You know that's not going happen TKS. No matter how many posts you make on the subject.
How do you know? As i said they did bad job with both organizations and i have no reason to desire one of two bunch of insane dumb psychos join to me.why i do need guys who can't tell difference between shovel and staff or guys that destroy everything around.Pretty much it wold have so much sense like side with demons or darkspawn good luck you have to chose.
How do I know they won't let the players kill off all the mages and templars in Thedas in this game or in any other? Common sense. The only way I can see that happening is at the end of the series, if they pull a Destroy ending ala Mass Effect. I can tell you that it won't happen unless they decide to end the DA series that way.
The only other thing I can suggest is that if you really feel that "kill them all and let the Maker sort them out" is what you really want from a DA game, then make a thread in the Feedback section asking for it. The devs are much more likely to look in that section for player ideas versus in the Story section. As long as you're polite, you might get them to at least read it. Who knows, there could be a lot more players that feel the way that you do, and the devs might allow it for some kind of 3rd option scenario down the road.
So we will probably be forced to choose between Mages and Templars again but in my opinion
there should be a third option because as Varric said at the end of DA:II I'm sick of mages and templars
and I agree with him completely
Do you think Bioware will give us that third option? What could it be ?
I hope there is a Compromise/Peace option, like we had with the Quarians and Geth in Mass Effect 3.
I hope there is a Compromise/Peace option, like we had with the Quarians and Geth in Mass Effect 3.
Seconded. I also loved the way that whole sequence played out.*
*In ME, the Quarians and the Geth have been a war for centuries for various reasons. In ME3, you can broker a peace between the two races and end a 300yr long war.
Seconded. I also loved the way that whole sequence played out.*
*In ME, the Quarians and the Geth have been a war for centuries for various reasons. In ME3, you can broker a peace between the two races and end a 300yr long war.
Agreed. Admiral Raan and the Geth Prime talking is one of the best scenes in the entire trilogy.
How do I know they won't let the players kill off all the mages and templars in Thedas in this game or in any other? Common sense. The only way I can see that happening is at the end of the series, if they pull a Destroy ending ala Mass Effect. I can tell you that it won't happen unless they decide to end the DA series that way.
The only other thing I can suggest is that if you really feel that "kill them all and let the Maker sort them out" is what you really want from a DA game, then make a thread in the Feedback section asking for it. The devs are much more likely to look in that section for player ideas versus in the Story section. As long as you're polite, you might get them to at least read it. Who knows, there could be a lot more players that feel the way that you do, and the devs might allow it for some kind of 3rd option scenario down the road.
Eee you know that you have to eliminate 1 side siding with another? And now i don't speak about eternal hunting mages or templars simple siding against both groups of lunatics and eliminate them which you will have to pretty much do with 1 side if you take another.
I see you jumped from "picking a side" to "killing the opposing side."
I don't see how siding with one over the other is "eliminating" anyone. It just means that I'm siding with one side of the conflict or the other. I'm not going to kill all the mages if I side with the templars, nor vice-versa. Will I have more members of the group I didn't pick going after me? Good chance of it, but it's not the same as just killing them all.
I don't see how siding with one over the other is "eliminating" anyone. It just means that I'm siding with one side of the conflict or the other. I'm not going to kill all the mages if I side with the templars, nor vice-versa. Will I have more members of the group I didn't pick going after me? Good chance of it, but it's not the same as just killing them all.
LoL and what do you think pick other side mean i hope you aren't so naive that you think that other side will just knee and accept what inq will say especially that both sides are insane i rly can't see templars agree on mages freedom or independence...
Pretty much pick a side mean kill opposite side i don't see that other side will be fine with that.
TKS, you're smarter than this. You know what I meant, but I'll indulge you one more time.
I just said that I'm sure that members of the group that I didn't choose will most likely come after me, in the form of battles. That isn't the same as every mage or templar in the entirety of Thedas that would want the Inquisitor dead. You're thinking in black and white and even the writers in the DA games don't ever think that way.
The more extreme members of the which ever opposing group will come after me. I expect them too, which would be a logical reaction. What I don't expect is every single mage or templar that I meet is going to try to kill me. That isn't logical, that's absurd and something that you know just isn't going to happen.
As much as it pains me I actually have to agree with TKS. I don't think the group you pick will suffer the other to live. They will most likely demand that you wipe out the other side.
Which is another reason why I will side with the mages. New mages will be born everyday and there will need to be people there who can train them unless you want to send them all to Tevinter and just hope for the best.
TKS, you're smarter than this. You know what I meant, but I'll indulge you one more time.
I just said that I'm sure that members of the group that I didn't choose will most likely come after me, in the form of battles. That isn't the same as every mage or templar in the entirety of Thedas that would want the Inquisitor dead. You're thinking in black and white and even the writers in the DA games don't ever think that way.
The more extreme members of the which ever opposing group will come after me. I expect them too, which would be a logical reaction. What I don't expect is every single mage or templar that I meet is going to try to kill me. That isn't logical, that's absurd and something that you know just isn't going to happen.
Those who fight are extremists... which pretty much is tortured since dragon age 2...
I didn't say every mage or templar will come after you neither choice i was saying wasn't about hunting every mage or templar in thedas.
You have 2 groups mages and templars in war where you will be able pick your side and you will have to crush another side... both sides are lunatics i don't want pick one of them i simple want put both down so separate my final solution for mages and this choice with simple destroying both sides that cause damage and are in war.
So
every mage in thedas//// mages in mage-templar war
Mages? Pah.
Templars? Pah.
In Kirkwall, they were both insane. Why didn't they let me convince the Arishok to stay? He could have prevented all this!
That would be an awesome Option for DA:I. Bringing the Qunari down on those Idiots. In the Memory of the one and only Arishok. Maybe he's there in Person - my "Canon" Playtrough has him alive and kicking.
So we will probably be forced to choose between Mages and Templars again but in my opinion
there should be a third option because as Varric said at the end of DA:II I'm sick of mages and templars
and I agree with him completely
Do you think Bioware will give us that third option? What could it be ?
I am more worried that the 'third option' will be the only one. Just because two sides disagree the right answer doesn't have to be somewhere in between and I hope you can go all the way and exterminate the side you disagree with.
As much as it pains me I actually have to agree with TKS. I don't think the group you pick will suffer the other to live. They will most likely demand that you wipe out the other side.
Natashina isn't addressing the templars who would be trying to impose their "dominion over mages by divine right" over the newest allies of the Inquisition. Not every templar defected with Lambert, just like some Circle mages remained under servitude to the Chantry, and this is a regional conflict. There were templars like Ser Bryant and the Lothering templars, who put a crisis above the dictates of the Order, even when faced with free mages. What the Chantry templars will do when faced with the Inquisition supporting mage autonomy (for players who side with the independent mages) remains to be seen.
Which is another reason why I will side with the mages. New mages will be born everyday and there will need to be people there who can train them unless you want to send them all to Tevinter and just hope for the best.
I'm quite happy at the prospect of seeing the mages truly free from the Chantry of Andraste and the Order of Templars. Aldenon the Wise's dream for Ferelden can finally take hold. The failure of the Magi Boon can be rectified. Bringing about mage autonomy, and putting an end to nearly a thousand years of an unjust system. I already know what I'll do:
My character will likely be a bit more reserved, however. 
Natashina isn't addressing the templars who would be trying to impose their "dominion over mages by divine right" over the newest allies of the Inquisition. Not every templar defected with Lambert, just like some Circle mages remained under servitude to the Chantry, and this is a regional conflict. There were templars like Ser Bryant and the Lothering templars, who put a crisis above the dictates of the Order, even when faced with free mages. What the Chantry templars will do when faced with the Inquisition supporting mage autonomy (for players who side with the independent mages) remains to be seen.
That was exactly what I was trying to get across. Thanks Lob. 
I'd rather have a truce between the mages and templars...and then you choose who will fight for the Inquisition.
The faction you pick get some bonus reputation with the common folks , nobles etc...and at the end are able to make a better deal in their favor.
I see no point in destroying one faction when everything is already in chaos ...templars or mages not getting involved with the Inquisition can still do some good on the side.
And I expect those templars and mages ; if they are willing to talk with the Inquisition and help save the world ,are not a bunch of crazy lunatics.
I mean the Inquisitor ending the war by force or diplomacy seems pretty weak.Especially if it takes place at the beginning of the game...
).
Natashina isn't addressing the templars who would be trying to impose their "dominion over mages by divine right" over the newest allies of the Inquisition. Not every templar defected with Lambert, just like some Circle mages remained under servitude to the Chantry, and this is a regional conflict. There were templars like Ser Bryant and the Lothering templars, who put a crisis above the dictates of the Order, even when faced with free mages. What the Chantry templars will do when faced with the Inquisition supporting mage autonomy (for players who side with the independent mages) remains to be seen.
I'm quite happy at the prospect of seeing the mages truly free from the Chantry of Andraste and the Order of Templars. Aldenon the Wise's dream for Ferelden can finally take hold. The failure of the Magi Boon can be rectified. Bringing about mage autonomy, and putting an end to nearly a thousand years of an unjust system. I already know what I'll do:
My character will likely be a bit more reserved, however.
I was thinking more along the lines you put a large enough group of people together they will allow mob mentality to take over, especially if a large number of the group is angry. I wasn't just speaking about templars wanting to wipe out all mages I also meant mages will want all templars wiped out. I just hope whoever we side with we are able to talk down from total annihilation of the other.
I'm also happy at the prospect of seeing mages truly free from Chantry and Templar control.
from a strategic standpoint, i think i would have to pick the mages. Their abilities have way more flexibility than the templars. Mages can use magic to do just more than attack, they can use it for other purposes as well, where as templars can only use their antimage powers on mages. Of course they might balance that by severely reducing the number of mages we can have compared to the templars.
from a strategic standpoint, i think i would have to pick the mages. Their abilities have way more flexibility than the templars. Mages can use magic to do just more than attack, they can use it for other purposes as well, where as templars can only use their antimage powers on mages. Of course they might balance that by severely reducing the number of mages we can have compared to the templars.
With templars we would also have to think about their lyrium addiction and the psychological as well as the physical problems that come with that.
I think that in Inquisition it probaply isn't as clear as chose templars or mages. Templars have red lyrium templars, chantry loyal templars and probaply rebel templars as well? Mages probaply aren't very united either, there is many mages with different views, some come from circles and are part of different factions, some are apostates etc.
I hope how big your inquisition is, in terms of numbers and resources, opens up more options in diplomatic relations.
if the inquisition is not that big yet it's understandable that one of the groups doesn't take your stance seriously as you're not that much of a threat.
once your group is big enough, both factions will try to assess which side you'll pick. now here's how i'd do it.
you can pick a faction early on, ending the mage-templar war, sparing the inquisition of defending their keeps and surrounding villages
or you can wait on your decision to grow your inquisition for more options on how to end the war but since you're taking the time to grow and all, your keeps and surrounding villages are attacked more often.
be bold/reckless or wise/cautious
better than good/gray/evil imo
Templars are very skilled knights though, with multiple different specializations within the order. They have no weakness except for their lyrium addiction. Mages on the other hand might have much more powerful ranged attacks, but are frail and have no real ability in close combat. They are also vulnerable to demons thanks to their connection to the fade.from a strategic standpoint, i think i would have to pick the mages. Their abilities have way more flexibility than the templars. Mages can use magic to do just more than attack, they can use it for other purposes as well, where as templars can only use their antimage powers on mages. Of course they might balance that by severely reducing the number of mages we can have compared to the templars.
Templars are very skilled knights though, with multiple different specializations within the order. They have no weakness except for their lyrium addiction. Mages on the other hand might have much more powerful ranged attacks, but are frail and have no real ability in close combat. They are also vulnerable to demons thanks to their connection to the fade.
Both sides have strengths and weaknesses, I don't think it's possible to call one more powerful or better than the other.
Yes but mages can be trained in combat and also where armor.
Retour en haut