I always felt Greagoir and Irving were a good team. Even if I side-eye Irving for his possibly damaging and dangerous "trying to get one over on my counterpart" thing he does.
Although, Orsino was this way too, but to a greater extreme. At least, Irving knew not to let blood mages run around willy nilly.
I honestly feel that Orsino was somewhat responsible for the amount of Blood Mages in Kirkwall's Circle
Thrask...there is being moderate and then there is plotting a rebelion with an Abomination as your second in command. I feel that his death can be interpreted as a warning.
I know, i am just pointing out her compassion dooms her to die.
No, her companion's sociopathic tendencies dooms him to rot in the cave in my playthroughs.
No, her companion's sociopathic tendencies dooms him to rot in the cave in my playthroughs.
I guess I don't remember Ser Agatha and her companion. Refresh?
Thrask...there is being moderate and then there is plotting a rebelion with an Abomination as your second in command. I feel that his death can be interpreted as a warning.
Definitely. That was the hardest thing about my Pro-Templar PT was seeing what befell Thrask because of his trust.
She's part of a quest you only get by siding with Meredith at the beginning of act 3, I think.
A moderate character is:
a ) A naive individual that doesn't understand how the world works.
b ) A person that doesn't know what they want in life.
If I'm powerful enough and neutral/moderate, I don't care for either of those things
I guess I don't remember Ser Agatha and her companion. Refresh?
http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Agatha
http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Mettin
http://dragonage.wik...e_Last_Holdouts
I really liked Thrask. I was so pissed at Grace. She was a hundred times worse than other questionable mages, like Anders or Adrian. I can't believe she threw away the only really working alliance of mages and templars we've seen. I couldn't kill her hard enough and I basically never say that about characters, ever. I think she's probably the one character I hate the most out of the whole series.
No, her companion's sociopathic tendencies dooms him to rot in the cave in my playthroughs.
Executing criminals is part of the Templar job, you know that when you swear the oath.
Them not being mages doesn't negate that they did wrong.
The original Ser Carver seemed pretty moderate too if he let Malcolm Hawke go.
Executing criminals is part of the Templar job, you know that when you swear the oath.
Them not being mages doesn't negate that they did wrong.
Uh, I don't think it is. Their purview is strictly recapturing mages. Also not every crime an executable offense.
She's part of a quest you only get by siding with Meredith at the beginning of act 3, I think.
Oooh... Uhm. I think that one I put the dangerous apostates down (Huon and Evelina) and talked the blubbery fat one into going back to the Circle. I had to kill Mettin too.
Executing criminals is part of the Templar job, you know that when you swear the oath.
Them not being mages doesn't negate that they did wrong.
Again, I ask you to provide the law that says anyone who helps a mage is commiting a crime worthy of the death sentence.
To save you time, there isn't any.
Oooh... Uhm. I think that one I put the dangerous apostates down (Huon and Evelina) and talked the blubbery fat one into going back to the Circle. I didn't have any issues with the Templars because they weren't calling for any innocent blood.
You're thinking of the main quests. Agatha was part of a small side quest.
Definitely. That was the hardest thing about my Pro-Templar PT was seeing what befell Thrask because of his trust.
That is the question, isn't it?
How much trust can normal people place in mages?
Again, I ask you to provide the law that says anyone who helps a mage commits a crime worthy of the death sentence.
To save you time, there isn't any.
To help a mage flee a circle, hide them from the Templars and then fight against them?
It seems like it would be enough to warrant Death in a world where you can be hanged for stealing from nobility.
That is the question, isn't it?
How much trust can normal people place in mages?
Dad is right you know, And i am not just saying that because he is getting more screen time then me at the moment...
To help a mage flee a circle, hide them from the Templars and then fight against them?
It seems like it would be enough to warrant Death in a world where you can be hanged for stealing from nobility.
The civilians don't fight. They huddle in the corners of the map as the apostates fight.
That is the question, isn't it?
How much trust can normal people place in mages?
A good amount, until proven otherwise. It's a case by case basis. Some are untrustworthy, some are not.
Dad is right you know, And i am not just saying that because he is getting more screen time then me at the moment...
Somebody's bitter...
The civilians don't fight. They huddle in the corners of the map as the apostates fight.
And you have the choice not to hurt them and to keep the Templars from doing it so...???
A good amount, until proven otherwise. It's a case by case basis. Some are untrustworthy, some are not.
Certainly, but Thrask's trust costed him his life. This is not like lending twenty coppers, we're talking about the lives of people and the very existence of non-magical society.
There is much to lose by placing one's faith in the wrong mage.
To help a mage flee a circle, hide them from the Templars and then fight against them?
It seems like it would be enough to warrant Death in a world where you can be hanged for stealing from nobility.
Hardly. Heck, the templars only have a standing order to kill maleficar on sight. These were only apostates, not blood mages.
The civilians don't fight. They huddle in the corners of the map as the apostates fight.
I stand corrected.
Still being part of a known insurgency and interfering with Templar duties is enough.
Retour en haut