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.
If we're right about the Peace Summit then the Mage Rebellion will be very chaotic within their factions
In all honesty, I don't think Inquisition will frame Mages and Templars in terms of 'support this faction and empower them.' I suspect it will be 'bring this faction into line first as part of a deal, and bring the other into line later.' Compromise/third way might be a part of it, but utimately I expect Inquisition to take things along a unitary route rather than divergent paths.
In other words, recruiting mages won't mean the abolishment of the Circle system and mage freedom. Supporting the Templars doesn't mean the antithesis of the mage route. And the Inquisitor as a character will be an agent to save the world in a relatively recognizable faction, rather than the player's omnipotent avatar to destroy any part of the world setting that offends them, be it Orlais or the Chantry or Elves or Mages/Templars or Chevaliers.
Things will change, but they will also stay the same. I predict that the Inquisition and its allies will be gradually aligned and roped into the international order with a new alliance including Orlais and the Chantry, influenced but not destroyable by the Inquisitor.
While not impossible by any means, the Chantry as an institution seems virtually powerless as of now; the Inquisition could easily assume a position of greatest influence over it, edging out Orlais, especially if the Breach and the civil war damages Orlais enough.
I'm hoping that Inquisition won't make things as black and white as choose one or the other path. Preferably I don't want that choice, I want to seal that rift. For that, I need both Mages and Templars.
Well, it seems the choice might be black versus black.
Gray vs. black at most, I think.
Gray vs. black at most, I think.
No, it's black vs black
No, it's black vs black
It's possible that the moral comparison is closest to Soviets vs. Nazis. Both are unpleasant, but one is worse.
I disagree. From the info of the hinterlands (which are Indeed incomplete), I'd say black versus black.Gray vs. black at most, I think.
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.
And with mages you'd have to be wary that they could succumb to demon temptation at any second.
It's possible that the moral comparison is closest to Soviets vs. Nazis. Both are unpleasant, but one is worse.
I'm pretty sure Bioware said they're gonna show both at their best and worst, so both sides are gonna be equal when it comes to this
It's possible that the moral comparison is closest to Soviets vs. Nazis. Both are unpleasant, but one is worse.
I disagree. From the info of the hinterlands (which are Indeed incomplete), I'd say black versus black.
To be honest, I'd expect the worse possible execution of the mage-templar war, so that I will be pleasantly surprised when playing.
Incomplete and from a decidedly non-objective viewpoint.
I'm pretty sure Bioware said they're gonna show both at their best and worst, so both sides are gonna be equal when it comes to this
I think we've already seen both sides at their best and worst.
No, that's a terrible analogy. Neither side has much in common with your comparision.
Not in terms of policy, but in terms of comparative morality.
I agree, but (spoiler from the hinterlands region in DAI):No, that's a terrible analogy. Neither side has much in common with your comparision.
Incomplete and from a decidedly non-objective viewpoint.
Non-objective as the ones who were talking about mages and templars in the area?Incomplete and from a decidedly non-objective viewpoint.
I think we've already seen both sides at their best and worst.
Not in terms of policy, but in terms of comparative morality.
In all honesty, I don't think Inquisition will frame Mages and Templars in terms of 'support this faction and empower them.' I suspect it will be 'bring this faction into line first as part of a deal, and bring the other into line later.' Compromise/third way might be a part of it, but utimately I expect Inquisition to take things along a unitary route rather than divergent paths.
In other words, recruiting mages won't mean the abolishment of the Circle system and mage freedom. Supporting the Templars doesn't mean the antithesis of the mage route. And the Inquisitor as a character will be an agent to save the world in a relatively recognizable faction, rather than the player's omnipotent avatar to destroy any part of the world setting that offends them, be it Orlais or the Chantry or Elves or Mages/Templars or Chevaliers.
Things will change, but they will also stay the same. I predict that the Inquisition and its allies will be gradually aligned and roped into the international order with a new alliance including Orlais and the Chantry, influenced but not destroyable by the Inquisitor.
I hope this compromise isn't stuffed down the player's throat. Some people will want absolute freedom and not support slavery under any circumstances, and I daresay some will not tolerate anything but imprisonment for mages. Forcing a compromise that doesn't allow players to choose anything other than 'reformed circles' would be massive rail-roading and very annoying, but it's quite likely to happen given that the most common complaint about the last game was 'cannot reach a compromise', and the most likely knee-jerk to this will be 'have to reach a compromise'.
I think we've already seen both sides at their best and worst.
And judging from the Hinderlands we still will
Bioware isn't gonna show one side worst than the other
Non-objective as the ones who were talking about mages and templars in the area?
Right. Either way, we need to see for ourselves.
I personally think it's a bad idea for Bioware to try to push for some kind of moral equivalence, because it'll always seem forced.
I hope this compromise isn't stuffed down the player's throat. Some people will want absolute freedom and not support slavery under any circumstances, and I daresay some will not tolerate anything but imprisonment for mages. Forcing a compromise that doesn't allow players to choose anything other than 'reformed circles' would be massive rail-roading and very annoying, but it's quite likely to happen given that the most common complaint about the last game was 'cannot reach a compromise', and the most likely knee-jerk to this will be 'have to reach a compromise'.
Ummm why would a 3rd option be stuffed down the players throat? It's not like you wouldn't be able to choose the others
Not really, the mages believe in their supremacy and the templars want to stop and supress them no matter the cost. Supremacists and extremists.Not in terms of policy, but in terms of comparative morality.
Not really, the mages believe in their supremacy and the templars want to stop and supress them no matter the cost. Supremacists and extremists.
How is wanting to be free, a belief in supremacy?
It's possible that the moral comparison is closest to Soviets vs. Nazis. Both are unpleasant, but one is worse.
Did we really need the WW2 analogy? You could have just easily said "It's like picking between a sunburn vs an indigestion. Both are unpleasant, but one is worse."
But NO, commies and Nazis away!
We might see it ourselves, but the implications as pretty clear. Unless you think that the mages react to something it was done to them, which the info already proved wrong at least for some cases.Right. Either way, we need to see for ourselves.
I personally think it's a bad idea for Bioware to try to push for some kind of moral equivalence, because it'll always seem forced.
Not really, the mages believe in their supremacy and the templars want to stop and supress them no matter the cost. Supremacists and extremists.
The soviets don't really fit in there.
The mages only believe in their survival right now. That's the whole point of the war.
Did we really need the WW2 analogy? You could have just easily said "It's like picking between a sunburn vs an indigestion. Both are unpleasant, but one is worse."
But NO, commies and Nazis away!
I've never experienced indigestion and thus my mind would never have made that connection. I have, however, been reading a fair bit about WW2 lately.
Did we really need the WW2 analogy? You could have just easily said "It's like picking between a sunburn vs an indigestion. Both are unpleasant, but one is worse."
But NO, commies and Nazis away!
Can't have a Mage and Templar discussion, without people trying pull groups like them into the conversation
Retour en haut