490 réponses à ce sujet

[KBomb]

I'm not pronouncing anything right now, merely asking a question. My order would be for the entire Annulment to cease immediately and for the templars to withdraw. The ones fighting, after all, would have been doing so out of self-defense.

You're asking a question you can't possibly get an answer to. It's almost like you're just looking for any reason at all to hate him, and if no reason is tangible, you'll think up one that is. One can't know what he would have done on that order, they can only speculate. You'd be debating on, "Well, Cullen most likely wouldn't have freed the mages, so that is another point against him." Then one would say, "Cullen may have done it, you don't know!" And before you know, you're just a couple of dogs chasing each other's tail. That may have been an order you'd have given, but you didn't, because the option wasn't available. We do know that Cullen wasn't willing to kill mages on suspicion of them being maleficar. 

 

I can say that if I were Cullen, I would never release the mages from the tower, let alone allow them to leave Kirkwall at that moment. Most of the mages had already turned into abominations, they could, under no circumstances, be released into Kirkwall or anywhere else. As I said, he wasn't willing to kill any mage that surrendered or on suspect. 

[RGC_Ines]

About Cullen showing leadership skills--well he wasn't given much chance to, was he? Every time we have met him, he has been under the orders of someone else. As I said in another thread, my little dalish elf had none either. She was happy with Tamlen, just hunting and whatever else elves do in the woods. However, Duncan saw something in her (perhaps much like Cassandra sees something in Cullen) and she soon rose to the challenge of saving the Circle, placing a Dwarven king on a throne, uniting an entire country under her cause, winning a Landsmeet, placing another king on the throne and being personally chosen to lead his armies against the darkspawn, among other things. She did okay for not having any leadership skills. Cullen has military training and is a warrior. He is also trained in killing demons--which is good, considering they're going to be oodles of them about. As far as I know, and as I have stated previously, his duties will be to advise you in military tactics and strategies. He is qualified to do so. 

 

Also, doesn't he tell you he'll pass the information about Anders onward if you warn him? How do you know he doesn't?  As for why he was insubordinate to Meredith, I guess that could be left to interpretation, but I doubt it was born from fear. He always seemed duty bound, arresting Hawke for a trial was one thing, outright killing him was another. 

You see, I have different point of view while we are talking about PC/NPCs in games and theirs role. For me, PC is a sketch from Devs Im filling. Of course, for example, there are mistakes in DA:O made by Devs, like Dalish Elf decision about who should rule Thedas ( while we all know what humans are thinking about elves, why for god sake they are asking my Dalish Warden,, who really don't care), but still a big part of player character is a head canon, and in this way PC will be  reliable on almost every position game put him/her on. From other hand, NPC is created by Devs as a whole. So here, facts we are given by Devs in game/games must make character reliable in his/her role. As I said before, I, as a player, know Cullen only from two previous games. You said he was trained as a Templar, deamon-killer and I agree here. But training don't make someone a champion. The fact, that I was teached how to paint don't make me Michael Angelo or DaVinci right? Cullen will be Military Adviser and according to BB interview he will lead Inquisition's troops. For me, someone on Military Adviser position have to be experienced on a battlefields, and knows tactic not only in theory. Instead, knowing facts only from two other games ( no head-canon, fan-fiction or wishes about Cullen in DA:I), I see a young man, who spend almost whole life locked in a Circle Tower, hated mages ( I know he was tortured by them and I even understand him),, blindly followed Meredith, never participle in serious, big battles ( those in Kirkwall weren't too big tbh),and never was on leader position,.I never saw him as a leader, never heard in games about his succes on a battlefields, the only think I knew after DA:O was that he murdered three young mages, that's all So, for me, BioWare failed here by theirs creation of Cullen's character, and they don't convice me, that he is right person on a right place. Of course, in October, when I will know the way BioWare re-created Cullen in DA:I , I can change my mind. Hope it will be handled better than in ME3 , when Kaidan was a SPECTRE just like that, without really good reason ( well I suspect that Udina had a hope that Kaidan will be more loyal to him after that)  Anyway it's good to be able talks here without being called a " hater" only becouse I have different pov. Thanks.

[KBomb]

You see, I have different point of view while we are talking about PC/NPCs in games and theirs role. For me, PC is a sketch from Devs Im filling. Of course, for example, there are mistakes in DA:O made by Devs, like Dalish Elf decision about who should rule Thedas ( while we all know what humans are thinking about elves, why for god sake they are asking my Dalish Warden,, who really don't care), but still a big part of player character is a head canon, and in this way PC will be  reliable on almost every position game put him/her on. From other hand, NPC is created by Devs as a whole. So here, facts we are given by Devs in game/games must make character reliable in his/her role. As I said before, I, as a player, know Cullen only from two previous games. You said he was trained as a Templar, deamon-killer and I agree here. But training don't make someone a champion. The fact, that I was teached how to paint don't make me Michael Angelo or DaVinci right? Cullen will be Military Adviser and according to BB interview he will lead Inquisition's troops. For me, someone on Military Adviser position have to be experienced on a battlefields, and knows tactic not only in theory. Instead, knowing facts only from two other games ( no head-canon, fan-fiction or wishes about Cullen in DA:I), I see a young man, who spend almost whole life locked in a Circle Tower, hated mages ( I know he was tortured by them and I even understand him),, blindly followed Meredith, never participle in serious, big battles ( those in Kirkwall weren't too big tbh),and never was on leader position,.I never saw him as a leader, never heard in games about his succes on a battlefields, the only think I knew after DA:O was that he murdered three young mages, that's all So, for me, BioWare failed here by theirs creation of Cullen's character, and they don't convice me, that he is right person on a right place. Of course, in October, when I will know the way BioWare re-created Cullen in DA:I , I can change my mind. Hope it will be handled better than in ME3 , when Kaidan was a SPECTRE just like that, without really good reason ( well I suspect that Udina had a hope that Kaidan will be more loyal to him after that)  Anyway it's good to be able talks here without being called a " hater" only becouse I have different pov. Thanks.

I don't agree with your view of Cullen. I see things differently, but that's okay. If that is your view of him, I can understand why there may be some worry there, but I think it may be unfounded. Cassandra chose Cullen based on what she saw of him after the Kirkwall disaster, I believe. We didn't see that period, so we don't know what transpired. I am sure it will be filled in somehow. Cullen isn't the same person he was and admits as much in his character blurb. You'd be hard pressed to find someone in any of the Dragon Age's who is a companion and has clean hands. And as I said before, having everyone in your party being pure of heart, agreeing with everything you do or say and never having any character flaws would be atrociously boring. That is my opinion anyway.

 

As for the bolded part of your reply: I can't speak for anyone else, but I don't consider people "haters" just because they have a different opinion than I do.The mage/templar debate is something that really gets people heated. I am pro-circle/pro-templar, but that doesn't mean I am anti-mage. I also think it's pretty silly to judge a person's character on how they play a fictional game. So, yeah. It's all good. 

[RGC_Ines]

I don't agree with your view of Cullen. I see things differently, but that's okay. If that is your view of him, I can understand why there may be some worry there, but I think it may be unfounded. Cassandra chose Cullen based on what she saw of him after the Kirkwall disaster, I believe. We didn't see that period, so we don't know what transpired. I am sure it will be filled in somehow. Cullen isn't the same person he was and admits as much in his character blurb. You'd be hard pressed to find someone in any of the Dragon Age's who is a companion and has clean hands. And as I said before, having everyone in your party being pure of heart, agreeing with everything you do or say and never having any character flaws would be atrociously boring. That is my opinion anyway.

 

As for the bolded part of your reply: I can't speak for anyone else, but I don't consider people "haters" just because they have a different opinion than I do.The mage/templar debate is something that really gets people heated. I am pro-circle/pro-templar, but that doesn't mean I am anti-mage. I also think it's pretty silly to judge a person's character on how they play a fictional game. So, yeah. It's all good. 

Hey

See, here is problem right now. It's Cassandra, who saw something in Cullen not me, the player. I saw nothing, and know nothing about Cullen since the end of DA2, and now it's BioWare job to fill everything and make this choice reliable. I also don't need someone pure, while I don't belive that in so hard times ppl will be saints. Also I don't need a " YES-man". I will hapilly discuss with all of my advisor, and try to change theirs point of views, or agree with them, if theirs arguments will be good enough ( still it's Devs role in character creation). I never said I will not change my mind about Cullen and others advisors, just for now I have only my impressions from previous games, and that's a base for my feelings. So for me it's just " wait and see" option, and hope that Devs will surprise me.

[KBomb]

Hey

See, here is problem right now. It's Cassandra, who saw something in Cullen not me, the player. I saw nothing, and know nothing about Cullen since the end of DA2, and now it's BioWare job to fill everything and make this choice reliable. I also don't need someone pure, while I don't belive that in so hard times ppl will be saints. Also I don't need a " YES-man". I will hapilly discuss with all of my advisor, and try to change theirs point of views, or agree with them, if theirs arguments will be good enough ( still it's Devs role in character creation). I never said I will not change my mind about Cullen and others advisors, just for now I have only my impressions from previous games, and that's a base for my feelings. So for me it's just " wait and see" option, and hope that Devs will surprise me.

I get that. However, we didn't get to choose our advisers, and that is mostly likely due to plot reasons. Leliana chose Josaphine, Cassandra chose Cullen and Leliana. (I could be wrong about Cass choosing Leliana). Your Inquisitor isn't the one who started the Inquisition, he/she was chosen to lead it, I am assuming because he can mend the rifts. The Inquisition is a coalition. You're the dealer, but you're not the only one playing. You're not going to be able to control everything, nor should you, imo.

 

I am glad to see you're taking a "wait and see" approach. With so little information, I think it's the wisest choice. 

[GVulture]

 

You mean the common law, right (or are you in a civil code country)? My point was just that retroactivity is not quite the absolute bar people think it is; powerful people always make exceptions for their enemies. I think The Wolf Among Us had a very apt situation in Episode 5, if you played the game. 

 

 

 

Fair enough, re: Meredith.

 

As a practical matter, it's hard to talk about what Cullen is responsible for because we don't know very much of his timeline. Clearly defending himself isn't the same thing as carrying out a wholesale slaughter, though one might argue he's defending himself by encroaching mage positions to carry out the ROA, so he's really the aggressor. It's all messy. 

The reality is that we don't really see what happens, so it's hard to judge. He's willing to allow mages to surrender, though that means tranquility for them. 

 

TWAU doesn't apply here either. The crimes that apply in episode 5 are still CRIMES. The person was just being held responsible AFTER someone questioned their right to commit crimes in the name of a higher power.

IF they occur, they're still crimes. They didn't make it magically illegal and held them responsible.

 

So, it still doesn't apply here. Because the ROA and killing rebelling mages is not illegal and once the ROA has been enacted, killing any mage is not illegal.

[x Raizer x]

I feel so sorry for the mages, but then again I completely understand some aspects of the Templars.
Its just such a gray area, probably one of the grayest I've ever had to dwell on.

[In Exile]

Yes, he also states he will accept responsibility for them if they can be spared. He talks about the ROA in Fereldan and how some mages were saved, and how he hopes that can be the case in Kirkwall, IIRC. He also demands the templars listen to Hawke and release the mages.

 

To be honest, I don't see tranquility as a bad thing in relation to bloodmages and the such. I think it's a consequence of an action, if the mage chooses the action, they choose the consequence by default. Though, I do not support it for mages who have done nothing at all. It is a thorny issue, I agree. Cullen isn't the big bad here and he is willing to give up everything to help the Inquisition. 

 

I see tranquility as something far, far worse than death. I'd prefer the executioner's axe and whatever potential afterlife or non-afterlife there is rather than whatever tranquility would be for me. In the case of death, whatever I am might be consigned to oblivion; but in the case of tranquility what I am as a person will be fundamentally altered. The only way to get that back is to become possessed, and that's not really preserving what you are either (see Anders). 

 

At any rate, the fact that I think Cullen is not as bad after all does not mean I don't think he's still bad.

[x Raizer x]

I see tranquility as something far, far worse than death. I'd prefer the executioner's axe and whatever potential afterlife or non-afterlife there is rather than whatever tranquility would be for me. In the case of death, whatever I am might be consigned to oblivion; but in the case of tranquility what I am as a person will be fundamentally altered. The only way to get that back is to become possessed, and that's not really preserving what you are either (see Anders). 

 

At any rate, the fact that I think Cullen is not as bad after all does not mean I don't think he's still bad.

 

I suppose all our advisers seem to have gray areas.  Especially Leliana.  She killed just to play "the game"  Not to say all the other foul things she likely did in Marjolaine.

 

Not much is known about Josephine yet but I assume she has skeletons in her closet as well.

[In Exile]

TWAU doesn't apply here either. The crimes that apply in episode 5 are still CRIMES. The person was just being held responsible AFTER someone questioned their right to commit crimes in the name of a higher power.

IF they occur, they're still crimes. They didn't make it magically illegal and held them responsible.

 

So, it still doesn't apply here. Because the ROA and killing rebelling mages is not illegal and once the ROA has been enacted, killing any mage is not illegal.

 

The TWAU example applies because there's no trial. There's a mob that gathers, some testimony is exchanged, and that's enough to consign someone to death or prison. As an actual judicial proceeding, it's a comical travesty. 

 

We're going around in circles here. The fact that an oppressive, dictatorial regime declares its genocide legal does not somehow grant protection to the jack-booted troops committing the genocide. The point is that in a courtroom with the victims, they'll find you guilty if they deem you guilty. Which is exactly what happened in TWAU, despite the fact that we learn that the evidence relied on wasn't actually reliable at all in the end. 

[GVulture]

The TWAU example applies because there's no trial. There's a mob that gathers, some testimony is exchanged, and that's enough to consign someone to death or prison. As an actual judicial proceeding, it's a comical travesty. 

 

We're going around in circles here. The fact that an oppressive, dictatorial regime declares its genocide legal does not somehow grant protection to the jack-booted troops committing the genocide. The point is that in a courtroom with the victims, they'll find you guilty if they deem you guilty. Which is exactly what happened in TWAU, despite the fact that we learn that the evidence relied on wasn't actually reliable at all in the end. 

My point is that there is no legal force in Thedas that gives a crap. Period. It's not illegal. So. As an allegory, for RL to Thedas. It doesn't matter. It doesn't apply. At all.

 

And if it is a travesty of justice in TWAU, why did you bring it up? You used it as an example of someone being held responsible for crimes prior to losing their immunity and I pointed out that the crimes were still crimes. They didn't magically decide that what X did was wrong. It was wrong when X did it. By their already established rules and laws. In the case of Thedas law. If a Knight Commander/Grand Cleric says all systems go on a ROA, then it is all systems go. Time to raze earth and start over.

 

Just like in all the zombie apocalypse games and the government drops a bomb on a bunch of zombies and survivors to ensure the outbreak doesn't spread. It's sad and tragic... but it is a nuclear option because the world at large decided that was preferable to mages being free to wander and possible get possessed and kill randomly (not that all will, but let's face it, the good mages aren't the ones people were thinking of when these laws went up).

 

I will admit that the ROA is bad and horrible. But acting like there is any real world equivalent to the mage and templar conflict is too simplistic. So, it shouldn't be done.

[Xilizhra]

My point is that there is no legal force in Thedas that gives a crap. Period. It's not illegal. So. As an allegory, for RL to Thedas. It doesn't matter. It doesn't apply. At all.

 

And if it is a travesty of justice in TWAU, why did you bring it up? You used it as an example of someone being held responsible for crimes prior to losing their immunity and I pointed out that the crimes were still crimes. They didn't magically decide that what X did was wrong. It was wrong when X did it. By their already established rules and laws. In the case of Thedas law. If a Knight Commander/Grand Cleric says all systems go on a ROA, then it is all systems go. Time to raze earth and start over.

 

Just like in all the zombie apocalypse games and the government drops a bomb on a bunch of zombies and survivors to ensure the outbreak doesn't spread. It's sad and tragic... but it is a nuclear option because the world at large decided that was preferable to mages being free to wander and possible get possessed and kill randomly (not that all will, but let's face it, the good mages aren't the ones people were thinking of when these laws went up).

 

I will admit that the ROA is bad and horrible. But acting like there is any real world equivalent to the mage and templar conflict is too simplistic. So, it shouldn't be done.

Not an exact one, but there are plenty of parallels. And if the Inquisition has anything to say about it, I'll apply laws about Annulments and make them retroactive. I doubt this'll be possible, but it's definitely what I desire.

[Massa FX]

I'm with you OP. I love Cullen for his passion and hotness. But his misconceptions about mages is downright annoying. I hope to reform him and make him mine. But if he can't get that stick out of his arse, then sorry. He and I will not see i to i.

[KBomb]

I'm with you OP. I love Cullen for his passion and hotness. But his misconceptions about mages is downright annoying. I hope to reform him and make him mine. But if he can't get that stick out of his arse, then sorry. He and I will not see i to i.

I don't think he has misconceptions, tbh. He sees them as dangerous. They are. Even though he sees them as dangerous, he still would not kill one because of it, not without provocation. Unless you're talking about the comment he made about mages not being people like him and Hawke. I think many take that comment out of context. Either way, he admits to the Inquisitor that he views things differently now. 

 

I see tranquility as something far, far worse than death. I'd prefer the executioner's axe and whatever potential afterlife or non-afterlife there is rather than whatever tranquility would be for me. In the case of death, whatever I am might be consigned to oblivion; but in the case of tranquility what I am as a person will be fundamentally altered. The only way to get that back is to become possessed, and that's not really preserving what you are either (see Anders). 

 

At any rate, the fact that I think Cullen is not as bad after all does not mean I don't think he's still bad.

A lot of mages volunteer for the Rite, and it's rare it's used on those who have already passed the Harrowing. Also, the First Enchanter has to agree to the Rite, too. It's for mages who cannot control their magic or those who refuse to. 

 

Like any infrastructure, there is always room for abuse and corruption. I believe 100% that Circles are necessary and nothing will change my mind on that score; however, I do think it needs some reformation. I believe that mages should be allowed more governance within the Circle, but working alongside Templars. I don't think mages have the best track record for helping their case, though. When the Chantry, Templars, etc. claim that mages cannot be trusted to govern themselves because it leads to corruption of their magic, i.e. turning to bloodmagic, then maybe the best course of action to settle your problems would be not to turn to forbidden arts. You don't argue your maturity with a temper tantrum. Look at Anders, for instance. His actions will now cause innocent mages to suffer. Look at Adrian, if you have read Asunder. They both took the wrong road and hurt innocent people, all for the sake of their cause. If you're going to be extremists, don't complain when people view you as such.

 

For the record, I believe the Templars and the Chantry need reformation, as well. Not just the mages.

 

As for the last part of your reply: "Not as bad" is better than nothing.   Seriously, though--if you dislike Cullen, that is entirely your right. Your reasons are your reasons, as are my own. Your opinion of him doesn't alter mine, and vice versa. 

[Massa FX]

Argh. Fear of the unknown manifests in hatred. Cullen (to me) bordered hatred in DA:O. He was a bit better in DA:2, but not much. If I can romance him in DA:I as a mage, he'll learn that just because you're a mage doesn't mean you are going to become a demon.

 

My mages are in control. No demon's here! Cully baby. 

[KBomb]

Argh. Fear of the unknown manifests in hatred. Cullen (to me) bordered hatred in DA:O. He was a bit better in DA:2, but not much. If I can romance him in DA:I as a mage, he'll learn that just because you're a mage doesn't mean you are going to become a demon.

My mages are in control. No demon's here! Cully baby.

It wasn't the fear of the unknown. It was the fact he was severely traumatized and tortured. Of course he went through a period of hatred. He overcame that and it was proven when he refused to kill three mages because there was no proof they were bloodmages. So, he already knows not all mages are going to turn into a demon.

[Pierce Miller]

It wasn't the fear of the unknown. It was the fact he was severely traumatized and tortured. Of course he went through a period of hatred. He overcame that and it was proven when he refused to kill three mages because there was no proof they were bloodmages. So, he already knows not all mages are going to turn into a demon.

I definitely get the feeling that Cullen might dislike my anti-circle, baby sacrificing, tevinter loving and demon dealing mage inquisitor. So it'll be interesting to see how Cullen reacts, will he decide that the inquisition is more important or will his principles get the better of him?

[leaguer of one]

1.He did not need to talk to the divine or the seekers. Grand Cleric Elthina was deal with it.

 

2.https://www.youtube....h?v=Zgn1CRXLLWg

 

3.Cullen's story line is about him seeing the best and worst of both the templers and the mages which is literally saw first hand. We see how it changed him and effect him in da:o and 2. That's what drives him in dai. He know both the wrong and right of both sides and is now no longer bias. I'm not even a Cullen fan and I see that.

[AlistairorCullen]

Cullen to me will always be the one templar I had reason to trust. His bad time at the circle at DAO caused him to have a conflict with mages and when DA2 came around you could see he was slowly sinking into slightly liking them again. Knowing that Meredith was becoming trouble and admitting that she is known to be a tad too......mean he shows he has common sense. He knows that what happened in Kirkwall was just the start so helping the inquisitor probably gave him the relief to know he was finally actually doing something to help. Instead of shrugging his shoulders and joining the templars in the templar and mage conflict just because he works with them he now realize that maybe the people you work with or for aren't always nice. I was slightly disappointed to know that he was a official party member and wouldn't be fighting right at my side but knowing he is a romance option and would be dealing with my allies makes me smile. I also think that the romance with Cullen might be more with humans, elves and dwarves instead of qunari. It just seems that with what happened with the Qunari in Kirkwall he will be reluctant to romance an Qunari Inquisitor. It just seems logical. Maybe picking the same race as your warden who was a mage in the circle might make him joke that he knew someone like you. He might be reluctant to romance a mage but like Alistair his past might just leave and he won't care anymore and go for it.

[x Raizer x]

After viewing the replies and conversations in this thread, I think I do trust Cullen a little more, but I still think I am a bit torn.  It does seem like he has seen first hand just as many bad things about Templars as he has seen about mages, so hopefully that balances him out.

[ChachiBobinks]

I'm with you OP. I love Cullen for his passion and hotness. But his misconceptions about mages is downright annoying. I hope to reform him and make him mine. But if he can't get that stick out of his arse, then sorry. He and I will not see i to i.

 

And once he works the stick out of his arse, he can just try to beat guys to death with it, amirite?

[Catche Jagger]

I actually appreciate Cullen's somewhat biased view (though it does seem that after the events of DA2 he's mellowed out a little). Most if not all companions in the past have had opinions on issues that not all players would agree with. Though it is extremely unlikely that he will be completely unreasonable when it comes to his views on Mages vs Templars, I believe that he will represent a pro-templar perspective.

[TK514]

And once he works the stick out of his arse, he can just try to beat guys to death with it, amirite?

Cullen and Garrus will have something in common.

I actually appreciate Cullen's somewhat biased view (though it does seem that after the events of DA2 he's mellowed out a little). Most if not all companions in the past have had opinions on issues that not all players would agree with. Though it is extremely unlikely that he will be completely unreasonable when it comes to his views on Mages vs Templars, I believe that he will represent a pro-templar perspective.

It would be nice to have a Pro-Templar perspective for a change. Not as nice as if he were a companion, but a start. Someone who believed in the Order's mandate as defenders rather than jailers.

[KBomb]

I would really love to see a balance between the two. I am pro-templar, but it would be nice to have someone who represented the mages--the Circle mages, that is. Not like Anders, I don't think he was a good advocate at all, but someone who really presents a nice argument. 

[TK514]

I would really love to see a balance between the two. I am pro-templar, but it would be nice to have someone who represented the mages--the Circle mages, that is. Not like Anders, I don't think he was a good advocate at all, but someone who really presents a nice argument.

Vivi is supposed to be our pro-Circle advocate, but my suspicion is that she's less pro-Circle than she is pro-Vivienne.