  Will you accept that responisbility, Cullen?
Cullen:  Yes.  I believe that is what being a Templar is all about

This is not the attitude of a genocidal maniac who hates all mages.

Well, not exactly. Cullen is clear that he would absolutely be for executing every single mage if they were a blood mage. His views have evolved to a recognition that some mages do not need to be executed on sight. 

Cullen accepts in that exchange that the "guilty" have to be executed on the spot - he is for the ROA. He is just against the execution of innocent (on his view) mages.

Which is, I fully admit, an apparent evolution of his view in DA:O and early DA2. But that dialogue doesn't support an interpretation of Cullen who is anti-ROA. He's just anti-killing non BMs who surrender. Which admittedly is a step in the right direction. 

[MisterJB]

LobselVith8 wrote...
I see Grace as a one-dimensional caricature who made little sense in the narrative with a pro-mage Hawke, and see her actions as a result of the developers railroading the plot into the same outcome, since Grace kills Thrask and tries to murder the Champion whether Hawke decided to help her escape from the templars, or turn her over to the Circle. To have Grace desire revenge against the man who helped her is something that doesn't make sense to me.

You are holding up Grace to a standard that she never gave evidence she belongued to. Some people manipulate others into doing what they want and that is it. There is absolutely no reason to believe Grace is not one of these people; that she didn't just manipulate Thrask into protecting her and, that as soon as he is in the way of her getting something, she will have any qualms about killing him.
Plus. given that she turns into an Abomination, she obviously has had demons whispering into her ear for some time.

What the hell are you even talking about here? Honestly, you're welcome to have an actual discussion with me for a change, but you really need to quit with this crap. How does me having an issue with Grace wanting revenge against the man who helped her mean that I think mages are "immune to the failings of the lesser mortals"? That doesn't even remotely make the slightest bit of sense.

You have been harping about this and Decimus for years; how their actions make no sense; how this is a failing by the writers when it can be so easily explained by faults within their personalities. Given your status as a pro-mage, you're giving off the impression of being unable to deal with this issue because you can't accept the possibility that any mage would ever attack someone who helped her.

[In Exile]

iakus wrote...
It's funny how the full context of his statement is often lost:

 "True, not every mage gives into temptation.  But none are ever free of it.  At any time, any mage can become a monster, from the lowest apprentice to the most seasoned enchanters. Mages cannot be treated like people.  They are not like you and me."

If that's the actual like, it is way worse that you are acting like it is. He outright says that mages can't be treated like people! The "you and me" bit is a reference to Cullen and Hawke who - in his estimation - are people. 

[Battlebloodmage]

MasterScribe wrote...

Battlebloodmage wrote...

One thing for certain though, Cullen is definitely not as boring as people are accusing of. I doubt boring characters would generate this much discussion about a topic that is not even about him specifically. I think a polar character is a lot better than a neutral character because they generate strong emotions from people regardless of whether they're good or bad.

I honestly don't see any difference between Cullen and the average templar, except that he has a name and has appeared in two games (which is really confusing in terms of timing).

"Boring" is too weak. "Bland" is more accurate.

I would prefer a new templar, a female, or one who is actually interesting (perhaps a traitor or an elf/dwarf).

Not a Mary Sue should-have-been redshirt who the writers forced into the sequel.

Well, an average templar doesn't usually go through 2 extreme ends where either the mage or templar take over. Basically, if you just are gonna to dismiss what he's going through, I don't think why we even need to discuss anything. When you said you prefer a female templar, it comes accross to me that if Cullen were a hot female, you would have found him more interesting. 

Modifié par Battlebloodmage, 21 septembre 2013 - 08:12 .

[In Exile]

LobselVith8 wrote...
I see Grace as a one-dimensional caricature who made little sense in the narrative with a pro-mage Hawke, and see her actions as a result of the developers railroading the plot into the same outcome, since Grace kills Thrask and tries to murder the Champion whether Hawke decided to help her escape from the templars, or turn her over to the Circle. To have Grace desire revenge against the man who helped her is something that doesn't make sense to me.

Grace explains exactly why she blames Hawke in Act 2 if you speak to her in the Gallows. She hates what she had to do to survive for the year she was away from the Circle - living in the wilds - and blames her eventual capture on Hawke collaborating with the templars. 

If you have an issue with her blaming Hawke for what happened, well, too bad. It's perfectly human to desperately blame someone for your problems.

Grace desires revenge against the man who - in her eyes - sold her out to the templars. 

[In Exile]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
No Lob, hunderds are being condemened because the Circle is deemed lost. It was considered lost by many BEFORE Ander did his little terrorist act.

So you're actually on record for supporting the ROA before Anders did anything? 

[MisterJB]

cjones91 wrote...
Mister JB is a rapid templar fanatic.

Not any more than any other pro-anything in these forums.

who holds mage to impossible standards that he does'nt hold for everyone else.

Because mages have dangerous abilities that others don't which means they must be held to higher standards.

He also seems to believe mages deserve to be mistreated simply because they have special talents nobody else has,

No but given the fact you couldn't even understand my position regarding Alrik vs Thrask; given you completely warping my words; my position would be far too complex for you to understand anyway, so I won't even bother.

he even tried to defend the actions of Ser Alrik claiming he would rather have a sadistic rapist defending him if he were a mage.

No. Like I said previously, you are harping my words.
What I said was that were I a normal person in Thedas; big difference right there; I would feel safer to have Alrik; who takes his job of keeping mages under control very seriously; guarding the Circle over Thrask, who had an Abomination as his second in command and allowed his mages to perform blood magic.
Given their track record, Alrik would clearly do a better job of keeping mages from harming me and family.
See the difference?

Modifié par MisterJB, 21 septembre 2013 - 08:11 .

[Sir JK]

LobselVith8 wrote...

While the Right of Annulment is supposed to focus on members of the Circle of Magi, the templars still have the legal authority to go after mages outside the Circle, as we know when Merrill explains why the Dalish clans are nomadic, and why the elven mages are careful about using magic in public where templars might see them. Even if Hawke isn't an apostate, the Champion is still responsible for killing templars by opposing the Right of Annulment and actively killing members of the Order. It's not as though the player is even given a chance to surrender; Cullen simply decides that trying to kill Hawke is crossing a line, which comes across as strange when Meredith has condemned hundreds to death for the actions of one single man who isn't a member of the Circle of Kirkwall (and Cullen was present when Orsino offered to stand down).

Here's a question Lobsel: Why ask a question when you clearly have already decided upon the answer?

I gave you my answer. While you raise a few good points, I'd say that the reason he draws the line here is as I said that he's simply feels he cannot excuse her behaviour any longer. He could explain away her usurping secular power. He could explain away Thrasks rebellion. He could even explain away the Rite of Annulment... and probably even attacking Hawk at the end... what he cannot accept is all those put together however. It's simply too much.
It's my analysis of it anyways... feel free to disagree. But I find it helps make the entire scene work.

Hawke didn't stand down and capitulate to Meredith's authority like The Warden can with Ser Cauthrien.

No, but there was a lull in the fighting and Hawke was not charging. I know I know... it's not much.. maybe he simply seized the opportunity? Or that he had planned it earlier but couldn't muster the courage? Or he's just plain had enough then and there, for no real reason except his conciousness screaming that he should have done so much earlier?
Or maybe it's that show don't tell thing that DA2 didn't always succeed at...

If Hawke sided with Meredith, then I agree. If Hawke didn't, then I see it as a problem. When the straw is the Champion of Kirkwall and not the act of condemning an entire population of people to death for the actions of one single man (who she can easily arrest since he's standing right in front of her) simply because the people of Kirkwall "will demand blood", then I take issue with it.

Because in Cullen's mind Meredith's reasoning was legal? He does not know Anders was behind it. Meredith does not tell him. He fully expects the circle to lie about their guilt (I mean... who wouldn't? "Yes mr templar sir, we absolutely harbour blood mages and you're completely in the right to annull this circle. Please apply your blade of mercy right here" ). But when -she- breaks Chantry law... that finally opens his eyes.

And yes... there are templars who would not bat an eyelash at killing Hawke then and there. No matter what the law may say. Apparently, Cullen's not one of them. Something we see clear signs of if you do side the with the templars... despite his rethoric.

[cjones91]

In Exile wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
No Lob, hunderds are being condemened because the Circle is deemed lost. It was considered lost by many BEFORE Ander did his little terrorist act.

So you're actually on record for supporting the ROA before Anders did anything? 

Lotion does'nt consider the genocide of mages to be wrong.

[cjones91]

MisterJB wrote...

cjones91 wrote...
Mister JB is a rapid templar fanatic.

Not any more than any other pro-anything in these forums.

who holds mage to impossible standards that he does'nt hold for everyone else.

Because mages have dangerous abilities that others don't which means they must be held to higher standards.

He also seems to believe mages deserve to be mistreated simply because they have special talents nobody else has,

No but given the fact you couldn't even understand my position regarding Alrik vs Thrask; given you completely warping my words; my position would be far too complex for you to understand anyway, so I won't even bother.

he even tried to defend the actions of Ser Alrik claiming he would rather have a sadistic rapist defending him if he were a mage.

No. Like I said previously, you are harping my words.
What I said was that were I a normal person in Thedas; big difference right there; I would feel safer to have Alrik; who takes his job of keeping mages under control very seriously; guarding the Circle over Thrask, who had an Abomination as his second in command and allowed his mages to perform blood magic.
Given their track record, Alrik would clearly do a better job of keeping mages from harming me and family.
See the difference?

Alrik was a rapist who preyed on female mages by making them illegally Tranquil,the fact you seem to think he defends the mages under his care disturbs me.

[In Exile]

MisterJB wrote...
What I said was that were I a normal person in Thedas; big difference right there; I would feel safer to have Alrik; who takes his job of keeping mages under control very seriously; guarding the Circle over Thrask, who had an Abomination as his second in command and allowed his mages to perform blood magic.
Given their track record, Alrik would clearly do a better job of keeping mages from harming me and family.
See the difference?

He takes raping mages very seriously. Whether or not he'd actually protect anyone is pretty up in the air, what with his main concern being raping mages and turning them tranquil so he could rape them more. 

[MisterJB]

cjones91 wrote...
Alrik was a rapist who preyed on female mages by making them illegally Tranquil,the fact you seem to think he defends the mages under his care disturbs me.

Please transcribe the sentence where I said I believed Alrik defended mages. C'mon, my post is right there, it shouldn't be so hard.

[Battlebloodmage]

MasterScribe wrote...

Battlebloodmage wrote...

Well, an average templar doesn't usually go through 2 extreme ends where either the mage or templar take over. Basically, if you just are gonna to dismiss what he's going through, I don't think why we even need to discuss anything. It seems more like if Cullen were a hot female, you would have found him more interesting. 

1. Cassandra fills the role of hot female Chantry-type. 

2. Alistair, a failed templar who has been through lots of s***, is one of my favorite characters in DA.

3. It is almost beyond my suspension of disbelief that one, random templar somehow managed to find his way into two conflicts in two different areas. I think the writers were lazy in this regard. There were plenty of other templars in DAO that were just tossed aside.

Chantry and templar are not the same, especially if the templar broke off from the chantry. Alistair's storyarc has less about him being templar and more about him being the bastard son of Maric. He doesn't even define himself as a templar. It's also suspension of disbelief for a random pirate to just happen to steal the Qunari book which led to the invasion of Qunari in Kirkwall which then goes on to find the actual king Maric. Oh, she also hooked up with the warden. What are the chances of a random qunari that the warden meets just happen to later become the Arishok anyway? If we goes by the story flow, many characters in the game do happen to stumble on extraordinary events that don't usually happen in real life. That's what storytelling is all about.

[cjones91]

MisterJB wrote...

cjones91 wrote...
Alrik was a rapist who preyed on female mages by making them illegally Tranquil,the fact you seem to think he defends the mages under his care disturbs me.

Please transcribe the sentence where I said I believed Alrik defended mages. C'mon, my post is right there, it shouldn't be so hard.

You said that he keeps the mages under control which would include making sure they are safe.Alrik did none of these things infact he was like a corrupt prison guard who forces female prisoners to have sex with him except Alrik violates the female mages both mentally and physically.

Modifié par cjones91, 21 septembre 2013 - 08:27 .