I apologise in advance if anyone feels this post is attacking their posts. I did originally include quotes but removed them to hopefully prevent any such impressions of persecution. It is not my intent to defame anyone, and nor is it to say that mages are totally in the wrong. All I hope to do is clarify that the Templars as a whole are not the monsters they are often made out to be.
I also apologise if - by removing said quotes - parts of my response no longer make sense, but i've done my best to keep it coherent.
While i'm sure that there are those out there that will disagree, as far as i'm aware it has never been the main goal of the Templar Order to slaughter mages wholesale. And while by modern standards the original concept of the Circle of Magi may be considered "Oppressive", the fact is that the Chantry shows remarkable tolerance for such potentially dangerous individuals, going so far as to give them secure places of learning in which to practice their arts.
There are many flaws with the argument that Mages and Templars are incomparable as groups, i'm afraid, and i'll do my best to address them.
Many claim that Mages are a collection of individuals brought together by the fact that they possess magical talent. While this is true, they often go on to say that the Templars are not a group of individuals brough together by similar intangible means - namely a belief that mages need to be stewarded by responsible guardians in order to prevent any individual mage's powers running away with them (either through irresponsibility or demonic influence) - which only serves to dehumanise Templars in their view, and is - quite simply - false. The vast majority of templars are not men who join their order because they relish the idea of tearing mage-born children from their families and murdering those mages that give in to baser instincts. Instead, I would imagine they tend to be decently pleasant individuals who realise the necessity of some manner of protection for the common man, and give up their lives in pursuit of this noble goal.
The fact that 'Kidnapping and Murder' are words that are often used in context of what Anders calls 'The mages' plight' is rather revealing, demonstrating a rather slanted view of what the Templars are forced to do in order to make sure the average Thedosian does not need to fear being burned alive because they trespass on a mage's property. While I will concede that what they do to mage children is close to kidnapping, they do not do so with the intention of mistreating them, only teaching them how to control their magical gifts, lest those same gifts in turn control the mage and cause destruction that would be on an almost unimaginable scale if the Templars did not have to deal with abominations on a semi-regular basis. Murder, on the other hand, is simply not the case. Sometimes they are forced to kill a mage who has become an abomination, that is true, but they are able to do it quickly and cleanly in most cases, preventing the massive damage that an abomination would do to the typical populace were mages not kept in controlled conditions. This is more akin to the execution of a dangerous criminal than the murder of an innocent citizen. The threat posed by abominations is very real.
Finally, the idea that Templars are 'free to leave the order whenever they please' is a gross misapprehension. As we know from Alistair in DA:O - Templars are very protective of the techniques they use to defend against magic, and Alistair was only allowed to leave because - technically - he had not yet taken any Templar vows (and it was implied heavily that had he done so, the chantry would not even have released him to the Grey Wardens) and because Duncan pressed the issue of his recruitment through the right of Conscription. Considering the large number of recruits the Templars no doubt gain from dispossessed orphans in this manner, we can extrapolate that a certain number of Templars have no more choice in the matter of who they become than mages do. When someone is raised by the Chantry they have few career paths available, and boys - it would seem - are groomed to take the path of the Templar. Very few orphans ever chose to be what they are.
Ultimately, the Chantry and - by association - the Templars are a very benevolent structure that did its best to provide safety and security for everyone in an imperfect world, and I do not begrudge the Templars for being skeptical of the idea that we should let the mages police themselves. While there are certainly issues with the abuse of power on both sides of the Mage/Templar debate, there is very little justification for killing all Templars just because of what they are.
As for the original topic, my inquisitor would wrestle with the idea of killing a group of Templars that were almost certain to sympathise with their Red counterparts, but would probably show them mercy because no good ever came of gratuitous wanton slaughter.
Modifié par Frogspawned, 02 décembre 2013 - 04:21 .