935 réponses à ce sujet

[MisterJB]

Silfren wrote...
Riiiiiiight.  The very fact that mages were killed IS HIS FAULT.  You're deaf, dumb, blind, and illiterate if you honestly think that Lambert is completely innocent of the massacre that took place.

Completely innocent? No.

But what I originally answered to was iaku's argument that an "kill all mages" war was going thanks to Lambert despite the fact that Lambert does not kill a single mage when they are in his power; tried to pin the blame for Fiona's actions on Cole so that he could avoid executing them; says to Wynne before her death "We'll catch you and put you back in your cages" and his final thougths are "the mages would be put back in their place".
Not once during the entire book does he make a single reference to "kill all mages" and, despite this, people have claimed that him and the Templars under his command split from the Chantry to "kill all mages".
 

[azarhal]

MasterScribe wrote...

Back in 2011, David Gaider called Cassandra a "templar investigator." 

There is cut dialogs from DA2 where Senescal Bran talks about a Templar Seeker as well.

[Gwydden]

MisterJB wrote...
But what I originally answered to was iaku's argument that an "kill all mages" war was going thanks to Lambert despite the fact that Lambert does not kill a single mage when they are in his power; tried to pin the blame for Fiona's actions on Cole so that he could avoid executing them; says to Wynne before her death "We'll catch you and put you back in your cages" and his final thougths are "the mages would be put back in their place".
 

Even so, "putting them back in their cages" doesn't really speak of an upstanding care or consideration for other humang beings. But the, I get there was no point in sugar coating it.

[AresKeith]

Xilizhra wrote...

iakus wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Fiona didn't set anything up, you're confusing her with Adrian. And trying to avoid a war is futile; it's been a war for thousands dead or mentally destroyed. All this is is finally showing the truth. Fiona is the way forward, and I'll burn the path.

You're right, I mixed the two up.  Fiona is a firebrand, but in the end all she did was talk.

Edit:  So in the end, I think it's a pity Evangeline didn't leave Adrien dead in a ditch, not Fiona.

Adrian's too valuable. And ultimately did what was necessary.

No she didn't, she's an idiot and an example of why people don't fully trust mages

[Gwydden]

AresKeith wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

iakus wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Fiona didn't set anything up, you're confusing her with Adrian. And trying to avoid a war is futile; it's been a war for thousands dead or mentally destroyed. All this is is finally showing the truth. Fiona is the way forward, and I'll burn the path.

You're right, I mixed the two up.  Fiona is a firebrand, but in the end all she did was talk.

Edit:  So in the end, I think it's a pity Evangeline didn't leave Adrien dead in a ditch, not Fiona.

Adrian's too valuable. And ultimately did what was necessary.

No she didn't, she's an idiot and an example of why people don't fully trust mages

In the mage vs templar conundrum, there isn't a possible solution where someone somewhere doesn't get screwed up. I find it surprising how most people can decide who gets the shorter stick so easily.

[MisterJB]

Gwydden wrote...
Even so, "putting them back in their cages" doesn't really speak of an upstanding care or consideration for other humang beings. But the, I get there was no point in sugar coating it.

Lambert first served as a Templar in Tevinter and tried to change it through friendship and cooperation. The results were predictable.
Now, he makes it clear he doesn't believe compassion will earn you anything beyond a knife in the back. You can disagree with him but his plans boil down to "keep the mages in the Circle" rather than "kill'em all and let the Maker pick His own"
He even acknowledge the conditions in Kirkwall were harsh and there is worth in studying alternatives to Tranquility...just not when the mages are looking for excuses to rebel.

[Xilizhra]

MisterJB wrote...

Gwydden wrote...
Even so, "putting them back in their cages" doesn't really speak of an upstanding care or consideration for other humang beings. But the, I get there was no point in sugar coating it.

Lambert first served as a Templar in Tevinter and tried to change it through friendship and cooperation. The results were predictable.
Now, he makes it clear he doesn't believe compassion will earn you anything beyond a knife in the back. You can disagree with him but his plans boil down to "keep the mages in the Circle" rather than "kill'em all and let the Maker pick His own"
He even acknowledge the conditions in Kirkwall were harsh and there is worth in studying alternatives to Tranquility...just not when the mages are looking for excuses to rebel.

Then he's a complete idiot. He served in the one place where that would be guaranteed not to work and tried applying that lesson to an entire continent.

[Silfren]

MisterJB wrote...

Gwydden wrote...
Even so, "putting them back in their cages" doesn't really speak of an upstanding care or consideration for other humang beings. But the, I get there was no point in sugar coating it.

Lambert first served as a Templar in Tevinter and tried to change it through friendship and cooperation. The results were predictable.
Now, he makes it clear he doesn't believe compassion will earn you anything beyond a knife in the back. You can disagree with him but his plans boil down to "keep the mages in the Circle" rather than "kill'em all and let the Maker pick His own"
He even acknowledge the conditions in Kirkwall were harsh and there is worth in studying alternatives to Tranquility...just not when the mages are looking for excuses to rebel.

His reaction to the unexplained deaths of young mages was to shrug and say "Initiates die."  The man has made it clear he doesn't give a damn about mage lives.  You're trying to paint him as this man who "only" wants to lock them away, but nothing about the book suggests he wouldn't happily slaughter mages who had something to say about being imprisoned.  Why deny this?

[Gwydden]

MisterJB wrote...

Gwydden wrote...
Even so, "putting them back in their cages" doesn't really speak of an upstanding care or consideration for other humang beings. But the, I get there was no point in sugar coating it.

Lambert first served as a Templar in Tevinter and tried to change it through friendship and cooperation. The results were predictable.
Now, he makes it clear he doesn't believe compassion will earn you anything beyond a knife in the back. You can disagree with him but his plans boil down to "keep the mages in the Circle" rather than "kill'em all and let the Maker pick His own"
He even acknowledge the conditions in Kirkwall were harsh and there is worth in studying alternatives to Tranquility...just not when the mages are looking for excuses to rebel.

It was more of a comment on his phrasing than an actual critic to his methods. As templars go, there are a lot worse. For some strange reason, no matter how hard I try, the only templar shown in the games who is neither incompetent or an extremist that I can remember is Gregoir.

[Gwydden]

Silfren wrote...

His reaction to the unexplained deaths of young mages was to shrug and say "Initiates die."  The man has made it clear he doesn't give a damn about mage lives.  You're trying to paint him as this man who "only" wants to lock them away, but nothing about the book suggests he wouldn't happily slaughter mages who had something to say about being imprisoned.  Why deny this?

We know that initiates do die. Magic is incredibly dangerous and there are many ways one can be hurted while learning how to use it.

[MisterJB]

Silfren wrote...
His reaction to the unexplained deaths of young mages was to shrug and say "Initiates die."  The man has made it clear he doesn't give a damn about mage lives.  You're trying to paint him as this man who "only" wants to lock them away, but nothing about the book suggests he wouldn't happily slaughter mages who had something to say about being imprisoned.  Why deny this?

"The Lord Seeker turned and looked at Rhys in honest consternation. "This creature preys upon those I am sworn to protect, no matter how undeserving. It has fooled you, turned you into a murderer and would have made you into its host before long. Why defend it?""

So, yes, Lambert has no love lost for mages but he never lost sight of his duty, even unto the end. It's just that, unlike certain templars, he has not forgotten that his duty also includes keeping mages from threatening those outside the Circle.
And given that he didn't "happily slaugther" the First Enchanters, I'm going to say executions are not his first resort.

[Silfren]

Gwydden wrote...

Silfren wrote...

His reaction to the unexplained deaths of young mages was to shrug and say "Initiates die."  The man has made it clear he doesn't give a damn about mage lives.  You're trying to paint him as this man who "only" wants to lock them away, but nothing about the book suggests he wouldn't happily slaughter mages who had something to say about being imprisoned.  Why deny this?

We know that initiates do die. Magic is incredibly dangerous and there are many ways one can be hurted while learning how to use it.

...Seriously? My point was Lambert's callousness on the matter, and this is what you have to say?  Never minding that in this case, nobody KNEW the reason for the initiates' deaths.  That many die from accidents while learning has sh*t to do with that.  Just because there's a high death rate does not MEAN the appropriate response to mysterious, suspicious, unexplained deaths is to shrug it off.

[Gwydden]

Silfren wrote...

...Seriously? My point was Lambert's callousness on the matter, and this is what you have to say?  Never minding that in this case, nobody KNEW the reason for the initiates' deaths.  That many die from accidents while learning has sh*t to do with that.  Just because there's a high death rate does not MEAN the appropriate response to mysterious, suspicious, unexplained deaths is to shrug it off.

Maybe he simply doesn't consider it to be in his job description, and just doesn't care? Or actually believe the apprentices were fooling around with something dangerous and actully had it coming? Or maybe he just likes to act like an ass? He does take measures against Cole, if I got that right.

[Silfren]

Gwydden wrote...

Silfren wrote...

...Seriously? My point was Lambert's callousness on the matter, and this is what you have to say?  Never minding that in this case, nobody KNEW the reason for the initiates' deaths.  That many die from accidents while learning has sh*t to do with that.  Just because there's a high death rate does not MEAN the appropriate response to mysterious, suspicious, unexplained deaths is to shrug it off.

Maybe he simply doesn't consider it to be in his job description, and just doesn't care? Or actually believe the apprentices were fooling around with something dangerous and actully had it coming? Or maybe he just likes to act like an ass? He does take measures against Cole, if I got that right.

You list all those reasons as if they not only explain his behavior but justify it.  It IS his job to give a damn about mages.  He's a SEEKER.  Part of a seeker's job description was looking out for templar abuses.  Templars and seekers alike are REQUIRED to care about mages.  

If it's true that he doesn't think it's in his job description, he needs to be removed.  If he wants to dismiss it as just apprentices screwing around--when other people are sure this is not the case--he is incompetent and reckless, and again needs to be removed.  If he just wants to be an ass..then, again, he's not taking his job seriously and NEEDS. TO. BE. REMOVED.

[Gwydden]

Silfren wrote...

You list all those reasons as if they not only explain his behavior but justify it.  It IS his job to give a damn about mages.  He's a SEEKER.  Part of a seeker's job description was looking out for templar abuses.  Templars and seekers alike are REQUIRED to care about mages.  

If it's true that he doesn't think it's in his job description, he needs to be removed.  If he wants to dismiss it as just apprentices screwing around--when other people are sure this is not the case--he is incompetent and reckless, and again needs to be removed.  If he just wants to be an ass..then, again, he's not taking his job seriously and NEEDS. TO. BE. REMOVED.

I never claimed Lambert was an angel the Maker sent to Thedas to die for our sins. But he is both more reasonable and capable than most templars we've met. He goes out of his way to spare mages, and really seems to support just locking them up rather than killing or tranquilizing the whole lot of them (which some more extremist templars would be delighted to do). As mage-hunters come, one can do worse.

[Dr. Doctor]

Templars do see a fair bit of the horrors that magic can unleash on innocent people. It becomes a little hard to view mages as people when you've seen demons unleashed, people enthralled, villages burned down, etc.

From a moral standpoint, it probably isn't going to do much for morale in the Circle Tower if a Seeker of Truth isn't interested in finding out who's murdering apprentices. Seekers are supposed to, well...seek things. In all actuality most people on the street probably aren't going to care too much about it mages are just unlucky souls who get locked up in a tower somewhere, best not to worry about them unless the place explodes or demons start pouring out everywhere.

[dragonflight288]

Gwydden wrote...

Silfren wrote...

You list all those reasons as if they not only explain his behavior but justify it.  It IS his job to give a damn about mages.  He's a SEEKER.  Part of a seeker's job description was looking out for templar abuses.  Templars and seekers alike are REQUIRED to care about mages.  

If it's true that he doesn't think it's in his job description, he needs to be removed.  If he wants to dismiss it as just apprentices screwing around--when other people are sure this is not the case--he is incompetent and reckless, and again needs to be removed.  If he just wants to be an ass..then, again, he's not taking his job seriously and NEEDS. TO. BE. REMOVED.

I never claimed Lambert was an angel the Maker sent to Thedas to die for our sins. But he is both more reasonable and capable than most templars we've met. He goes out of his way to spare mages, and really seems to support just locking them up rather than killing or tranquilizing the whole lot of them (which some more extremist templars would be delighted to do). As mage-hunters come, one can do worse.

Reasonable people don't go into a legl meeting and say 'break it up, you're all under arrest, and if you disagree with me, my associates will kill you.'

[Hellion Rex]

dragonflight288 wrote...

Gwydden wrote...

Silfren wrote...

You list all those reasons as if they not only explain his behavior but justify it.  It IS his job to give a damn about mages.  He's a SEEKER.  Part of a seeker's job description was looking out for templar abuses.  Templars and seekers alike are REQUIRED to care about mages.  

If it's true that he doesn't think it's in his job description, he needs to be removed.  If he wants to dismiss it as just apprentices screwing around--when other people are sure this is not the case--he is incompetent and reckless, and again needs to be removed.  If he just wants to be an ass..then, again, he's not taking his job seriously and NEEDS. TO. BE. REMOVED.

I never claimed Lambert was an angel the Maker sent to Thedas to die for our sins. But he is both more reasonable and capable than most templars we've met. He goes out of his way to spare mages, and really seems to support just locking them up rather than killing or tranquilizing the whole lot of them (which some more extremist templars would be delighted to do). As mage-hunters come, one can do worse.

Reasonable people don't go into a legl meeting and say 'break it up, you're all under arrest, and if you disagree with me, my associates will kill you.'

Ah, dragonflight, I love your analogies.

[Hellion Rex]

Gwydden wrote...

Silfren wrote...

You list all those reasons as if they not only explain his behavior but justify it.  It IS his job to give a damn about mages.  He's a SEEKER.  Part of a seeker's job description was looking out for templar abuses.  Templars and seekers alike are REQUIRED to care about mages.  

If it's true that he doesn't think it's in his job description, he needs to be removed.  If he wants to dismiss it as just apprentices screwing around--when other people are sure this is not the case--he is incompetent and reckless, and again needs to be removed.  If he just wants to be an ass..then, again, he's not taking his job seriously and NEEDS. TO. BE. REMOVED.

I never claimed Lambert was an angel the Maker sent to Thedas to die for our sins. But he is both more reasonable and capable than most templars we've met. He goes out of his way to spare mages, and really seems to support just locking them up rather than killing or tranquilizing the whole lot of them (which some more extremist templars would be delighted to do). As mage-hunters come, one can do worse.

Reasonable my a**. Spare mages? Like he told Evangeline to kill Rhys, Wynne, and Adrian if any counter measure to Tranquility were found?

[Gwydden]

dragonflight288 wrote...

Reasonable people don't go into a legl meeting and say 'break it up, you're all under arrest, and if you disagree with me, my associates will kill you.'

I clarified that he was reasonable when compared to other templars we've met (Meredith, Alrik, Cullen a bit), while at the same time not being as incompetent as others (Thrask, Cullen again).

[dragonflight288]

Gwydden wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

Reasonable people don't go into a legl meeting and say 'break it up, you're all under arrest, and if you disagree with me, my associates will kill you.'

I clarified that he was reasonable when compared to other templars we've met (Meredith, Alrik, Cullen a bit), while at the same time not being as incompetent as others (Thrask, Cullen again).

Reasonable compared to others means exactly what, in the end? That's like saying he's reasonable compared to a mad serial killer, or reasonable compared to someone who has lost all sense of reason or logic. Or reasonable compared to someone who is traumatized.

That's hardly comforting from the person in charge of making sure templars don't abuse mages.

What I expect from a reasonable, well-rounded templar or seeker, is someone who takes every aspect of the job seriously. Including the parts that they protect mages from others. Not just protect others from mages.

[dragonflight288]

eluvianix wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

Gwydden wrote...

Silfren wrote...

You list all those reasons as if they not only explain his behavior but justify it.  It IS his job to give a damn about mages.  He's a SEEKER.  Part of a seeker's job description was looking out for templar abuses.  Templars and seekers alike are REQUIRED to care about mages.  

If it's true that he doesn't think it's in his job description, he needs to be removed.  If he wants to dismiss it as just apprentices screwing around--when other people are sure this is not the case--he is incompetent and reckless, and again needs to be removed.  If he just wants to be an ass..then, again, he's not taking his job seriously and NEEDS. TO. BE. REMOVED.

I never claimed Lambert was an angel the Maker sent to Thedas to die for our sins. But he is both more reasonable and capable than most templars we've met. He goes out of his way to spare mages, and really seems to support just locking them up rather than killing or tranquilizing the whole lot of them (which some more extremist templars would be delighted to do). As mage-hunters come, one can do worse.

Reasonable people don't go into a legl meeting and say 'break it up, you're all under arrest, and if you disagree with me, my associates will kill you.'

Ah, dragonflight, I love your analogies.

Thanks.

[Gwydden]

dragonflight288 wrote...

Gwydden wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

Reasonable people don't go into a legl meeting and say 'break it up, you're all under arrest, and if you disagree with me, my associates will kill you.'

I clarified that he was reasonable when compared to other templars we've met (Meredith, Alrik, Cullen a bit), while at the same time not being as incompetent as others (Thrask, Cullen again).

Reasonable compared to others means exactly what, in the end? That's like saying he's reasonable compared to a mad serial killer, or reasonable compared to someone who has lost all sense of reason or logic. Or reasonable compared to someone who is traumatized.

That's hardly comforting from the person in charge of making sure templars don't abuse mages.

What I expect from a reasonable, well-rounded templar or seeker, is someone who takes every aspect of the job seriously. Including the parts that they protect mages from others. Not just protect others from mages.

My point is that if you actually wanted a templar that will protect you from mages, he wouldn't be that terrible a choice. As I said, the only "good" templar we've actually met in the games, as far as I can remember, is Gregoir.