148 réponses à ce sujet

[lil yonce]

Locking the door and calling for the RoA was within their role as the guards. The Templars aren't solely bodyguards for the mages; they're also there to protect civilians from them. Argue if you want that the RoA is inefficient, but do not argue that it's outside their job description. I also see a problem with your assertion that the mages should be entirely autonomous. Kirkwall (and for a less extreme example, the more vicious Gregoir from the comics) is what happens if the Templars are allowed to police themselves, and Tevinter can result if the mages can.

 

It was going to be Jowan, after he was caught in the phylactery chamber.

I don't think so - I don't think that's within their role if we're discussing an autonomous circle. I don't think Greagoir has the power to make that call or that he should. Its a major decision for which he can be criticized by the PC and one he defends with "well, what else was I supposed to do?" Your job, maybe? Kill abominations and demons that emerge rather than do nothing and lock every mage inside with them? Its not a good call - especially when the PC does his job for him. Besides, the tower is in the middle of a lake. What peasants is he putting in immediate danger and why is this concern more important than the mages he is equally sworn to protect locked in close quarters with abominations, demons, and hostile blood mages? And the circles are autonomous now - or rather they're supposed to be. I don't know why any mage would agree to anything less than that in a peace deal in DAI. And autonomous does not mean independent in this case. The mages still work with the chantry to pass law and decide policy - they simply don't answer to the templars within their own circles. And Kirkwall's templars were not allowed to police themselves - just somehow the seekers never showed up to investigate.

[lil yonce]

And that's entirely in his purview. All templars have standing orders to kill maleficar on sight. And when you see one try to run off with his or her phylactery, what are you supposed to think?

 

Even still, initially Jowan was just gonna get Tranquility (that Irving agreed with), but when Jowan tried to run, of course he'd get a harsher punishment.

If the circle is autonomous, it should punish its own criminals. Greagoir should have no authority in this at all. Can Irving ever demand a templar's execution and get it? And he was "just going to get tranquility"? I don't find tranquility acceptable in any case but the very rare extreme one and it should never be used as a punishment. And with the new rules on blood magic - it was a joke to ever consider making Jowan tranquil. He is perhaps one of the strongest mages we've met in the setting.

[Xilizhra]

And I believe that those who do not have any better ideas should keep their mouths shut.

 

So, what are your better ideas? Keep in mind that apart from making mage libertarians happy (which is not an important issue in the least bit), you also have these potential problems that need stable solutions: giving mages proper training, mitigating the damage of demonic-possession, ensuring that law-enforcement groups are equipped to rein in criminal mage groups or individuals (potentially armed with Blood Magic).

 

Good luck.

Something that I've stated multiple times.

 

I'm fine with the Circle rejoining the Chantry provided Annulment and involuntary Tranquility are banned, those with templar abilities come under the authority of individual Circles and not the Chantry (the Seekers can be the Chantry's police; it's a multitier system akin to the difference in America between city/state police and the FBI), and mages have fair representation within the Chantry's government if the Chantry is to govern them.

 

 

And that's entirely in his purview. All templars have standing orders to kill maleficar on sight. And when you see one try to run off with his or her phylactery, what are you supposed to think?

 

Even still, initially Jowan was just gonna get Tranquility (that Irving agreed with), but when Jowan tried to run, of course he'd get a harsher punishment.

Irving can be a slimy collaborationist at times.

[Bigdoser]

Wrong Irving even says to you since I just recently played DAO is that if things were different he would not have gone through with tranquillity or signed jowan off. The templars hold more power than him. Plus he is told that gregoir has eye witness testimony his hands were tied he could not get into the path of the decision he knows he can't help Jowan but his words were "I won't let the chantry get by while one of my apprentices suffer I will see the chantry will do the same". 

 

Since if jowan is not caugh red handed lily would get off scout free and if you tell him wow that is abit ruthless he tells you that to survive in the cirlce sometimes sacrifices are necessary. The current system is not equal templars hold more power if Irving had his way he would of allowed duncan to have more mages for the battle of ostagar. 

 

That's why if you tell him about Jowan's problem he tells you to help them with their plan so lily also gets punished just the same. Play the origin again and when you find out about Jowan's problem talk to Irving let me say when I first did that option I was quite surprised before I thought he was in agreement with gregoir but through the conversation I realized he is not.  

[KaiserShep]

Something that I've stated multiple times.

 

I'm fine with the Circle rejoining the Chantry provided Annulment and involuntary Tranquility are banned, those with templar abilities come under the authority of individual Circles and not the Chantry (the Seekers can be the Chantry's police; it's a multitier system akin to the difference in America between city/state police and the FBI), and mages have fair representation within the Chantry's government if the Chantry is to govern them.

 

The Right of Annulment would never go away entirely, because magic itself comes with very special circumstances. It doesn't matter what anyone here thinks about personal freedom or justice or anything like that, because all options must be considered with the risks inherent, especially since every other feasible option can be exhausted for any number of reasons. Whether or not I like the Right (which I don't) doesn't matter.

 

What would be your solution if a Circle spiraled out of control with demonic possession?

 

Anyway, in response to this old post:

 

Because Bethany seems to find contentment in the Circle at the expense of the fate of her fellow mages, judging by the total lack of any indication we get that she's trying to improve it, I've come to favor just having her die in Lothering, because that way at least one sibling will be able to live a life of both satisfaction and integrity.

 

I don't see contentment so much as I see resignation. After all, Bethany would rather be free to do whatever she wants than be confined to any Circle. She does, however, settle in and assumes a role that is actually beneficial. Whether or not you think she's complicit in the injustice of the Circle system does not change the fact that as a teacher of apprentices, she can at least do her part to see that young mages are trained in magic properly.

 

I see this as a case of armchair rebellion. What should Bethany do, really? Rally a crowd? Kill Templars like Anders? For what? For justice? Maybe some people don't really feel like rising up and getting killed for some cause all of a sudden.

[Xilizhra]

The Right of Annulment would never go away entirely, because magic itself comes with very special circumstances. It doesn't matter what anyone here thinks about personal freedom or justice or anything like that, because all options must be considered with the risks inherent, especially since every other feasible option can be exhausted for any number of reasons. Whether or not I like the Right (which I don't) doesn't matter.

 

What would be your solution if a Circle spiraled out of control with demonic possession?

Kill all the demons, which doesn't require permission.

[Steelcan]

Kill all the demons, which doesn't require permission.

by that do you mean go into the fade and kill the demons possessing the mages?  Which would be horribly infeasible in a situation where the entire Circle is overrun.

 

Or only kill abominations?  Which if the Circle has completely fallen is probably everyone already

[KaiserShep]

Kill all the demons, which doesn't require permission.

What demons? If possession is running amok, then the mages themselves are already bound to them. You may not like it, but the Templars must also consider the body count on their end as well. If in their attempts to be more specific and avoid collateral damage, they end up taking too many losses, then a more effective solution must be considered to mitigate that. If that means bringing the whole thing down, then so be it. Gameplay may not reflect this too well, but single abominations are kind of a big deal. Even one getting loose can wreak havoc on any nearby populated areas. The templars cannot risk even one of these things escaping.

[Xilizhra]

What demons? If possession is running amok, then the mages themselves are already bound to them. You may not like it, but the Templars must also consider the body count on their end as well. If in their attempts to be more specific and avoid collateral damage, they end up taking too many losses, then a more effective solution must be considered to mitigate that. If that means bringing the whole thing down, then so be it. Gameplay may not reflect this too well, but single abominations are kind of a big deal. Even one getting loose can wreak havoc on any nearby populated areas. The templars cannot risk even one of these things escaping.

Mages didn't ask to be born mages; templars chose to join this force. I consider templar casualties to protect civilians wholly justifiable.

[KaiserShep]

Mages didn't ask to be born mages; templars chose to join this force.

 

I don't really see the point of this. That a mage didn't choose to be born such doesn't change the fact that once possessed, a Templar, by his or her own devices, cannot kill this demon without killing its host. Whether or not the Templar chose to be a Templar doesn't change the fact that once possessed, that mage is now a danger to everyone and must be eliminated by someone anyway, be it another mage or some non-Templar soldier.

 

 

I consider templar casualties to protect civilians wholly justifiable.

 

Well sure you do, but I don't see the point of this either. If the Templars are trying to control a rash of possessions, and it's getting out of hand, them simply dying for sake of being selective doesn't really do anyone any good. Whether you like it or not, they must also consider the risk of there being not enough left to keep the situation contained, and that if they simply all died, whatever's left of the abominations can now freely go on their merry way.

[lil yonce]

by that do you mean go into the fade and kill the demons possessing the mages?  Which would be horribly infeasible in a situation where the entire Circle is overrun.

 

Or only kill abominations?  Which if the Circle has completely fallen is probably everyone already

Not every mage in the tower is guaranteed to be an abomination - we meet several in the Ferelden circle who weren't. The RoA grants power to kill them regardless. To kill innocent people is unjust and thus why the RoA should be abolished.

[Xilizhra]

I don't really see the point of this. That a mage didn't choose to be born such doesn't change the fact that once possessed, a Templar, by his or her own devices, cannot kill this demon without killing its host. Whether or not the Templar chose to be a Templar doesn't change the fact that once possessed, that mage is now a danger to everyone and must be eliminated by someone anyway, be it another mage or some non-Templar soldier.

True, but my objection this whole time has been against killing mages who aren't possessed. And it's not like it ever seems difficult to tell them apart.

[Steelcan]

Not every mage in the tower is guaranteed to be an abomination - we meet several in the Ferelden circle who weren't The RoA grants power to kill them regardless. To kill innocent people is unjust and thus why the RoA should be abolished.

we meet how many mages in the tower who weren't possessed?

 

Wynne and her group were under seige and wouldn't have lasted long, and a single other mage who hid.

 

 

The Ferelden Circle was for all intents and purposes lost until the Warden came in.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Mages didn't ask to be born mages; templars chose to join this force. I consider templar casualties to protect civilians wholly justifiable.

Of course. But what about civilians who aren't mages? At the end of the day, what matters isn't about how many mages die any more than it is about how many templars die. What is important is that all the demons die, so that they don't swim to the Spoiled Princess or to Redcliffe. And it might be that past a certain point, the only way the Templars can make damn certain they don't lose is to go in there and just start killing anything that moves. Of course, that certain point is difficult to reach, and I'm not saying that the Kirkwall or Rivaini Circles had reached it. Given that the demons in Ferelden seemed to be a remarkably unsubtle bunch, maybe it wasn't even necessary in Ferelden, but supposing some that actually understand subtlety show up during a similar event in the future? We see Connor and Uldred's abomination selves maintain their human forms, now what if a demon that can do that shows the brains necessary to capitalize on that human appearance?

[lil yonce]

we meet how many mages in the tower who weren't possessed?

 

Wynne and her group were under seige and wouldn't have lasted long, and a single other mage who hid.

 

 

The Ferelden Circle was for all intents and purposes lost until the Warden came in.

And should Wynne's group and others in the tower survive to meet the templars, for what should they be killed? How would you justify their deaths?

[Steelcan]

True, but my objection this whole time has been against killing mages who aren't possessed. And it's not like it ever seems difficult to tell them apart.

Amalia's father couldn't tell his daughter was possessed

[Steelcan]

And should Wynne's group, and others in the tower survive to meet the templars, for what should they be killed? How would you justify their deaths?

rather easily, not letting any possible chance of a demon to escape into the countryside is more important.

 

However the Ferelden Circle situation is rather unusual, the templars don't even bother checking the remaining mages for signs of possession unless urged to do so by the Warden.

[lil yonce]

rather easily, not letting any possible chance of a demon to escape into the countryside is more important.

 

However the Ferelden Circle situation is rather unusual, the templars don't even bother checking the remaining mages for signs of possession unless urged to do so by the Warden.

And what do demons and innocent mages have in common?

[Steelcan]

And what do demons and innocent mages have in common?

a connection to the fade

[lil yonce]

a connection to the fade

And why wouldn't you just kill the demon if you're worried about it "escaping into the countryside"? Why would you kill an innocent mage?

[KaiserShep]

If the demon has a hold on the mage, it doesn't matter. You can't kill one without killing the other.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

And why wouldn't you just kill the demon if you're worried about it "escaping into the countryside"? Why would you kill an innocent mage?

The problem is that blood mages can easily pass for innocent mages (in fact I occasionally tell one to sneak back in with the normal mages Wynne was guarding), and that the very most powerful abominations are able to maintain human form. And as has been previously pointed out, at least one demon (Kitty) used its human form to escape into the countryside with its host's father.

[lil yonce]

If the demon has a hold on the mage, it doesn't matter. You can't kill one without killing the other.

I'm not talking about abominations. Killing those is expected. Killing innocents is what I object to.

[lil yonce]

The problem is that blood mages can easily pass for innocent mages (in fact I occasionally tell one to sneak back in with the normal mages Wynne was guarding), and that the very most powerful abominations are able to maintain human form. And as has been previously pointed out, at least one demon (Kitty) used its human form to escape into the countryside with its host's father.

And if you were a mage, you would find it perfectly okay for the templars to kill you on the off chance that you might be an abomination or that you might use blood magic against them? Even in DA2 Cullen is in favor of releasing three mages that could be blood mages. Because they have not made a threatening move toward the templars he wants them let go. Its a risk the templars must take. You don't kill people on maybes.

[Xilizhra]

we meet how many mages in the tower who weren't possessed?

 

Wynne and her group were under seige and wouldn't have lasted long, and a single other mage who hid.

 

 

The Ferelden Circle was for all intents and purposes lost until the Warden came in.

Enough, clearly, to form a small army to go to Denerim.

 

 

Of course. But what about civilians who aren't mages? At the end of the day, what matters isn't about how many mages die any more than it is about how many templars die. What is important is that all the demons die, so that they don't swim to the Spoiled Princess or to Redcliffe. And it might be that past a certain point, the only way the Templars can make damn certain they don't lose is to go in there and just start killing anything that moves. Of course, that certain point is difficult to reach, and I'm not saying that the Kirkwall or Rivaini Circles had reached it. Given that the demons in Ferelden seemed to be a remarkably unsubtle bunch, maybe it wasn't even necessary in Ferelden, but supposing some that actually understand subtlety show up during a similar event in the future? We see Connor and Uldred's abomination selves maintain their human forms, now what if a demon that can do that shows the brains necessary to capitalize on that human appearance?

Not even Ferelden's Circle had reached that point. And not only are subtle demons practically nonexistent, even the ones who are subtle can be detected relatively easily, via blood tests or harmless attacks.