8640 réponses à ce sujet

[Hellion Rex]

durasteel wrote...

The Guardian of the Gauntlet challenges the will and courage of everyone other than Dog and Shale. He tries to use doubt and regret to weaken the Warden's and companions' resolve before A Test of Faith to reach the Urn.

As I remember it, when he challenges Leliana's faith in her vision, she responds without doubt or hesitation, although she sounds annoyed. Been a while since I saw the conversation.

Wait, what did that have to do with this debate exactly?

[LobselVith8]

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I rather liked Merrill, and I respected her for trying to end the plight of the People. I think about this quote from Merrill when I think about the character: "Anders... there's no such thing as a good spirit. There never was. All spirits are dangerous. I understood that. I'm sorry that you didn't."

I'm hoping that, in the playthrough where Merrill opposed Meredith at the heart of templar power over eastern Thedas, the Dalish Inquisitor can speak positively about her, similar to how an apostate Champion can be a hero to the mages if Hawke opposes Meredith's Right of Annulment, in the same way a supporter of Meredith can become a hero to the templars by aiding the Knight-Commander.

I know that since the Elf Mage will have a Dalish backstory, I plan on making a Merrill.

That's cool. 

I'm thinking about a Dalish Inquisitor who will aspire to help the Elvhen. I was inspired by Addai's "The Wolf at the Edge of Camp" story with a Dalish mage Warden (who came across as an elven kwitzach haderach to me).

[Mistic]

Taleroth wrote...

In DAO, the conflict was unconvincing. The harrowing still doesn't make any sense to me, it's just an invitation to possession. The Mages and Templars leaders act like brothers, sometimes friends, sometimes petty rivals. And the entire demonic incursion is solved by 4 people, which included 0 real templars, and probably a mage or two. And after it all, nobody really seemed to act like there was any great loss. Irving sounded like he was just bothered about having to repaint the tower. Not that there was some great tragedy that could only have been averted if they'd locked people in towers and had Templars that weren't useless do-nothings.

That's because people in Ferelden have a stiff upper lip Nothing fazes them. Ah, so there were tons of demons, abominations and blood mages? And then the templars tried to use the Right of Annulment? Well, let's not dwell on the past. We have to look forward to the future! And kill darkspawn! If there's a problem, there's always the Warden to take care of things.

Cullen was a failure at keeping his composure, that's why he ended up in Kirkwall

[durasteel]

eluvianix wrote...
Wait, what did that have to do with this debate exactly?

Responsive to several posts on the previous page, beginning with the 5th post down, by MWZ.

[LobselVith8]

Master Warder Z wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

Master Warder Z wrote...

Pfft.

Last i bothered to check that the only replies getting response to were of things at least vaguely relating to the thread.

Not a knife earred race that will be extinct in  a few generations. 

Meh. The concept art makes me think otherwise. 

Well yeah it is Lob.

He will try to turn everything into a Dalish thread. 

There seemed to be a few other discussions going on before I addressed the different cultural view of the Beyond and spirits, like the topic about Leliana's vision and the Guardian.

You're welcome to focus back to the topic at hand if you'd like (like Taleroth did), rather than repeatedly talking about the Elvhen and then blaming me for one the current discussions focusing on elves.

[durasteel]

Misticsan wrote...
That's because people in Ferelden have a stiff upper lip Nothing fazes them. ...

A lifetime spent drinking tea that smells faintly like wet dog will tend to leave one fortified.

/pinky

[Master Warder Z_]

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

Master Warder Z wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Master Warder Z wrote...

Personally? I find this line by Fenris pretty much sums up Merril to a T.

Fenris: Ignore the tiger not its fault its going to eat you.

._. Idiotic Blood Mage Craven. 

I rather liked Merrill, and I respected her for trying to end the plight of the People. I think about this quote from Merrill when I think about the character: "Anders... there's no such thing as a good spirit. There never was. All spirits are dangerous. I understood that. I'm sorry that you didn't."

I'm hoping that, in the playthrough where Merrill opposed Meredith at the heart of templar power over eastern Thedas, the Dalish Inquisitor can speak positively about her, similar to how an apostate Champion can be a hero to the mages if Hawke opposes Meredith's Right of Annulment, in the same way a supporter of Meredith can become a hero to the templars by aiding the Knight-Commander.

I know that since the Elf Mage will have a Dalish backstory, I plan on making a Merrill.

I plan on beheading a merril if she pops up in game 

You plan on beheading any mage in this game if an opportunity presents itself, so I'm not surprised.:innocent:

Not "any" just those part of the rebellion that i encounter in my path.

*gives an egg roll*

:innocent:

[Cainhurst Crow]

durasteel wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...
I don't think orlais was wrong in calling an exalted march, considering their territories were being seized one after another and their capital was sacked. If my capital city was sacked, I would want to call any and all resources available to push out and pursue the attackers.

I have looked for any indication that Val Royeaux was sacked by the elves. I haven't found it. I don't think it happened.

2:10 Glory – The elves capture Montsimmard, a major strategic settlement for Orlais, then march on Val Royeaux.

To me that sounds like montsimmard was taken, and then the dalish went and attacked Val Royeaux, thus "marching" on it. Even i not, the intention to attack the city was clear from that timeline description, as was the dalish claiming territory that wasn't theirs and had nothing to do with them. You'd have to be crazy not to try and call up a military call to arms against them at that point.

[Martyr1777]

ShadowLordXII wrote...

Perhaps Asunder does grant a more even presentation, but I'm little skeptical about counting it against the main games considering that it screams of "Required Reading" or in tv tropes terms, "Explained in the Manuel". In short, the book seems more optional and supplemental to stuff that we've seen in the main games rather then superceding them in terms of "canon".

Take for instance "Stolen Throne" and "The Calling"...both are great stand-alone stories that also supplement information that we're given in DA: O and it's expansion, Awakening. But we don't need to read those books to understand why the Orlesian Occupation was bad or why Loghain is a complicated character, the games give us enough information.

Here, I get the impression that Asunder is retconning the origins of the Mage-Templar War after DAII explicitely stated that the Kirkwall Breakdown was the start of the conflict. Asunder essentially renders the struggles of Hawke as pointless in the overall picture since according to Asunder, all Hawke did was kick over a bucket of oil but someone else actually set it on fire.

Plus even Asunder falls prey to my original OP's sentiment because not only are the templars almost unanimously oppressive, but apparently the seekers, the organization meant to keep the templars in line, appear to be just as bad due to Lambert's understandable, but still zealous position on magic. I still see no reason why the Circle shouldn't break away from the Chantry considering how oppressive their executive branches are and how useless the Divine appears to be in the grand picture.

You know...the more that I think about it and trace the dots, the more that this whole conflict seems to be yet another magnificent failure on the part of the Chantry. Or it's probably just me.

I see what you mean, but I feel differently.

I don't think Asunder invalidated DA2, their are many referances to Kirkwall in Asunder. Kirkwall is the spark, the last straw, etc. It got all the other Circles really on their toes and gave all kinds of fire to the Libritarians. While at the same time making the Templars more nervous.

A great comparison is what someone else said about the America Revolution, first real battles were in 1775, but independence wasn't officially declared until a year later. Kirkwall is the spark that started it all but it wasn't the begining of the actual war.

If anything I think Asunder shows the compromise of both sides very plainly, because its after the events of Kirkwall they are still trying to talk. The only thing that finally drove the majority of mages away from the side of peace was the attack on the First Enchanters. So Lambert was an extreme zealot and reminds me very much of Meredith. But like the whole purpose of DA2, Lambert was a character on the extreme, just as Adrian and Fiona were on the Mage side.

But then you get that the original Knight Commander was much more understanding than Lambert. But most of all you have Evengeline and Rhys... Both started out very much on their own side but obviously came around. Not to mention the Insight into the duty of a Templar as Evengeline states many times. They are not just to protect against the mages but to protect the mages themselves. I don't remember that mentalliy being shown at all in the games and it really stood out to me in Asunder.

In fact I think its that first indepth look of a moderate Templar that makes Asunder stand out. I was going to say I didn't think Asunder as required reading, but for that aspect I fell you may be correct since you don't get that moderate view or the internal struggle of the Circle fraternities. I would say if you just want to play the games then it certainly isn't but if you want to really dive into the lore like us then certainly it should be considered 'required' which I think makes sense.

Thats being said though, the games are sadly flawed in a few regards. for DA2 it was just rushed and not fleshed out. So there is alot of muddiness in the story and just felt too forced, everyone was of an extreme.

Now this is personal belief... DAO wasn't flawed in and of itself, but more so the setting of DA grew and evolved more over time. So there are diferences between the books and DAO. For instance I can't stand Loghain in DAO, but after reading Stolen Throne I think he's a very interesting character. The problem is I don't see them as the same character. I could never picture the ST Loghain, after all the ways he behaved, ever possibly behaving like he did in DAO. I feel it was just Loghain developing more in the book then he did in Origins so you had some diferences. I would say the same for the mage vs templar issue. While it was felt to a degree in Origins it really didn't have the power that it now does. We didn't get to explore it in Origins, we just killed a lot of demons and abominations and the Knight Commander was very much 'Meh, I don't care, whatever you think is best Warden.'

Origins was just lacking all the thought thats gone into the world since its release. It's good that the world has evolved and become more full to us now, but I think that makes Origins flawed in it's presentation since we miss some of these deeper items in it.

Asunder gives the first full look at the whole situation, its not just the extremes of DA2 and not just brief glimpse into the the Circle structure.Because of that you are right in that it becomes required reading if you want to really understand the lore. But its certainly not needed to enjoy the games if you don't want to get that in depth.

Not to mention I think it was by far the best of the 3 books so far. ST was good, Calling was fair (except for Hafter and... forgot his masters name, I miss them). But Asunder had some real meat to it.

[Hellion Rex]

durasteel wrote...
I have looked for any indication that Val Royeaux was sacked by the elves. I haven't found it. I don't think it happened.

"At this point, the Chantry called for a holy war against the elves that became known as the Exalted March of the Dales. While the elves eventually sacked Val Royeaux and pushed well into human lands, Halamshiral was conquered and the elves were completely crushed by 2:20 Glory."

Modifié par eluvianix, 19 février 2014 - 09:39 .

[TK514]

iakus wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

iakus wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

TheKomandorShepard wrote...
Are event described in WoT true part of history or just like codex entry?

I would say that they are probably the most accurate information we have at the moment.

They're as accurate as any researched topic you;ll find in a history book.  The author believes the events to be true and accurate, and researched them thoroughly.  But he may be mistaken or letting preconceived notions cloud his judgement.

True, perhaps. But we must make do with what we have, considering that no information we have is unbiased. It's the best we have at the moment.

Indeed.  the information is likely "true", from a certain point of view, as old Ben Kenobi would say.  But there could be erroneous details mixed in to make one side or the other look good.

I feel compelled to correct this misconception.  Again.

World of Thedas is current Word of God.  It is objective fact from the development team at the time of its publication.  It was written with an in-character tone to make it more interesting to read, not to cast doubt on its contents.  This has been stated by the Developers.  Its in Mike Laidlaw's foreword to the book.  It's the reason they released errata to correct mistaken facts in the text shortly after it was released.

People may not like what the book has to say on various subjects, but until new information comes out that contradicts or overrides it, the information in World of Thedas is fact when it comes to the setting.

[Cainhurst Crow]

eluvianix wrote...

durasteel wrote...
I have looked for any indication that Val Royeaux was sacked by the elves. I haven't found it. I don't think it happened.

"At this point, the Chantry called for a holy war against the elves that became known as the Exalted March of the Dales. While the elves eventually sacked Val Royeaux and pushed well into human lands, Halamshiral was conquered and the elves were completely crushed by 2:20 Glory."

This war lasted 10 years. Jesus.

[Master Warder Z_]

Martyr1777 wrote...

ShadowLordXII wrote...

Perhaps Asunder does grant a more even presentation, but I'm little skeptical about counting it against the main games considering that it screams of "Required Reading" or in tv tropes terms, "Explained in the Manuel". In short, the book seems more optional and supplemental to stuff that we've seen in the main games rather then superceding them in terms of "canon".

Take for instance "Stolen Throne" and "The Calling"...both are great stand-alone stories that also supplement information that we're given in DA: O and it's expansion, Awakening. But we don't need to read those books to understand why the Orlesian Occupation was bad or why Loghain is a complicated character, the games give us enough information.

Here, I get the impression that Asunder is retconning the origins of the Mage-Templar War after DAII explicitely stated that the Kirkwall Breakdown was the start of the conflict. Asunder essentially renders the struggles of Hawke as pointless in the overall picture since according to Asunder, all Hawke did was kick over a bucket of oil but someone else actually set it on fire.

Plus even Asunder falls prey to my original OP's sentiment because not only are the templars almost unanimously oppressive, but apparently the seekers, the organization meant to keep the templars in line, appear to be just as bad due to Lambert's understandable, but still zealous position on magic. I still see no reason why the Circle shouldn't break away from the Chantry considering how oppressive their executive branches are and how useless the Divine appears to be in the grand picture.

You know...the more that I think about it and trace the dots, the more that this whole conflict seems to be yet another magnificent failure on the part of the Chantry. Or it's probably just me.

I see what you mean, but I feel differently.

I don't think Asunder invalidated DA2, their are many referances to Kirkwall in Asunder. Kirkwall is the spark, the last straw, etc. It got all the other Circles really on their toes and gave all kinds of fire to the Libritarians. While at the same time making the Templars more nervous.

A great comparison is what someone else said about the America Revolution, first real battles were in 1775, but independence wasn't officially declared until a year later. Kirkwall is the spark that started it all but it wasn't the begining of the actual war.

If anything I think Asunder shows the compromise of both sides very plainly, because its after the events of Kirkwall they are still trying to talk. The only thing that finally drove the majority of mages away from the side of peace was the attack on the First Enchanters. So Lambert was an extreme zealot and reminds me very much of Meredith. But like the whole purpose of DA2, Lambert was a character on the extreme, just as Adrian and Fiona were on the Mage side.

But then you get that the original Knight Commander was much more understanding than Lambert. But most of all you have Evengeline and Rhys... Both started out very much on their own side but obviously came around. Not to mention the Insight into the duty of a Templar as Evengeline states many times. They are not just to protect against the mages but to protect the mages themselves. I don't remember that mentalliy being shown at all in the games and it really stood out to me in Asunder.

In fact I think its that first indepth look of a moderate Templar that makes Asunder stand out. I was going to say I didn't think Asunder as required reading, but for that aspect I fell you may be correct since you don't get that moderate view or the internal struggle of the Circle fraternities. I would say if you just want to play the games then it certainly isn't but if you want to really dive into the lore like us then certainly it should be considered 'required' which I think makes sense.

Thats being said though, the games are sadly flawed in a few regards. for DA2 it was just rushed and not fleshed out. So there is alot of muddiness in the story and just felt too forced, everyone was of an extreme.

Now this is personal belief... DAO wasn't flawed in and of itself, but more so the setting of DA grew and evolved more over time. So there are diferences between the books and DAO. For instance I can't stand Loghain in DAO, but after reading Stolen Throne I think he's a very interesting character. The problem is I don't see them as the same character. I could never picture the ST Loghain, after all the ways he behaved, ever possibly behaving like he did in DAO. I feel it was just Loghain developing more in the book then he did in Origins so you had some diferences. I would say the same for the mage vs templar issue. While it was felt to a degree in Origins it really didn't have the power that it now does. We didn't get to explore it in Origins, we just killed a lot of demons and abominations and the Knight Commander was very much 'Meh, I don't care, whatever you think is best Warden.'

Origins was just lacking all the thought thats gone into the world since its release. It's good that the world has evolved and become more full to us now, but I think that makes Origins flawed in it's presentation since we miss some of these deeper items in it.

Asunder gives the first full look at the whole situation, its not just the extremes of DA2 and not just brief glimpse into the the Circle structure.Because of that you are right in that it becomes required reading if you want to really understand the lore. But its certainly not needed to enjoy the games if you don't want to get that in depth.

Not to mention I think it was by far the best of the 3 books so far. ST was good, Calling was fair (except for Hafter and... forgot his masters name, I miss them). But Asunder had some real meat to it.

I patently disagree; The straw that broke the Camel's back was given before Lambert even gave the order to attack the rebellous mages.

The Mages disobeying the Divine and forgoing the topic of dicussion for the first conclave granted to them in over a year in favor of once again dicussing the topic of seperation of the circle from the chantry. Aka the topic that got the college of cumberland closed.

Their refusual to hand over a Murder suspect didn't aid the situation any and in finality the spreading of news regarding the "cure" for tranqulity was what finally sent the situation past the point of peaceful discourse and debate to the point of open war.

That said i do agree with the notion of DA evolving over time and the lore being corrected and edited as it went along; That occurs in most expansive universes, Starwars being a notable example.

[Master Warder Z_]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

durasteel wrote...
I have looked for any indication that Val Royeaux was sacked by the elves. I haven't found it. I don't think it happened.

"At this point, the Chantry called for a holy war against the elves that became known as the Exalted March of the Dales. While the elves eventually sacked Val Royeaux and pushed well into human lands, Halamshiral was conquered and the elves were completely crushed by 2:20 Glory."

This war lasted 10 years. Jesus.

Modern wars are relatively short due to improvements in weaponry, transportation and logistical shortcomings that prevented swifter campaigns in the past.

[durasteel]

Returning to the issue raised in the OP, I've noticed that a great many Codex entries are written from the perspective of Brother Genitivi, who is understandably a Chantry apologist, sympathetic to the Templar Order and the Circle system.

I think this is more than offset by the fact that the player character always has an apostate companion, sometimes more than one. They are vigorous critics of the circle and advocates of mage freedom. By contrast, companions who are in a position to defend the Circle, like Wynn, tend to give a more balanced perspective instead of a full-bore defense of the system.

The companions who do advocate in favor of the Chantry's mage pogrom, like Sebastian and Fenris, tend to be annoying for other reasons. Of course the big revelation in the Fenris story is that he actually volunteered for the lyrium tattoos that he's been whining about, and that before his memory loss he wasn't nearly so anti-mage.

I don't think there is much question, at least in my mind, as to whether the presentation of the conflict is even. There are, however, interesting questions on the other side of that inquiry. Can the presentation be even? Should it be?

You will presumably always have perspectives of those who were abducted from their prior lives and interred in a Circle of Magi concentration camp, subjected to Templar control, knew people lobotomised into Tranquility, and threatened with death if they stepped out of line or even tried to see their families. How do you balance that?

You can make logical arguments about safety all you want to, but that is a poor counter to a personal sob story. The worst case scenario that a player character will hear regarding mage badness anywhere outside of Tevinter is a situation that has either already been resolved or one that the PC will personally resolve in fairly short order, while the Templars' pogrom against the mages is ongoing with no end in sight.

Not everything can be even.

[durasteel]

eluvianix wrote...

durasteel wrote...
I have looked for any indication that Val Royeaux was sacked by the elves. I haven't found it. I don't think it happened.

"At this point, the Chantry called for a holy war against the elves that became known as the Exalted March of the Dales. While the elves eventually sacked Val Royeaux and pushed well into human lands, Halamshiral was conquered and the elves were completely crushed by 2:20 Glory."

So the elves managed to wreak havok even after the Exalted March, making gains for a time against the combined might of the Chantry and Orlais. Impressive. It reminds me of the slave rebellion in Rome about 70 years BC, the one led by Spartacus. Although apparently doomed to inevitable failure almost from the start, they certainly did make a huge mess before the end.

[Master Warder Z_]

durasteel wrote...

Returning to the issue raised in the OP, I've noticed that a great many Codex entries are written from the perspective of Brother Genitivi, who is understandably a Chantry apologist, sympathetic to the Templar Order and the Circle system.

I think this is more than offset by the fact that the player character always has an apostate companion, sometimes more than one. They are vigorous critics of the circle and advocates of mage freedom. By contrast, companions who are in a position to defend the Circle, like Wynn, tend to give a more balanced perspective instead of a full-bore defense of the system.

The companions who do advocate in favor of the Chantry's mage pogrom, like Sebastian and Fenris, tend to be annoying for other reasons. Of course the big revelation in the Fenris story is that he actually volunteered for the lyrium tattoos that he's been whining about, and that before his memory loss he wasn't nearly so anti-mage.

I don't think there is much question, at least in my mind, as to whether the presentation of the conflict is even. There are, however, interesting questions on the other side of that inquiry. Can the presentation be even? Should it be?

You will presumably always have perspectives of those who were abducted from their prior lives and interred in a Circle of Magi concentration camp, subjected to Templar control, knew people lobotomised into Tranquility, and threatened with death if they stepped out of line or even tried to see their families. How do you balance that?

You can make logical arguments about safety all you want to, but that is a poor counter to a personal sob story. The worst case scenario that a player character will hear regarding mage badness anywhere outside of Tevinter is a situation that has either already been resolved or one that the PC will personally resolve in fairly short order, while the Templars' pogrom against the mages is ongoing with no end in sight.

Not everything can be even.

Same Trite Pro Mage BS eh?

Abductions, Labotomized, Pogrom 

Honestly even if i wasn't a stouch defender of the circle system, Templars, Seekers and the need to have Mages contained.

I'd see the bias here, One sided prospective, You see a negative and i see a system that the kept the contient if not the world relatively free of mage oppression for more then a thousand years.

[Master Warder Z_]

durasteel wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

durasteel wrote...
I have looked for any indication that Val Royeaux was sacked by the elves. I haven't found it. I don't think it happened.

"At this point, the Chantry called for a holy war against the elves that became known as the Exalted March of the Dales. While the elves eventually sacked Val Royeaux and pushed well into human lands, Halamshiral was conquered and the elves were completely crushed by 2:20 Glory."

So the elves managed to wreak havok even after the Exalted March, making gains for a time against the combined might of the Chantry and Orlais. Impressive. It reminds me of the slave rebellion in Rome about 70 years BC, the one led by Spartacus. Although apparently doomed to inevitable failure almost from the start, they certainly did make a huge mess before the end.

There is always something...thrilling, inspiring even about knowing that defeat will come eventually and yet fighting on regardless.

And looking back to history the Slave Revolt led by Sparturd wasn't even a note worthy event considering there were about three just like in either direction in Roman history like his didn't do much. Rome lasted because it could unite when it faced a common enemy to the Empire. And Rebelling slaves are a common enemy that the empire faced many times over through out its storied history.

But i grant the Dalish their due, Standing against the might of an Empire is no easy thing but the conclusion is inveitable. And it ended the only way it could have ended.

[LobselVith8]

durasteel wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

"At this point, the Chantry called for a holy war against the elves that became known as the Exalted March of the Dales. While the elves eventually sacked Val Royeaux and pushed well into human lands, Halamshiral was conquered and the elves were completely crushed by 2:20 Glory." 

So the elves managed to wreak havok even after the Exalted March, making gains for a time against the combined might of the Chantry and Orlais. Impressive. It reminds me of the slave rebellion in Rome about 70 years BC, the one led by Spartacus. Although apparently doomed to inevitable failure almost from the start, they certainly did make a huge mess before the end. 

Ariane also infers the involvement of the Circle of Magi in the fall of the Dales, so you have trained Circle mages playing a role against the elves as well.

[Cainhurst Crow]

durasteel wrote...

You will presumably always have perspectives of those who were abducted from their prior lives and interred in a Circle of Magi concentration camp, subjected to Templar control, knew people lobotomised into Tranquility, and threatened with death if they stepped out of line or even tried to see their families. How do you balance that?

Easy. Show how one sided and bias that perspective is and throw in a pro-circle mage character whose family was killed by an apostate trying to "keep them free" of the chantry's hold and abused the crap out of them to make them a weapon in an ideological war against the chantry and andrastians alike. Real world type scenarios of these victimized people using child soldiers and suicide explosive attacks more then allow grey morality to creep into this setting.

Even more so, show the situations where things aren't a parody on national socialist germany by showing more mages like wynne, who was saved by the templars after her family tried to lock her in a farm and burn her. Mages like finn or bethany who could keep in contact with their families and weren't harrased by templars. Mages like wilhelm who fought valiantly in the war for fereldan independance and were free not just to have a family but to also pursue a career as a arl of redcliffes personal mage and was able to retire outside the circle. Show more mages being good people and working fine in the circle system and templars who do their jobs as they are supposed to instead of focusing enterily on the apostates, libertarian extermists, and crazed templar point of view on the issue as if it actually holds water compared to reality.

It sounds like you've taken the koolaid hook, line, and sinker, but for some of us, the issue is far less emotionally manipulative and far more objective and insulting to intelligance and common sense.

[Martyr1777]

Master Warder Z wrote...

I patently disagree; The straw that broke the Camel's back was given before Lambert even gave the order to attack the rebellous mages.

The Mages disobeying the Divine and forgoing the topic of dicussion for the first conclave granted to them in over a year in favor of once again dicussing the topic of seperation of the circle from the chantry. Aka the topic that got the college of cumberland closed.

Their refusual to hand over a Murder suspect didn't aid the situation any and in finality the spreading of news regarding the "cure" for tranqulity was what finally sent the situation past the point of peaceful discourse and debate to the point of open war.

That said i do agree with the notion of DA evolving over time and the lore being corrected and edited as it went along; That occurs in most expansive universes, Starwars being a notable example.

Some fair points, But I think the amount to pin pricks in comparison. I mean they break the 'rules' of the conclave, Lambert could have just said, 'ok we're done here, everyone get out'. But he most certainly didn't do that. As for the murder aspect, he can't but the blame on the circle, by that point everyone knew Rhys was either the murder or know who it was and he wouldn't talk. Lambert felt that even before they went on Wynne's mission.

So yes lots of things piled up, but to me there is one factor, and only one, that was any where nearly big enough to cause all the other circles to rebel, if only to hold a free conclave and decide if there would be war or not.

Even Kirkwall didn't start this and the events in Kirkwall were much more flagrant then the series of events you mention. It's just all those events led to the attack of the conclave. Fact was Lambert was looking for any excuse at all to attack them regardless of everything else. Ok not fact but my belief.

[durasteel]

Martyr1777 wrote...
...
But then you get that the original Knight Commander was much more understanding than Lambert. But most of all you have Evengeline and Rhys... Both started out very much on their own side but obviously came around. Not to mention the Insight into the duty of a Templar as Evengeline states many times. They are not just to protect against the mages but to protect the mages themselves. I don't remember that mentalliy being shown at all in the games and it really stood out to me in Asunder.
...

That's an interesting point. Your first exposure to Templars outside of the Mage origin is when you meet Alistair for the first time. When he tells you that he used to be a Templar, one of your possible reactions is "You were a mage hunter?" Not much in either game does anything to change that T vs M mindset.

[Mistic]

durasteel wrote...

Returning to the issue raised in the OP, I've noticed that a great many Codex entries are written from the perspective of Brother Genitivi, who is understandably a Chantry apologist, sympathetic to the Templar Order and the Circle system.

Well, he's a member of the Chantry, so his opinion is biased. But contrary to other writers, Genitivi admits that bias. He's in fact one of the most open minded persons in all Thedas. He goes great lengths to find reliable Dalish and Qunari sources, he acknowledges that the Black Chantry has a power the White Chantry tries to deny, and more.

durasteel wrote...
I think this is more than offset by the fact that the player character always has an apostate companion, sometimes more than one. They are vigorous critics of the circle and advocates of mage freedom. By contrast, companions who are in a position to defend the Circle, like Wynn, tend to give a more balanced perspective instead of a full-bore defense of the system.

In DA:O we had a proud apostate mage and a proud Circle mage. The templars were shown to try to use the Right of Annulment and kill everyone, but it was also true that blood mages, demons and abominations had taken control of the tower (the player had to kill them one way or another, after all). We had Dalish mages living peacefully, but also a whole town terrorized by a child possessed by a demon.

In my opinion, it was DAII the game which unbalanced the presentation of this problem. Let's see what happens in DA:I. At least not every mage companion will be an apostate (Vivienne is a Circle mage).

Modifié par Misticsan, 19 février 2014 - 10:17 .

[Master Warder Z_]

LobselVith8 wrote...

durasteel wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

"At this point, the Chantry called for a holy war against the elves that became known as the Exalted March of the Dales. While the elves eventually sacked Val Royeaux and pushed well into human lands, Halamshiral was conquered and the elves were completely crushed by 2:20 Glory." 

So the elves managed to wreak havok even after the Exalted March, making gains for a time against the combined might of the Chantry and Orlais. Impressive. It reminds me of the slave rebellion in Rome about 70 years BC, the one led by Spartacus. Although apparently doomed to inevitable failure almost from the start, they certainly did make a huge mess before the end. 

Ariane also infers the involvement of the Circle of Magi in the fall of the Dales, so you have trained Circle mages playing a role against the elves as well.

Don't recall that off topic comment.

[Cainhurst Crow]

We should really have a honest to goodness templar in the party, not a reject templar like alistar or a anti-magic or pro-chanty member like fenris or sebastion who don't actually have any investment in the mage and templar struggle and are more just out to make their own points.

I want someone who will do for templars what these constant apostate companions do for mages and argue strongly for their side dammit. The entire conflict's portryal has been far too one sided from the very start and it's about time we got to changing it.

Modifié par Darth Brotarian, 19 février 2014 - 10:17 .