98 réponses à ce sujet

[KaiserShep]

If it's cruel, then so be it. I consider the village in total more valuable than his life, so he can put it to good use and help defend it.

[Xilizhra]

Ok Xil, so by your logic it would be ok for me to try to kill you because I view you as a legitimate threat to my sanity   I kid I kid, but I don't get that argument at all sorry.  I can understand Lobs point of view of having a prior history with him I guess, but when I played the mage origin, it actually convinced me more that Jowan was too unhinged to run around willy nilly.  The templars/circle may very well be responsible for that, but that doesn't change the fact that he was no longer right in the head.

 

Its just like we don't let the mentally unstable buy firearms, Jowan never struck me as anything close to stable.

Jowan's not unstable, just frightfully unlucky and bumbling. Granted, letting him go wouldn't be my ideal first choice, but I won't just kill him either.

 

 

If it's cruel, then so be it. I consider the village in total more valuable than his life, so he can put it to good use and help defend it.

The village is already handled; the undead army is mostly beaten and Jowan's not really necessary.

[LobselVith8]

If it doesn't violate Xil's moral code, Xil doesn't deem it worthy of death.

Jowan is supposed to be the friend of the mage protagonist (with the implication being that the two have known each other for years), so I think it's understandable if The Warden wants to spare him from execution or tranquility.

Personally, I spared Zevran and Loghain, so I don't see the big deal about freeing Jowan.

[KaiserShep]

One can only work with the perspective granted to each origin. If you're a dwarf or human noble, the Warden is as familiar with Jowan as he/she would be with a random NPC in Denerim's market district.

[EmissaryofLies]

Is that you John Wayne? Is this me?

[Xilizhra]

One can only work with the perspective granted to each origin. If you're a dwarf or human noble, the Warden is as familiar with Jowan as he/she would be with a random NPC in Denerim's market district.

In which case he's still just an unlucky dupe.

[KaiserShep]

I dunno. I'd consider him fairly lucky. I would have simply had him executed, if I did not consider him of any use at all.

[wcholcombe]

Jowan's not unstable, just frightfully unlucky and bumbling. Granted, letting him go wouldn't be my ideal first choice, but I won't just kill him either.

 

 

The village is already handled; the undead army is mostly beaten and Jowan's not really necessary.

lol but it isn't just killing him, he tried to murder someone?  He is indirectly responsible for everything that happened at redcliff.

[Xilizhra]

I dunno. I'd consider him fairly lucky. I would have simply had him executed, if I did not consider him of any use at all.

I can't kill the helpless.

 

 

lol but it isn't just killing him, he tried to murder someone?  He is indirectly responsible for everything that happened at redcliff.

Death in and of itself is never justice; that only happens when you deal death to directly protect yourself or others, and Jowan is no threat at this time.

[BroBear Berbil]

I only let Jowan go if I'm playing a mage. I wouldn't feel justified with that choice playing anything else. The other choices are just between who you want to execute Jowan, so I usually just have Eamon do it.

 

I never send Jowan into the Fade. I know he doesn't do anything bad whilst there, but from pretty much any of my characters' perspective it's a bad idea. He's weak-willed, a blood mage, and kind of incompetent so I'd rather send the mage I trust the most - usually Wynne.

[KaiserShep]

I can't kill the helpless.

 

Jowan isn't helpless. If I thought that he was, I would not have forced him into the Fade to fight demons. He may be at the mercy of the Warden and the knights of Redcliffe, but as a blood mage, I would expect him to be a rather formidable opponent.

[Xilizhra]

Jowan isn't helpless. If I thought that he was, I would not have forced him into the Fade to fight demons. He may be at the mercy of the Warden and the knights of Redcliffe, but as a blood mage, I would expect him to be a rather formidable opponent.

Well, he's unarmed and not attacking me, so I count that as enough.

[KaiserShep]

A mage is technically always armed.

[Xilizhra]

A mage is technically always armed.

Even so... let's just extend it to "I won't kill those who aren't attacking me or someone else."

[EmissaryofLies]

Do you think they'll forgo "mage" in favor of "wizard", they have better hats after all.

[wcholcombe]

Jowan is supposed to be the friend of the mage protagonist (with the implication being that the two have known each other for years), so I think it's understandable if The Warden wants to spare him from execution or tranquility.

Personally, I spared Zevran and Loghain, so I don't see the big deal about freeing Jowan.

I don't actually have an issue with it, I usually spare Stein and he murdered children, I vary back and forth on Loghain, zevran sometimes sometimes not.  I think Xil just has a talent for bringing me into debate with him

 

Its funny I was just trying to show some of the intelligent interactions between mages and templars and such and we stuck on a debate about player decisions in game lol.  Its your game by all means play it how you wish.

[KaiserShep]

Even so... let's just extend it to "I won't kill those who aren't attacking me or someone else."

 

Point is, I believe that having him executed is justifiable, given the crime. It doesn't matter to me why he did it; all that matters is that he's directly responsible, and if the urn of sacred ashes did indeed turn out to be a myth, then Eamon would surely be dead, and Jowan would have successfully killed the Arl of Redcliffe. That can't be excused, no matter how stupid or gullible he may be.

[LobselVith8]

I don't actually have an issue with it, I usually spare Stein and he murdered children, I vary back and forth on Loghain, zevran sometimes sometimes not.  I think Xil just has a talent for bringing me into debate with him

 

I think you mean her.

 

 

Its funny I was just trying to show some of the intelligent interactions between mages and templars and such and we stuck on a debate about player decisions in game lol.  Its your game by all means play it how you wish.

 

As for your original post, I agree with a lot of what you wrote. Putting aside the complexities and debates surrounding the Chantry controlled Circles, I think Origins did a better job at conveying three-dimensional templars than it's successor. Ser Bryant and the Lothering templars were depicting as doing good by helping people in Lothering (before Dragon Age II had Ser Bryant and his templars leaving, which seemed odd given Bryant's dialogue to his men, since he seemed like the kind of man who would stay and protect the last of the villagers with his life); he also refused to get into a battle with a mage protagonist, because the people were his first focus. There was also Ser Otto, who is willing to battle demons despite being legally blind, and arguably, Knight-Commander Greagoir (even though my character disliked him, and the pre-Origins comic depicted him rather horribly), who is willing to delegate some authority to Irving.

 

Regarding Wynne, she does need permission to help aid The Warden against the Blight, although she does seem to have the trust of both Greagoir and Irving, since the former spares her and wants to give her the title of the First Enchanter (if the Circle is annulled). The Knight-Commander also takes Irving's death particularly hard if the Circle is annulled, given his retirement after the Battle of Denerim.

[wcholcombe]

I think you mean her.

 

 

 

As for your original post, I agree with a lot of what you wrote. Putting aside the complexities and debates surrounding the Chantry controlled Circles, I think Origins did a better job at conveying three-dimensional templars than it's successor. Ser Bryant and the Lothering templars were depicting as doing good by helping people in Lothering (before Dragon Age II had Ser Bryant and his templars leaving, which seemed odd given Bryant's dialogue to his men, since he seemed like the kind of man who would stay and protect the last of the villagers with his life); he also refused to get into a battle with a mage protagonist, because the people were his first focus. There was also Ser Otto, who is willing to battle demons despite being legally blind, and arguably, Knight-Commander Greagoir (even though my character disliked him, and the pre-Origins comic depicted him rather horribly), who is willing to delegate some authority to Irving.

 

Regarding Wynne, she does need permission to help aid The Warden against the Blight, although she does seem to have the trust of both Greagoir and Irving, since the former spares her and wants to give her the title of the First Enchanter (if the Circle is annulled). The Knight-Commander also takes Irving's death particularly hard if the Circle is annulled, given his retirement after the Battle of Denerim.

Again, I don't find the templars leaving lothering surprising. They wouldn't have accomplished anything staying.  They didn't have the numbers to repell the actual horde.  It was a military evacuation, people shouldn't have been stopping in lothering anyway, and they for dang sure shouldn't have been putting traps down at their farms....I was in lothering forever, they had time to get the heck out

 

In  the gameplay I just went through, she just needed permission from Irving, she didn't even talk to Gregoire about it and Irving was pretty much given a free hand in how he wished to help the Warden.  Also, there is the note/codex entry about Irving arranging a retreat for the the enchanters who teach the apprentices.  I am just wanting to point out in DAO the circles are portrayed as having far more freedom for the non apprentices at least than anything in DA2 or Asunder.  The same can be said for the portrayal of mages in The Calling and The stolen throne as well in regards to having more freedoms.

[Xilizhra]

Point is, I believe that having him executed is justifiable, given the crime. It doesn't matter to me why he did it; all that matters is that he's directly responsible, and if the urn of sacred ashes did indeed turn out to be a myth, then Eamon would surely be dead, and Jowan would have successfully killed the Arl of Redcliffe. That can't be excused, no matter how stupid or gullible he may be.

I don't believe in capital punishment.

[LobselVith8]

Again, I don't find the templars leaving lothering surprising. They wouldn't have accomplished anything staying.  They didn't have the numbers to repell the actual horde.  It was a military evacuation, people shouldn't have been stopping in lothering anyway, and they for dang sure shouldn't have been putting traps down at their farms....I was in lothering forever, they had time to get the heck out

 

It's mostly an impression I got from Ser Bryant when he was talking about protecting the people of Lothering, and I thought some of his men might have joined him in staying behind. I always thought he'd be fighting the darkspawn, to protect every last villager he could, which I think would've made a good impression to see, rather than having them all leave Lothering. His VA is the same for (male) Hawke, too.

 

In  the gameplay I just went through, she just needed permission from Irving, she didn't even talk to Gregoire about it and Irving was pretty much given a free hand in how he wished to help the Warden.  Also, there is the note/codex entry about Irving arranging a retreat for the the enchanters who teach the apprentices.  I am just wanting to point out in DAO the circles are portrayed as having far more freedom for the non apprentices at least than anything in DA2 or Asunder.  The same can be said for the portrayal of mages in The Calling and The stolen throne as well in regards to having more freedoms.

 

I wasn't disputing that, I simply meant that Wynne needed permission to leave. I do agree that Greagoir delegates some authority to Irving, but I got the impression it was more from their working relationship, given what happened to Aneirin (which I think would have happened pre-Greagoir).

 

As for the Chantry controlled Circles, I strongly disagree with them, so I completely understand Xil's opposition to them, but I think we've beaten that particular horse to death a thousand times over. It's simply not ground that I think the opposing sides will ever agree on. That said, I hope pro-templar players do get content that appeals to them.

[Xilizhra]

That said, I hope pro-templar players do get content that appeals to them.

I do not hope this, as it'd interfere with the world states that I would want to import. At least if it went too far.

[LobselVith8]

I do not hope this, as it'd interfere with the world states that I would want to import. At least if it went too far.

 

It would be better to get choices that are significant and have ramifications for both sides, rather than to have no consequences for our actions because of importing issues. I'd like my Inquisitor's choices to matter, but if those actions are watered down in the name of future imports, then I don't see much point to Dragon Age if none of my choices matter. If my Inquisitor helps the elven rebellion, for example, I want that act to carry weight, rather than the opportunity not being present simply because it would complicate the import process.

[Xilizhra]

It would be better to get choices that are significant and have ramifications for both sides, rather than to have no consequences for our actions because of importing issues. I'd like my Inquisitor's choices to matter, but if those actions are watered down in the name of future imports, then I don't see much point to Dragon Age if none of my choices matter. If my Inquisitor helps the elven rebellion, for example, I want that act to carry weight, rather than the opportunity not being present simply because it would complicate the import process.

Have any of our actions at all in DAO carried... any significant weight in DA2?

[KaiserShep]

I don't believe in capital punishment.

 

I'm considering this from the viewpoint of a person charged with the rather hefty task of getting as many allies as one could to fight a potentially world-consuming evil, while contending with the machinations of an enemy Regent and his Arl sidekick. Ferelden is becoming increasingly war-torn. Under these extreme circumstances, whether or not I believe in capital punishment doesn't matter. Jowan involved himself by almost killing a very prominent figure who may be vital for the two remaining Wardens to achieve their goal, and thus made himself a threat. I am inclined to assume the worst of Jowan, so once he's caught, I will not grant him freedom, but I won't kill him so long as he cooperates and does something positive in the process. Zevran would be under similar scrutiny, and so long as he holds up his end of the bargain to the end of the war, he'd get to keep his life too.