Out of context? It says right there that as a seeker, they don't have lyrium addiction.
There is no room for interpretation here. Seekers are not addicted to lyrium, yet have full access to templar talents.
No it doesn't.... It says CASSANDRA doesn't have the risk for Lyrium addiction. Until we have more information THAT is all we have to go on. People have from that information immediately jumped to the conclusion that all Seekers are immune to Lyrium addiction.
Sounds awesome. I played a demo recently and the wraith abilities are so sweet.I am enjoying it at the moment. A good distraction until DA:I comes out. Technically its an Elven Wraith and he lives inside you and both of you are "banished from death".
No it doesn't.... It says CASSANDRA doesn't have the risk for Lyrium addiction. Until we have more information THAT is all we have to go on.
It says thus Cassandra can use these abilities without the risk of Lyrium addiction, meaning as a result of the Seekers teaching the Templar Order how to use anti-magic.
Want to know the worst thing about this new revelation? The Templar Inquisitor won't have to snort Lyrium dust through a straw. That's pretty disappointing in my eyes.
It says thus Cassandra can use these abilities without the risk of Lyrium addiction, meaning as a result of the Seekers teaching the Templar Order how to use anti-magic.
No. It means as a result of being a Seeker she has access to Templar abilities. It does not specify that the lack of addiction is a result of her being a Seeker, or something else.
I am not saying that it isn't possible that it is what people are jumping to conclude. I am saying that we don't have all the pieces yet, so it is all wild speculations.
So, will the Templar!Inquisitor have a Lyrium Addiction or is Bioware also going to provide a loophole there as well?
Well since I'd only heard WoG on the comics pretty recently, I've always assumed that Alistair was right in Origins. Templars develop their powers without lyrium through training, then are given lyrium only after taking Templar vows. That the lyrium amplifies their skills. Lyrium addiction is not a secret. What is annoying me is that the Seekers for some reason or another have hidden something that means the addiction wouldn't happen...that is...well I'm too polite to say what I shouted at the screen earlier today. 
An army deliberately addicted to lyrium that is distributed officially by the Chantry...places a lot of power in the hands of the Divine. 
Did the Seekers keep the secret from the Divine as well? Thus maintaining their independence from control, or are they fully culpable of collusion?
My Warden, Hawke and Trevelyan would all like to know...Cassandra I'm going to make your interrogation of Varric look like a park walk....SIT! If she argues, I'm telling Cullen and his Templar...I don't think they'd be amused either.
On the plus side we now have a possible way of bringing renegade Templar back into the fold, if it is even possible to apply this addiction cure to those already addicted.
I see the Chantry being reformed at the point of Templar swords.
So, will the Templar!Inquisitor have a Lyrium Addiction or is Bioware also going to provide a loophole there as well?
I'm willing to bet that the Inquisitor will benefit from Cassandra's Seeker method... either that or the glowy hand will substitute for lyrium.
No. It means as a result of being a Seeker she has access to Templar abilities. It does not specify that the lack of addiction is a result of her being a Seeker, or something else.
It undoubtedly implies that it is more than it isn't, going by the conventions of written English.
It undoubtedly implies that it is more than it isn't, going by the conventions of written English.
The conventions of written English would require us to have context before we ever make any conclusions...
Blessed are those who stand before the corrupt and the wicked and do not falter!
am I doing this right?
Blessed are those who stand before the corrupt and the wicked and do not falter!
The conventions of written English would require us to have context before we ever make any conclusions...
Uh, no. In a statement that is supposed to provide information (which is what the class description is), the conventions of written English encourage that proper context is established in writing, to ensure that people will be drawing the correct (intended) conclusions in the first place.
Uh, no. In a statement that is supposed to provide information (which is what the class description is), the conventions of written English encourage that proper context is established in writing, to ensure that people will be drawing the correct (intended) conclusions in the first place.
And as I said, it should be taken in context. ESPECIALLY since it is not the Templar description blurb, but rather the explanation as to why Cassandra has the Templar skills.
Now we have the devs saying that Seekers do things differently, and we will jsut have to wait and talk to Cass to get any conclusions.
So, all the people in (multitudes) of threads, can calm their ******, and just wait for the explanation BEFORE they default to blaming the Chantry (which isn't even mentioned in the same blurb they cling so desperately to)
And as I said, it should be taken in context. ESPECIALLY since it is not the Templar description blurb, but rather the explanation as to why Cassandra has the Templar skills.
Right, the only context we have at the moment being the description itself. That a freedom from Lyrium addiction is a characteristic of Seekers in general, as opposed to just Cassandra, is more readily inferred due to the manner in which it is written. This is further reinforced by a dev implying that this is indeed the case.
... That someone would find a correct application of reading comprehension appalling is itself rather appalling.
No it doesn't.... It says CASSANDRA doesn't have the risk for Lyrium addiction. Until we have more information THAT is all we have to go on. People have from that information immediately jumped to the conclusion that all Seekers are immune to Lyrium addiction.
http://forum.bioware...ars/?p=17470012
Bioware Employee confirms Seekers do things differently than Templars, so it's not Cassandra being special.
Blessed are those who stand before the corrupt and the wicked and do not falter!
Blessed is the prophet Andraste purified the holy flame.
I prefer...
Foul and corrupt are they
Who have taken His gift
And turned it against His children
I prefer...
Foul and corrupt are they
Who have taken His gift
And turned it against His children
I like.....
Blessed are they who stand before
The corrupt and the wicked and do not falter.
Blessed are the peacekeepers, the champions of the just.
Well since I'd only heard WoG on the comics pretty recently, I've always assumed that Alistair was right in Origins. Templars develop their powers without lyrium through training, then are given lyrium only after taking Templar vows. That the lyrium amplifies their skills. Lyrium addiction is not a secret. What is annoying me is that the Seekers for some reason or another have hidden something that means the addiction wouldn't happen...that is...well I'm too polite to say what I shouted at the screen earlier today.
Didn't Evangeline say something different in Asunder, however? That she indeed needed lyrium for her templar powers?
Didn't Evangeline say something different in Asunder, however? That she indeed needed lyrium for her templar powers?
She did.
In my "ideal world", Circles are self-ran by mages. Mages considered strong are free to leave but Templars hold on to their Pylacteries.
I like.....
Blessed are they who stand before
The corrupt and the wicked and do not falter.
Blessed are the peacekeepers, the champions of the just.
I like neither because no one is blessed. They will all take turns in burning on the afterlife.
I like neither because no one is blessed. They will all take turns in burning on the afterlife.
There isn't any mention of "Hell" in the Chant.
Those who don't follow the Maker are merely cast from his sight, they just cease to exist after death.
Retour en haut