dragonflight288 wrote...
She could ease things and remove Meredith from political power, power that she shouldn't have as a templar anyway (Imnirick from Origins, gave up his noble status and rights to be a bann in favor of Alfstana and became a templar) but she doesn't.
Trolldrool wrote...
How come everytime anyone wants a pro-templar templar in their party, everyone automatically assumes we're die-hard Chantry fanboys who believe the templars are right to oppress mages? I want a templar for the dialogue potential. Because I think they might offer an interesting perspective on the whole veil being torn asunder, whether I disagree with that perspective or not. And because templars are pretty handy in a fight with demons.
In Exile wrote...
dragonflight288 wrote...
She could ease things and remove Meredith from political power, power that she shouldn't have as a templar anyway (Imnirick from Origins, gave up his noble status and rights to be a bann in favor of Alfstana and became a templar) but she doesn't.
It's pretty obvious Meredith wasn't going to step down. She listened to Elthina, but by the end of the game had already gone over her head to get the ROA. If Elthina actually fired her, do you think Meredith woul have relented?
dragonflight288 wrote...
But she would've lost legitimate claim to her post as Knight-Commander, and Cullen could easily have stepped in and relieved her of command, and then she could be sent to Val Royeaux like any other retired templar whose brain has been addled by lyrium.
And if she violently resisted, that would make her a criminal, and would therefore given Aveline and the guard reason to arrest her, rather than the other way around the templars were trying.
It was never going to be peaceful. But I believe Elthina's inaction caused far more harm than good. Elthina could've done acted against Meredith without acting against the templars or the Chantry's position on mages, and she could've easily asked the Champion (Hawke) or the City-Guard to make sure the transition went as peacefully as possible.
Modifié par In Exile, 22 septembre 2013 - 06:50 .
dragonflight288 wrote...
Cullen steps in at the end of the game and tells Meredith to stand down. I think he would've.
Would things have improved? I don't know. I haven't seen him act as Knight-Commander, but as a lackey of Meredith who had been traumatized by mages. But he is open to looking into a middle ground in Act 1, even if many of his comments are quite extreme.
At the very least, Cullen wasn't trying to oust Aveline, and he never was called 'the power in Kirkwall' like the city guard calls Meredith before Hawke even enters the city. That means that things would've at least improved in the city itself. I don't think he'd approve of templar death-squads killing non-mages in broad daylight.
I don't think Fiona would've relented, but if Kirkwall never happened, the tension would've never have risen to the point it was at in Asunder to begin with. I can't claim to speak for 'what-if's' or 'perhaps.' It is what it is.
But the tension did rise as a result of Meredith's barely-legal, unjustifiable Right of Annulment, and was made even heavier when the Seekers Annulled Rivain's Circle because some Seers were in contact with their families.
If Anders still blew up the Chantry, I don't know what Knight-Commander Cullen would've done, but I don't think he'd have called for a Right of Annulment on the spot the way Meredith did, and the tension, while it would still be higher, wouldn't have been as high.
By Asunder, many mages now believe (rightly) that the templars don't care about their guilt or innocence anymore, and would have them all killed on technicalities if they could....which Lambert goes and proves.
So, in the end, I guess the war was bound to happen, and it's best to get it over with quickly.
And you understimate how much opposition she had from the city's nobles and the city guards. Not every templar supported Meredith.
Great, now I have that scene from Return of the Jedi in my head. "Your overconfidence is your weakness." "Your faith in your friends is yours."
Why not? They were quite eager to depose her, so they could consolidate power. She was getting fed up with the templars interfering with her job. I'm willing to bet that if it hastened the city coming to order, and getting a proper Viscount, she'd be all over it.
In the latter case, it's because the magister himself was either breaking or twisting the law and how an instance of vigilantism would be the only way to see justice done.I actually have a poorer view of Aveline that most re: her adherence to law and order, based on how she approached the elves plight in Act II and how she was (interestingly) OK with vigillantee justice in the magistrate's son quest.
Evangeline. Is. Not. A. Moderate.dragonflight288 wrote...
But if they're more moderate, like Evangeline, then that would be perfectly fine.
Plaintiff wrote...
...Then he's negligent. Hawke is never able to go beyond the Gallows courtyard, but it takes all of five minutes to discover that physical and sexual abuse against mages are being committed within its walls. A tranquil store vendor mentions being beaten when her wares are stolen, another tranquil mage claims to "belong to Ser Alrik".Though I wonder, perhaps he simply was to blind to see what was going on around him? Cause, I might be wrong about him but I think he's not the type of person who could allow abuses to be commited in front of him and do nothing about it. I supose that, in his mind, he was simply doing his job?
If Hawke can fnd this stuff out in only a few trips to The Gallows, then Cullen, who spends all day every day working there, has no excuses. The only way these problems could possibly escape his notice is if he willfully ignored them. Which makes him culpable in the wrongdoing. I'd say as their commanding officer, he bears an equal share of the blame.Yes, it's true that Cullen's attitude is 'normal' for Thedas. But being normal doesn't make it aceptable.Anyway, since Asunder I tend to relativise, because the climat of paranoia was not something only present in Kirkwall but also in other circles (and abuses were comited there too). So the entire system seems dysfunctional, not only one spot.
Modifié par MWImexico, 22 septembre 2013 - 12:21 .
In Exile wrote...
dragonflight288 wrote...
She could ease things and remove Meredith from political power, power that she shouldn't have as a templar anyway (Imnirick from Origins, gave up his noble status and rights to be a bann in favor of Alfstana and became a templar) but she doesn't.
It's pretty obvious Meredith wasn't going to step down. She listened to Elthina, but by the end of the game had already gone over her head to get the ROA. If Elthina actually fired her, do you think Meredith woul have relented?
MisterJB wrote...
Evangeline. Is. Not. A. Moderate.dragonflight288 wrote...
But if they're more moderate, like Evangeline, then that would be perfectly fine.
It grows tiresome to hear people exalt her when she is, in fact, the very worst Templar. By the end of Asunder, she managed to give every mage the freedom to do whatever they wish to whoever they wish whenever they wish; because she can't bloody well keep every mage in Thedas under control by herself: and also helped to start a war that is going to engulf the entire continent. "Kill all mages" is just as much an extremist position as "Free all mages".
Evangeline is a traitor to every non-magical person in Thedas and every drop of blood spilled in this war is on her hands. Hopefully, she'll be tried and executed.
MWImexico wrote...
*snip*
Tranquils are different in their way of thinking. Maybe they thought it is safer to not talk about their agressions to an other templar? Or maybe they are like Carl who betrays Anders since he is made trankil? There are a lots of reason why a mage will rather talk to Hawke of his problem than to the Knight-Captain, especialy if he was threaten to death if he does so.
My problem is, even in Asunder, there are abuses, ok. But you see Evangeline, a nice little templar doing her job in the begining of the book. And she doesn't seems to realise those abuses exist. It could be compared to a jail where some guardians are abusers but the director doesn't know about it, because the law of silence is applied.
^ also thisdragonflight288 wrote...
I think Evangeline was more loyal to the Chantry and what was right, rather than Lambert and his rigid ideals.
Modifié par MWImexico, 22 septembre 2013 - 02:35 .
Fiona broke both the law and the Divine's trust the moment she attemptef to hijack the meeting to fulfill her agenda; that meeting was an olive branch extended by a Chantry and it was called to discuss the Right of Tranquily, not sedition. At that point, Lambert should have been well within his rights to put an end to it.dragonflight288 wrote...
Lambert and every templar following him were breaking the law, were going against the Divine, and Lambert ordered an attack on the mages for something he feared might happen. Lambert and everyone who stood with him were in the wrong. They struck the first blow, they started the killing, and they outright stated that the perfectly legal meeting the mages were at was to be disbanded despite the authority given to them by the Divine.
I think Evangeline was more loyal to the Chantry and what was right, rather than Lambert and his rigid ideals.
MisterJB wrote...
Fiona broke both the law and the Divine's trust the moment she attemptef to hijack the meeting to fulfill her agenda; that meeting was an olive branch extended by a Chantry and it was called to discuss the Right of Tranquily, not sedition. At that point, Lambert should have been well within his rights to put an end to it.dragonflight288 wrote...
Lambert and every templar following him were breaking the law, were going against the Divine, and Lambert ordered an attack on the mages for something he feared might happen. Lambert and everyone who stood with him were in the wrong. They struck the first blow, they started the killing, and they outright stated that the perfectly legal meeting the mages were at was to be disbanded despite the authority given to them by the Divine.
I think Evangeline was more loyal to the Chantry and what was right, rather than Lambert and his rigid ideals.
Even if I were to accept Lambert was in the wrong, there are different degrees of wrongness. Lambert remained faithful to the Templar and Chantry's ideals of controlling the mages and keeping them from harming others; Evangeline and the Divine both completely threw those ideals out of the window and not only did they unleash biological weapons on an unsuspecting populace but they also precipitated Thedas into a global conflict that will cause thousands of deaths.
Regardless of how "wrong" Lambert was, what Justinia and Leliana and Evangeline did was far worse. They sided with the mages against their own people.
MisterJB wrote...
Evangeline. Is. Not. A. Moderate.dragonflight288 wrote...
But if they're more moderate, like Evangeline, then that would be perfectly fine.
It grows tiresome to hear people exalt her when she is, in fact, the very worst Templar. By the end of Asunder, she managed to give every mage the freedom to do whatever they wish to whoever they wish whenever they wish; because she can't bloody well keep every mage in Thedas under control by herself: and also helped to start a war that is going to engulf the entire continent. "Kill all mages" is just as much an extremist position as "Free all mages".
Evangeline is a traitor to every non-magical person in Thedas and every drop of blood spilled in this war is on her hands. Hopefully, she'll be tried and executed.
Modifié par duckley, 22 septembre 2013 - 02:56 .
Such is the world. Exceptions exist but people form groups to which they are drawn to, identify with, have loyalty towards and, ultimately, wish to live amidst. These groups may be formed on biological, cultural or ideological basis but they always exist.Gwydden wrote...
I disagree that they betrayed their own people. You're basically stating that every mage, because of being a mage, automatically feels identifyied with the mages as a group instead of just thinking of himself as an individual with a certain trait, and that the same goes for non mages. You're pushing people into categories they're suposed to have some sort of loyalty to simply because the way they were born.
That gladdens me but I'm afraid I must disagree with this post of yours.duckley wrote...
I tend to agree with you.
What abuses were going on for years at the White Spire? I can't recall any.Evangeline was not much different than Cullen. She knew of the abuses going on for years at the White Spire and did nothing.
That's just it. I don't think she tried to do the right thing. I think she allowed her feelings to could her judgment and made the worst decision possible.Despite that I like Evangeline as a character, because in the end, she tried to do the right thing, as did Cullen.
MisterJB wrote...
Such is the world. Exceptions exist but people form groups to which they are drawn to, identify with, have loyalty towards and, ultimately, wish to live amidst. These groups may be formed on biological, cultural or ideological basis but they always exist.Gwydden wrote...
I disagree that they betrayed their own people. You're basically stating that every mage, because of being a mage, automatically feels identifyied with the mages as a group instead of just thinking of himself as an individual with a certain trait, and that the same goes for non mages. You're pushing people into categories they're suposed to have some sort of loyalty to simply because the way they were born.
In Thedas, two such groups are normals and mages. They live apart, follow different cultural norms and are biologically distinct. In endagering every single normal in Thedas for the sake of the mages, Evangeline and others have betrayed their people.
Modifié par MWImexico, 22 septembre 2013 - 03:22 .
Modifié par AstusOz, 22 septembre 2013 - 03:39 .
Xilizhra wrote...
In the latter case, it's because the magister himself was either breaking or twisting the law and how an instance of vigilantism would be the only way to see justice done.
DarthLaxian wrote...
yes - not voluntarily, no, but without being in command (her templars would not obey her without her being appointed by the grand-cleric!) she could not have gone on a rampage (!) - well she alone might have (with a few other fanatics) but the rest of the templars would probably have tried to stop them (and her in particular)
greetings LAX
Trolldrool wrote...
How come everytime anyone wants a pro-templar templar in their party, everyone automatically assumes we're die-hard Chantry fanboys who believe the templars are right to oppress mages? I want a templar for the dialogue potential. Because I think they might offer an interesting perspective on the whole veil being torn asunder, whether I disagree with that perspective or not. And because templars are pretty handy in a fight with demons.
In Exile wrote...
I don't think the abuses that occured for 7 years would be possible without the majority of her men to be fanatics like her. It's not as if she was ordering Alrik and Karras to rape mages.
Modifié par Sir JK, 22 septembre 2013 - 05:00 .
Retour en haut