1325 réponses à ce sujet

[MisterJB]

More than one. 

 

Kerras, Alrik, Metten, everyone who was under them that didn't report their abuse to Cullen or Meredith, two of whom I mentioned are running ramapant in Acts 1 and 2, unless Kerras dies by Hawke's hand in Act 1. 

 

Also, why was Emerick, a decent templar who was genuinely trying to do his job and conduct an investigation into practically confirmed blood magic, with the evidence gathered by Hawke, human remains, demons summoned, a man fleeing the scene, not only ignored by his superiors, but he was actually limited in his investigation by them, and received no help from the Guard or the templars and eventually told to stand down, cease and desist, because he convinced some guards to raid the manor of a noble, who turned out to be a blood mage, and had a connection to Quentin as his former apprentice?

 

And Cullen's own codex says he wasn't promoted on merit, he was promoted to Knight-Captain because his own views on mages (while freshly traumatized from Ferelden) matched Meredith's own. 

 

Add in History of Kirkwall Chapter 4, with the Chantry ordering the templars to interfere with Kirkwall politics because the Viscount was making things hard for Orlais, and it was Elthina who tried and sentenced the Viscount, and you have a long history of corruption within the templars. Not just in abuse of mages, but overall corruption, corrupt in its grabs for power, corrupt in promoting the wrong people for the wrong reasons, corrupt in limiting the real work by templars who are actually trying to do their job, and then, in Act 3, corrupt in seizing power in the city and a refusal to give it up over the course of three years. 

Cullen's promotion can't be seen as a sign of corruption. He was promoted because Meredith believed that his experience with mages made him unlikely to be fooled by their claims of innocence and thus, he would be able to do his job better; he wasn't promoted because he was rich or related to someone or shagging the boss.

You may disagree with her reasoning but this is not a case of corruption.

 

And I'll remind you that the Knight Commander of the time argued against interfering with politics.

 

Emeric's case was a sign of inefficacy by the Order, not corruption.

[dragonflight288]

What MWZ said was that there wouldn't have been a fight without Fiona which is true. Even if we accept the Templars initiated physical hostilities, had there been a more reasonable and patient Grand Enchanter there, the viollence might have been avoided at all.

 

Besides, I question her legal right to put another agenda on the table. At least, where I live, you have to announce to everyone interested that you will be doing so three days prior to the meeting or they'll be invallid.

 

Well, Thedas isn't where you live, so unless we hear otherwise, we can only assume she did have the right, but fair point on that one. And I did acknowledge that Fiona was not helping the situation.

 

However, when you take into account Lambert ordering Evangeline to kill anyone who knew the truth of tranquility's cure and destroy all evidence....I have my doubts that he wouldn't force violence unprovoked anyway. 

 

And since he initiated the physical violence, he started the battle. MWZ tried saying that all the mages killed there was because they fought in a battle that Fiona started, and I pointed out that no, they didn't all die in battle, one tried to surrender without a fight and was killed on the spot, and it was Lambert who started the battle since he's the one who struck the first blow. 

 

Spin it however you like, Lambert struck the first blow, he illegally tried to stop the gathering, openly declared that the Divine no longer had authority, before any vote occurred and before the Nevvaran Accord was dissolved, and that makes Lambert responsible for the battle and forcing the mages into a corner. That very same vote has happened before, and the mages voted to remain with the Chantry each time it happened, and with Wynne and Rhyse there, it probably would have turned out the same as before had he not forced the mages into a corner. 

 

We can play the "maybe if he or she didn't do this, it wouldn't have happened" all day, but fact is, it did happen, Lambert was the one who initiated violence, and mages were killed simply because they were there and weren't fighting back. 

[dragonflight288]

Cullen's promotion can't be seen as a sign of corruption. He was promoted because Meredith believed that his experience with mages made him unlikely to be fooled by their claims of innocence and thus, he would be able to do his job better; he wasn't promoted because he was rich or related to someone or shagging the boss.

You may disagree with her reasoning but this is not a case of corruption.

 

And I'll remind you that the Knight Commander of the time argued against interfering with politics.

 

Emeric's case was a sign of inefficacy by the Order, not corruption.

 

Cullen's own codex says he was promoted because his views matched Meredith's. And he was a new templar in Origins. What experience are you talking about? He was a templar for two years, maybe three tops when Hawke meets him in Act 1 and he's Knight-Captain. 

 

He did, and then was killed by the Viscount, Meredith rallied the templars, stormed the keep, arrested the Viscount who was then tried and sentenced by the Chantry, and a new Viscount was appointed, and the guard even before Hawke enters Kirkwall makes it clear that Meredith became the power in Kirkwall and he danced to her tune. 

 

Guard: I'd hate to think what would happen if he did something the Knight-Commander didn't want. 

 

Emerick had human remains, demons summoned, a man fleeing the scene, an eye witness, and it was all ignored, then his investigation was hampered by both his superiors and the City Guard, whose captain may have been there when the evidence was discovered in the first place. 

 

Whether inefficiency or corruption, there was blatant incompetence by the Guard and his superiors, especially when he turned out to be right.

 

When I'm presented with corrupt or incompetent as the options, that does not speak well of the order under scrutiny. 

[MisterJB]

Well, Thedas isn't where you live, so unless we hear otherwise, we can only assume she did have the right, but fair point on that one.

 

And why should we assume that? Given Fiona's personality, it's just as likely she broke every rule to get what she wanted; many mages on the conclave protested against her bringing another topic on the agenda.

 

 

However, when you take into account Lambert ordering Evangeline to kill anyone who knew the truth of tranquility's cure and destroy all evidence....I have my doubts that he wouldn't force violence unprovoked anyway.

He backed off during the meeting with the Divine.

Also, it's worth noting that if Evangeline had done her duty, there wouldn't have been a conclave for violence to start in.

 

And since he initiated the physical violence, he started the battle. MWZ tried saying that all the mages killed there was because they fought in a battle that Fiona started, and I pointed out that no, they didn't all die in battle, one tried to surrender without a fight and was killed on the spot, and it was Lambert who started the battle since he's the one who struck the first blow. 

No, I've followed the conversation the very start and that is not what MWZ said. He said, and I quote

 

 

That man died only because of Fiona.

 

There wouldn't have even been a battle without her.

 

Or are you going to deny that?

 

He never said she started the battle, he said that there wouldn't have been a battle without her.

Which is a logical position to take because, without her, there wouldn't have been calls for rebellion in a direct challenge to the Chantry and Templars.

 

This holds true even if Lambert ordered the mages detained first.

 

 

Spin it however you like, Lambert struck the first blow, he illegally tried to stop the gathering, openly declared that the Divine no longer had authority, before any vote occurred and before the Nevvaran Accord was dissolved, and that makes Lambert responsible for the battle and forcing the mages into a corner. That very same vote has happened before, and the mages voted to remain with the Chantry each time it happened, and with Wynne and Rhyse there, it probably would have turned out the same as before had he not forced the mages into a corner. 

 

We can play the "maybe if he or she didn't do this, it wouldn't have happened" all day, but fact is, it did happen, Lambert was the one who initiated violence, and mages were killed simply because they were there and weren't fighting back. 

I agree with you that Lambert shouldn't have done what he did because it just polarized both sides. However, we don't know if breaking the conclave was illegal because, if Fiona's introducing a new topic was illegal, the he was within his rights to break it up until the Divine could call another one that also included "Let's all rebel: Yes or No" as a question.

 

Also, the book specifically tell us the Templar who killed that mage had a look of shock in his face. Evidently, it was an accident that ocurred in the heath of battle.

But the mages fighting to kill afterwards was no accident.

[dragonflight288]

And why should we assume that? Given Fiona's personality, it's just as likely she broke every rule to get what she wanted; many mages on the conclave protested against her bringing another topic on the agenda.

 

 

He backed off during the meeting with the Divine.

Also, it's worth noting that if Evangeline had done her duty, there wouldn't have been a conclave for violence to start in.

 

No, I've followed the conversation the very start and that is not what MWZ said. He said, and I quote

 

 

 

He never said she started the battle, he said that there wouldn't have been a battle without her.

Which is a logical position to take because, without her, there wouldn't have been calls for rebellion in a direct challenge to the Chantry and Templars.

 

This holds true even if Lambert ordered the mages detained first.

 

 

I agree with you that Lambert shouldn't have done what he did because it just polarized both sides. However, we don't know if breaking the conclave was illegal because, if Fiona's introducing a new topic was illegal, the he was within his rights to break it up until the Divine could call another one that also included "Let's all rebel: Yes or No" as a question.

 

Also, the book specifically tell us the Templar who killed that mage had a look of shock in his face. Evidently, it was an accident that ocurred in the heath of battle.

But the mages fighting to kill afterwards was no accident.

 

Fair point. 

 

Okay, I misread him, but all he did was lay all the blame on Fiona, who again was not helping the situation as I've acknowledged, and he ignored the fact that Lambert started the fight, polarized the mages and forced them into a corner, and, this is the important part, Fiona putting a new agenda on the table was not the reason he gave for interrupting.

 

If Fiona was breaking Chantry law to put it on the agenda, then yes, Lambert would have had the right to break up the conclave, but that, again, is not the reason he gave for doing so. It was the murder of Pharamond and him wanting to arrest Rhys. Yes, he did order the mages to stand down, but Fiona gave him a bit of lip and he ordered an attack. I got the impression he was just waiting for an excuse to attack, and Fiona gave him one with some lip on how the Divine said they could gather, and he proceeded to say that the Divine no longer had power, then attacked. 

 

Yeah, I get that the templar that killed the mage had a look of shock, and I accept that it probably was done in the heat of the battle, but it also made the mages feel that even if they surrendered, they would be killed anyway, so they fought with renewed vigor. 

 

No matter how it is sliced, the templars killed a mage who surrendered, the templars and Lord High Seeker Lambert struck the first blow, and that makes the templars and the Seekers responsible. 

[MisterJB]

Cullen's own codex says he was promoted because his views matched Meredith's. And he was a new templar in Origins. What experience are you talking about? He was a templar for two years, maybe three tops when Hawke meets him in Act 1 and he's Knight-Captain.

I'm referring to the experience of being tortured by mages. In Meredith's eyes, and she is probably right, this would prevent him from trusting mages too much and thus fail to notice dangerous signs. For instance, Cullen wouldn't ever have met Thrask's ends because he would never have trusted Grace.

 

You may think this is not the characteristic Templars should possess, and you're entitled to your opinion, but it's not a sign of corruption because Cullen wasn't promoted due to status or wealth but rather due to Meredith's belief his experience of having seen the true face of mages; in her eyes, anyway; would enable him to do his job better.

 

 

He did, and then was killed by the Viscount, Meredith rallied the templars, stormed the keep, arrested the Viscount who was then tried and sentenced by the Chantry, and a new Viscount was appointed, and the guard even before Hawke enters Kirkwall makes it clear that Meredith became the power in Kirkwall and he danced to her tune.

I'll grant you it's a touchy subject.

Many hailed Meredith as a savior while other preferred the previous Viscount. Afterwards, it's only natural that the person who defeated the previous ruler gains immense influence.

A bigger case for corruption could be made with her actions in Act 3 such as stalling the choice of a new Viscount; altough her actions were influenced by the Red Lyrium; but can it be considered to corruption if she truly believe she is doing what is best for the people?

 

 

When I'm presented with corrupt or incompetent as the options, that does not speak well of the order under scrutiny. 

True but there is a difference between the two terms.

 

[MisterJB]

Fair point. 

 

Okay, I misread him, but all he did was lay all the blame on Fiona, who again was not helping the situation as I've acknowledged, and he ignored the fact that Lambert started the fight, polarized the mages and forced them into a corner, and, this is the important part, Fiona putting a new agenda on the table was not the reason he gave for interrupting.

 

If Fiona was breaking Chantry law to put it on the agenda, then yes, Lambert would have had the right to break up the conclave, but that, again, is not the reason he gave for doing so. It was the murder of Pharamond and him wanting to arrest Rhys. Yes, he did order the mages to stand down, but Fiona gave him a bit of lip and he ordered an attack. I got the impression he was just waiting for an excuse to attack, and Fiona gave him one with some lip on how the Divine said they could gather, and he proceeded to say that the Divine no longer had power, then attacked.

Actually, that's not the impression I got. He speaks of treason and the mages being made if they think this will be permitted; only then does he speak of them listening to the words of a murderer, Rhys.

Fiona also says Lambert has no right to tell them what they can discuss and he didn't appear surprised.

Also, remember how there were Templars; Evangeline being one of them; present within the conclave and who, when Fiona called for rebellion; left quietly.

This leads me to believe that those Templars informed him of what was happening which, in his mind, made all of the mages at the conclave rebels plotting how to defeat the Templars and Chantry.

 

Of course, he wasn't entirely wrong, but neither was he entirely right. His attacking the conclave only made sure all mages felt they had no choice but to stand together against the Templars.

Personally, what I would have done was, first and foremost, request for a Templar delegation to be present so their voice can be heard,

If that failed, give them an ultimatum. They would be allowed to continue their gathering and even vote for rebellion but they should be reminded that they stand in a tower surrounded by Templars and Chevaliers and a million non mages and that they won't simply be allowed to walk out and begin gathering armies.

 

Yeah, I get that the templar that killed the mage had a look of shock, and I accept that it probably was done in the heat of the battle, but it also made the mages feel that even if they surrendered, they would be killed anyway, so they fought with renewed vigor. 

 

No matter how it is sliced, the templars killed a mage who surrendered, the templars and Lord High Seeker Lambert struck the first blow, and that makes the templars and the Seekers responsible. 

Partially responsible. Fiona and Adrian were doing their utmost to start a war. You can only provoke someone so much before they respond and this applies to both mages and Templars.

[dragonflight288]

 

I'm referring to the experience of being tortured by mages. In Meredith's eyes, and she is probably right, this would prevent him from trusting mages too much and thus fail to notice dangerous signs. For instance, Cullen wouldn't ever have met Thrask's ends because he would never have trusted Grace.

 

You may think this is not the characteristic Templars should possess, and you're entitled to your opinion, but it's not a sign of corruption because Cullen wasn't promoted due to status or wealth but rather due to Meredith's belief his experience of having seen the true face of mages; in her eyes, anyway; would enable him to do his job better.

 

 

It's not the characteristic, or Cullen's character I'm opposed, it's him getting such a large promotion with so limited time in the Order. I can see him being made a Knight-Lieutenant because of that experience and surviving, not Knight-Captain. 

 

 

I'll grant you it's a touchy subject.

Many hailed Meredith as a savior while other preferred the previous Viscount. Afterwards, it's only natural that the person who defeated the previous ruler gains immense influence.

A bigger case for corruption could be made with her actions in Act 3 such as stalling the choice of a new Viscount; altough her actions were influenced by the Red Lyrium; but can it be considered to corruption if she truly believe she is doing what is best for the people?

 

It is touchy, but yes, it is corruption. There is a saying. "The path to hell is paved with good intentions." Being well-meaning does not justify the results of one's actions. And in many cases on Meredith's part, inaction is also applied when it comes to cracking down on her own men. Because of the chain-of-command, she is indirectly responsible for anything her subordinates do, and the same is true in all jobs. 

 

 

 

True but there is a difference between the two terms.

 

Yes, there is. I'm more inclined to see corruption because Meredith was involved with politics from the get-go of her tenure as Knight-Commander, and I ask myself why she wrote the letter of apology to Gaspard for two guardsmen raiding his house and not Aveline, but I leave enough room for doubt on it because it is accepted that Emerick convinced the guardsmen to do it because he was banned from investigating by Meredith, so I can see that letter as a professional courtesy as well. 

 

But still, incompetence or corruption, neither speaks well of Meredith's rule as Knight-Commander, even before she had the idol. 

 

 

Of course, he wasn't entirely wrong, but neither was he entirely right. His attacking the conclave only made sure all mages felt they had no choice but to stand together against the Templars.

Personally, what I would have done was, first and foremost, request for a Templar delegation to be present so their voice can be heard,

If that failed, give them an ultimatum. They would be allowed to continue their gathering and even vote for rebellion but they should be reminded that they stand in a tower surrounded by Templars and Chevaliers and a million non mages and that they won't simply be allowed to walk out and begin gathering armies.

 

You would be a better leader than Lambert.

 

 

 

Partially responsible. Fiona and Adrian were doing their utmost to start a war. You can only provoke someone so much before they respond and this applies to both mages and Templars.

 

That's not the impression I got. Okay, Adrian WAS doing her level best to start a war, but I got the impression that Fiona was doing her level best to make the Circle's Independent, and that doesn't mean fighting necessarily. 

 

And in the end, the Chantry allowed the mages to leave peacefully. Lambert and the Templars, however, didn't, and left the Chantry willingly to hunt mages. 

 

Had Lambert, at the end, followed the edicts of the Divine and the Chantry, there wouldn't even be a mage/templar war. 

 

And yes, it does apply to both mages and templars, but I give Lambert majority responsibility, because of both his rank and what he did with his authority. 

[EmperorSahlertz]

More than one. 

 

Kerras, Alrik, Metten, everyone who was under them that didn't report their abuse to Cullen or Meredith, two of whom I mentioned are running ramapant in Acts 1 and 2, unless Kerras dies by Hawke's hand in Act 1. 

 

 

Kerras and Metten aren't corrupt. They are overzealous maybe, but they weren't breaking any laws.

The Templars had every right to kill the Mage and their (criminal) families in the case of Metten. They didn't need to no, but Thedas isn't a pretty place.

Regarding kerras, he also had every right to kill Grace and her group, and when that fool of a Templar (who's name escapes me) tried to obstruct him, he had every right to remove the obstruction. Again, Thedas=not pretty. Then of course there is the case of rape from Kerras, which isn't as much a case of corruption, as simple illegality.

 

Alrik was the only Templar, other than that whole bunch of rebellious ones in Act 3, that was actually corrupt.

 

 

Also, why was Emerick, a decent templar who was genuinely trying to do his job and conduct an investigation into practically confirmed blood magic, with the evidence gathered by Hawke, human remains, demons summoned, a man fleeing the scene, not only ignored by his superiors, but he was actually limited in his investigation by them, and received no help from the Guard or the templars and eventually told to stand down, cease and desist, because he convinced some guards to raid the manor of a noble, who turned out to be a blood mage, and had a connection to Quentin as his former apprentice?

 

Because he had only a bag of bones as evidence? The guards and Templars DID listen to him at first, but when the foundry seemed to be a dud, they ceased listening. That Hawke claims to have seen something means NOTHING, if he cannot prove it. The foundry was EMPTY that is why Emerick wasn't listened to.

 

And Cullen's own codex says he wasn't promoted on merit, he was promoted to Knight-Captain because his own views on mages (while freshly traumatized from Ferelden) matched Meredith's own. 

 

That isn't corruption. Unless you can find me some official document that states that the Templar Order is a meritocracy and NOT a political entity (I'm gonna go ahead and save you the trouble and tell you there isn't such a one).

 

Add in History of Kirkwall Chapter 4, with the Chantry ordering the templars to interfere with Kirkwall politics because the Viscount was making things hard for Orlais, and it was Elthina who tried and sentenced the Viscount, and you have a long history of corruption within the templars. Not just in abuse of mages, but overall corruption, corrupt in its grabs for power, corrupt in promoting the wrong people for the wrong reasons, corrupt in limiting the real work by templars who are actually trying to do their job, and then, in Act 3, corrupt in seizing power in the city and a refusal to give it up over the course of three years. 

 

Uhm.. It was the Chantry that ordered the Templars to interfere in the Kirkwall incident... The Tempalrs themselves actually prefered to stay out of it... Until of course the Viscount chose to execute the concurrent Knight-Commander after which it was probably easy to persuade the Templars to interfere. Still not corruption though.

[Xilizhra]

 

Kerras and Metten aren't corrupt. They are overzealous maybe, but they weren't breaking any laws.

The Templars had every right to kill the Mage and their (criminal) families in the case of Metten. They didn't need to no, but Thedas isn't a pretty place.

Regarding kerras, he also had every right to kill Grace and her group, and when that fool of a Templar (who's name escapes me) tried to obstruct him, he had every right to remove the obstruction. Again, Thedas=not pretty. Then of course there is the case of rape from Kerras, which isn't as much a case of corruption, as simple illegality.

 

Alrik was the only Templar, other than that whole bunch of rebellious ones in Act 3, that was actually corrupt.

 

Thank you for demonstrating why it's the system of the Templar Order that's so terribly evil and worthy of destruction, rather than merely a few bad apples.

[Drasanil]

Cullen's own codex says he was promoted because his views matched Meredith's. And he was a new templar in Origins. What experience are you talking about? He was a templar for two years, maybe three tops when Hawke meets him in Act 1 and he's Knight-Captain. 

 

Uh? Cullen made it through days, if not weeks, of intense blood magic mindrape without succumbing. That easily makes him a top-tier templar. He probably went through and survived more in that tower than most templars do in years. 

[The Baconer]

All that corruption and insubordination exhibited by ONE member of the Order, until Act III which is what I said.

 

Yes, that ONE member who was a commanding officer, and had a large amount of cronies under his command, committing off-the-record Tranquilities and twice causing the deaths of multiple Templars under questionable circumstances.

 

Beyond them there's not only Karras, and the Templars who try to respond with an extrajudicial killing of Hawke if Karras is deceased.

 

And, of course, there is Meredith herself. Regardless of any technicalities, her decision to let a (well) known apostate Hawke to operate for years is textbook corruption.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Yes, that ONE member who was a commanding officer, and had a large amount of cronies under his command, committing off-the-record Tranquilities and twice causing the deaths of multiple Templars under questionable circumstances.

 

 

Which were all just following orders, and/or being intimidated into silence. They literally had no way of knowing wether or not the mages they Tranquilized were authorized or not. Those who cared to attempt to find out were bullied into silence (and given assignments expected to end in their deaths), and those that didn't care... Well, they just didn't care.

 

Beyond them there's not only Karras, and the Templars who try to respond with an extrajudicial killing of Hawke if Karras is deceased.

 

Extrajudicial is a fancy word in the lawless world of Thedas, I'm sure you could impress a peasant or two by using that word sometime. Sadly, most of Thedas probably don't give a flying pot of ****** about it. There is one law that rules in Thedas, and that is the sword.

Hawke had (unlawfully) killed a Templar, and some Templars were out for vengeance. They even do so during night, which I am gonna guess is their off-hours, I am also gonna guess that the Templar Order DIDN'T sanction the kill, ergo not corruption.

 

And, of course, there is Meredith herself. Regardless of any technicalities, her decision to let a (well) known apostate Hawke to operate for years is textbook corruption.

 

Except that it is the Templars job to keep people safe from magic. If Meredith thought that keeping an eye on Hawke and Anders, but not restrain them in the Circle, then that is her decission to make, and as Knight-Commander it is her word that is law as to the Templars duties. So still not corruption.

 

But all this talk of corruption did remind me of the one other shred of evidence of corruption in the order: They were smuggeling Lyrium into the Gallows. Now at least the unlawful aquirement of contraband IS corruption. So I retract my previous statement and offer a new one:

Alrik was the only NAMED corrupt Templar. But there is evidence of widespread Lyrium abuse and smuggeling.

[MisterJB]

You would be a better leader than Lambert.

Thanks but nah. Lambert made on error in judgement. He is right more often than he is wrong.

 

 

That's not the impression I got. Okay, Adrian WAS doing her level best to start a war, but I got the impression that Fiona was doing her level best to make the Circle's Independent, and that doesn't mean fighting necessarily.

Of course it does. And she knew, Wynne warned her the Templars would never allow them to simply leave and her response was that it didn't matter.

She knew it meant war, she just didn't care.

Fiona is the same as Adrian.
 

 

And in the end, the Chantry allowed the mages to leave peacefully. Lambert and the Templars, however, didn't, and left the Chantry willingly to hunt mages.

Just because the Chantry attempted to pursue a more peaceful way of asserting their wishes, that doesn't mean they suddenly surrendered any authority they had over the Circle. It's not like they were at their best shape; hundreds of mages voting in a remote location rather than a dozen in the White Spire, mages and Templars fighting in the Circles, the Lord Seeker taking control and butting heads with the Divine.

 

Had Lambert, at the end, followed the edicts of the Divine and the Chantry, there wouldn't even be a mage/templar war.

This being the same Divine who ordered Templars murdered?

She suggests allowing weapons of mass destruction to roam around, setting fire to whoever crosses their path, and the Templars should just accept that?

 

 

And yes, it does apply to both mages and templars, but I give Lambert majority responsibility, because of both his rank and what he did with his authority. 

Fiona was picking a fight with her authority, Lambert accepted it with his. What's the difference?

[Xilizhra]

Extrajudicial is a fancy word in the lawless world of Thedas, I'm sure you could impress a peasant or two by using that word sometime. Sadly, most of Thedas probably don't give a flying pot of ****** about it. There is one law that rules in Thedas, and that is the sword.

Hawke had (unlawfully) killed a Templar, and some Templars were out for vengeance. They even do so during night, which I am gonna guess is their off-hours, I am also gonna guess that the Templar Order DIDN'T sanction the kill, ergo not corruption.

 

Kindly explain how defending oneself after explaining that Thrask had hired you to help facilitate the peaceful capture of the Starkhaven mages was "unlawful?"

[EmperorSahlertz]

Kindly explain how defending oneself after explaining that Thrask had hired you to help facilitate the peaceful capture of the Starkhaven mages was "unlawful?"

Because its bullshit, and Kerras saw through your bullshit? You were cavorting around with Blood Mages, Kerras was, as I said, in his full right to purge the entire area if he wanted to.

[MisterJB]

Kindly explain how defending oneself after explaining that Thrask had hired you to help facilitate the peaceful capture of the Starkhaven mages was "unlawful?"

Because you can only kill Karras if you tell the mages to leave at which point Hawke is facilitating the escape of dangerous prisioners, impeding the duty of a figure of authority and murdering said figure.

[TheJediSaint]

This is why I always left the bullshitting to Varric.

[MisterJB]

Grace should be in the Circle.

[Xilizhra]

Because its bullshit, and Kerras saw through your bullshit? You were cavorting around with Blood Mages, Kerras was, as I said, in his full right to purge the entire area if he wanted to.

Ah well. Not like the deaths of a few more templars will hurt anything.

[dragonflight288]

Uh? Cullen made it through days, if not weeks, of intense blood magic mindrape without succumbing. That easily makes him a top-tier templar. He probably went through and survived more in that tower than most templars do in years. 

 

And how does this contribute to investigative techniques? Tracking blood mages? Being able to discern lies from truth in interrogation? Or even what Otto did, being able to sense corruption itself?

[The Baconer]

Which were all just following orders, and/or being intimidated into silence. They literally had no way of knowing wether or not the mages they Tranquilized were authorized or not.

 

That's not what "literally" means, since all they had to do was reach out to a higher CO like Cullen or Meredith. But yes, I can definitely see how Templars "just following orders" and being coerced into participating with illegal activities just exudes professionalism on so many levels.

 

Those who cared to attempt to find out were bullied into silence (and given assignments expected to end in their deaths), and those that didn't care... Well, they just didn't care.

 

The bolded is fanon. Those that "didn't care" would be actively participating in corruption, making them corrupt.

 

 

Extrajudicial is a fancy word in the lawless world of Thedas, I'm sure you could impress a peasant or two by using that word sometime. Sadly, most of Thedas probably don't give a flying pot of ****** about it. There is one law that rules in Thedas, and that is the sword.

 

Oooh, how edgy. Anyway, there are in fact laws, and if you expect a body like the Templars to operate with any credibility at all, they would do best to observe them.

 

 

Hawke had (unlawfully) killed a Templar, and some Templars were out for vengeance. They even do so during night, which I am gonna guess is their off-hours, I am also gonna guess that the Templar Order DIDN'T sanction the kill, ergo not corruption.

 

Which is why they should have reported their findings to the Knight Commander. Their decision to instead try and kill Hawke in their off-hours would make those individuals, yes, corrupt. And insubordinate. Again, professionalism.

 

 

Except that it is the Templars job to keep people safe from magic. If Meredith thought that keeping an eye on Hawke and Anders, but not restrain them in the Circle, then that is her decission to make, and as Knight-Commander it is her word that is law as to the Templars duties. So still not corruption.

 

Yes, granting someone freedom to operate outside the law because they are wealthy and/or influential is corruption. If the Knight-Commander of the White Spire had claimed that "It was my decision to let the mage in question attend the party. My word is the law, and you have no basis to demote me" they would have sent that ****er straight to the Aeonar.

[riverbanks]

Is there something in the water with these mage freedom people today? They're infesting every thread with this heretic spiel.

 

Away with you from the house of the righteous, you bunch of heathens, go rant about mage rights in the the other fifty seven mage threads going on around the forums.

[Sir DeLoria]

Ah, you may wish to hop over to the templar support thread, where they're justifying nearly all of the non-Alrik atrocities in DA2 as legal and proper.

Well, if you say it that way...

[QueenofFereldan]

...Well since templars are considered 'evil' and people who support them are 'evil'...might as well join the Darkside. But the Mage vs Templar arguments with mages portray as nothing as innocents are making me want to stick with the Templars.