Who would that be?
Because "temaplrs hate mages" is definately NOT true.
Not even in Kirkwall.
By Bethanies own admission.
TheRedVipress wrote...
Not true.
If you take Harry Potter as an example, Dumbldore was merely a symbol for a large group of sane magic users.
Darth Brotarian wrote...
and DAO is full of templars who don't follow that sentiment, and DA2 has templars that even go farther to saying we all should work together fully.
So I guess we're now at an impass. Both exists, both in large numbers, and no way to prove one way or another whose more correct.
KainD wrote...
More like a symbol to a group of nonsensical mages.
eluvianix wrote...
Bethany was simply protected by Hawke's reputation (as a noble and Champion and the fact that Cullen said he'd keep an eye on her. While that doesn't vilify every templar in Kirkwall, neither does it say they were all nice.Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Willowhugger wrote...
I wouldn't say it's the most logical one as it basically leashes the Mages to a bunch of people who utterly hate them and sticks them together, which allows them to simultaneously seethe and resent their status as mages WHILE ALSO putting them in gigantic groups where they can join together and become a threat.
Who would that be?
Because "temaplrs hate mages" is definately NOT true.
Not even in Kirkwall.
By Bethanies own admission.
TheRedVipress wrote...
Not quite true.
Even those Templars who don't really hate mages, are the product of chantry propoganda and mind washing.
Which abuses? Karl and the Alrik situation?ianvillan wrote...
eluvianix wrote...
Bethany was simply protected by Hawke's reputation (as a noble and Champion and the fact that Cullen said he'd keep an eye on her. While that doesn't vilify every templar in Kirkwall, neither does it say they were all nice.Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Willowhugger wrote...
I wouldn't say it's the most logical one as it basically leashes the Mages to a bunch of people who utterly hate them and sticks them together, which allows them to simultaneously seethe and resent their status as mages WHILE ALSO putting them in gigantic groups where they can join together and become a threat.
Who would that be?
Because "temaplrs hate mages" is definately NOT true.
Not even in Kirkwall.
By Bethanies own admission.
Why would Cullen have to keep an eye on her if the Templars were nice to mages.
Cullen saying he would keep an eye on Bethany shows that he knew about the abuses happening in the circle and was doing nothing to stop it, It shows that he even supported them.
Most supporters point out Cullen as a model Templar, if he allowed abuses to happen then it shows what Templars are like.
TheRedVipress wrote...
I didn't bring Dumbledore as an example for effectiveness or logic. (and neither most of his followers)
He is merely an exemple for a powerfull magic user that opposed what can only be seen as evil.
eluvianix wrote...
Which abuses? Karl and the Alrik situation?ianvillan wrote...
eluvianix wrote...
Bethany was simply protected by Hawke's reputation (as a noble and Champion and the fact that Cullen said he'd keep an eye on her. While that doesn't vilify every templar in Kirkwall, neither does it say they were all nice.Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Willowhugger wrote...
I wouldn't say it's the most logical one as it basically leashes the Mages to a bunch of people who utterly hate them and sticks them together, which allows them to simultaneously seethe and resent their status as mages WHILE ALSO putting them in gigantic groups where they can join together and become a threat.
Who would that be?
Because "temaplrs hate mages" is definately NOT true.
Not even in Kirkwall.
By Bethanies own admission.
Why would Cullen have to keep an eye on her if the Templars were nice to mages.
Cullen saying he would keep an eye on Bethany shows that he knew about the abuses happening in the circle and was doing nothing to stop it, It shows that he even supported them.
Most supporters point out Cullen as a model Templar, if he allowed abuses to happen then it shows what Templars are like.
And how's that?
Modifié par Willowhugger, 23 janvier 2014 - 06:34 .
ianvillan wrote...
One of the many yes.
Yeah, considering nobody knew about that, and Alrik forbade anyone from bothering either Meredith or Cullen about it, I don't hold Meredith or Cullen responsible on that.
Modifié par Willowhugger, 23 janvier 2014 - 06:36 .
Willowhugger wrote...
And how's that?
One Templar is cast out of the order simply for relaying some mail between a mage and his lover.
All Templars must be ready to do the Rite of Annulment.
All Templars must keep mages imprisoned in the Circles.
In the Mage Origin, we find a faithful Andrastian praying about how her magic is a curse.
I think it's pretty clear being a mage is a black mark in most faithful's eyes.
The Templars aren't required to love mages in the least. And a Circle is hardly the best place to raise a child. Pray tell what do you think would happen if an Annulment was proclaimed on a Circle that had CHILDREN in there?Willowhugger wrote...
Yeah, considering nobody knew about that, and Alrik forbade anyone from bothering either Meredith or Cullen about it, I don't hold Meredith or Cullen responsible on that.
Alrik represents the worst of the system.
Evangeline represents the best.
But even the best system prevents mages from raising their own children.
Templars may not hate Mages but their love is pretty damn awful.
The Templars aren't required to love mages in the least. And a Circle is hardly the best place to raise a child. Pray tell what do you think would happen if an Annulment was proclaimed on a Circle that had CHILDREN in there?
eluvianix wrote...
The Templars aren't required to love mages in the least. And a Circle is hardly the best place to raise a child. Pray tell what do you think would happen if an Annulment was proclaimed on a Circle that had CHILDREN in there?
Willowhugger wrote...
One Templar is cast out of the order simply for relaying some mail between a mage and his lover.
All Templars must be ready to do the Rite of Annulment.
All Templars must keep mages imprisoned in the Circles.
In the Mage Origin, we find a faithful Andrastian praying about how her magic is a curse.
Wynne has her child taken away and while I don't take Orson Scott Card's comic as canon (who hired HIM of all people?), he correctly zeroed in on how ****ed up that is.
I think it's pretty clear being a mage is a black mark in most faithful's eyes.
Willowhugger wrote...
The Templars aren't required to love mages in the least. And a Circle is hardly the best place to raise a child. Pray tell what do you think would happen if an Annulment was proclaimed on a Circle that had CHILDREN in there?
See Origins, it DOES have children there.
Modifié par eluvianix, 23 janvier 2014 - 06:39 .
Willowhugger wrote...
The Templars aren't required to love mages in the least. And a Circle is hardly the best place to raise a child. Pray tell what do you think would happen if an Annulment was proclaimed on a Circle that had CHILDREN in there?
See Origins, it DOES have children there.
TheRedVipress wrote...
eluvianix wrote...
The Templars aren't required to love mages in the least. And a Circle is hardly the best place to raise a child. Pray tell what do you think would happen if an Annulment was proclaimed on a Circle that had CHILDREN in there?
According to lore, there are probably children in every circle.
ianvillan wrote...
Willowhugger wrote...
The Templars aren't required to love mages in the least. And a Circle is hardly the best place to raise a child. Pray tell what do you think would happen if an Annulment was proclaimed on a Circle that had CHILDREN in there?
See Origins, it DOES have children there.
Children the Templars let fight abominations while they hid a few rooms away, Children who were helping to keep the abominations contained while the Templars hid. Children they had sentenced to death for no fault of their own and who's only crime was escaping from abominations.
eluvianix wrote...
ianvillan wrote...
One of the many yes.
Yeah, considering nobody knew about that, and Alrik forbade anyone from bothering either Meredith or Cullen about it, I don't hold Meredith or Cullen responsible on that.
At the age of 6 to 12 which their still learning the basics to magic, still no babies
eluvianix wrote...
ianvillan wrote...
Willowhugger wrote...
The Templars aren't required to love mages in the least. And a Circle is hardly the best place to raise a child. Pray tell what do you think would happen if an Annulment was proclaimed on a Circle that had CHILDREN in there?
See Origins, it DOES have children there.
Children the Templars let fight abominations while they hid a few rooms away, Children who were helping to keep the abominations contained while the Templars hid. Children they had sentenced to death for no fault of their own and who's only crime was escaping from abominations.
Templars who were trying to prevent a full blown, pride demon led demonic takeover from spilling out of the Circle.
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut