142 réponses à ce sujet

[Darkly Tranquil]

but, but sex slaves!?!

 

 

i will explain. i have a buddy from Australia who told me that if a person would have any relationships with muslims, that person will get himself into trouble or even get himself killed. because muslims are killing people.

This was so strange so i asked my buddy - from where did he get such idea? and his answer was - mass media.

So i guess you may find some similarities here and there. When mages as race being judges by the actions of the few, so muslims are being judged by the actions of groups of extremists.

 

Australian mass media is in the toilet at the moment. Idiocy abounds. Blame Rupert Murdoch.

[Chari]

Oh my God, another thread about "evil templars" and :oppression"

Wait, wait, it's BSN, why am I even surprised?

[Lumix19]

Dude. Do you even try to inform yourself why these factions exist? 

 

Here's the lead writer (Gaider):

 

 The thing to remember as well is that the Circles were created to help Thedas as well. We had the Blights, and the first Circles were created shortly after the first Blight. The mages become vitally important when there's a Blight in order to combat the darkspawn. So it wasn't like the Chantry wanted to cripple the mages, they wanted them to have the power they needed to help humanity.

 

http://swooping-is-b...om/1286233.html

 

Before the Circles existed, mages were just getting hunted down without mercy. The CHANTRY stepped in and wanted to help them. This was the only way they could think how.

Perhaps it was out of benevolence that they formed the Circle but there's a clear ulterior motive which was they wanted to use them for their power. If they really wanted to protect the mages they would have helped the mages develop the Circle on their own, separate from the Chantry and governing themselves (since their really the most knowledgeable on the subject). Instead they chained the Circle to the Chantry and placed people who could never understand what it is like to be a mage in charge of said mages.

[carlo angelo]

...Just to put it simply for me, I blame how Dragon Age II handled this situation because it was either one or the other.

 

I like to believe that Inquisition will fix this and give more reasons to be on the side of the Templars without the unfortunate implication of also being pro-slaughter of mages.

 

EDIT; Personally, my Inquisitor would be pro-Mage, but seriously, some perspective on the Templars in a more forgiving light would be nice.

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

I just realized that I've traditionally avoided Mage/Templar threads, because I don't really see it as an either/or issue, and didn't see the point in getting caught up in taking sides.

 

But since I dun stepped in it twice, I guess I'll add my two cents:

 

My DA 2 playthrough was decidedly pro-mage. They did kinda hit us over the head with the Templar thing, and the writers went out of their way to simplify and unbalance what was actually a fairly thought-provoking conflict in Dragon Age: Origins.

 

In DA:O I took a balanced approach, which was an option. I saved the mages, but that wasn't a pro-mage position, since it saved the Templars, as well. I saved both Connor and his mother (only possible by saving the mages) but that wasn't "pro-mage" or "pro-blood magic" since, again, doing so saves everyone.

 

In DA 2, they chose to forgo any kind of balance, and insist on a rather immature Black/White "All philosophies are diametrically-opposed" position. This basically forced players who wanted to explore role playing options into making extreme choices, even when logic dictated that there were better ways to address almost every situation than simply picking one side and declaring it "right" and the other "wrong."

 

To be honest, I really felt that the writers were overtly pushing most players into a Pro-Mage position by layering in more and more extremity to the Templars, until it reached a point where I just threw my hands in the air, and stopped caring about the story, entirely.

 

I hope that trend does not continue in DA:I, but the truth is, I fully expect that it will (one of the many reasons I won't be buying it for a few weeks, while I wait for enough reviews to come in from players who actually finish the game.)

 

All of that having been said, I'm not bothered in the slightest by anyone siding with the Templars, be it for reasons of exploration, curiosity, personal belief, or just a completionist who wants to make all the choices over multiple playthroughs.

 

In fact, I really couldn't care less how someone else plays the game, or what choices they make. I'm not sure I can imagine how it would ever impact my own experience of playing the game.

[Ynqve]

Ok, I'm as pro mage as they come, but even I can appreciate the arguments made in the Templars favor. Magic IS dangerous, you need to exercise some caution or everything goes to hell. The issue isn't as clear-cut as you seem to think OP. 

 

Hogwarts? The school where they send KIDS to fight the DARK LORD.... You would want children to go to that place?.... Okay... You must be trolling... Because the implications of otherwise, does not speak in your favor..

 

Hey, if you ignore the death traps, slave labor and the occasional psychopath teacher; Hogwarts isn't so bad. 

[Zakhar]

I can't help but feel the argument is being simplified...

I'm pro-Circle but not pro-Templar. I'm all for Mages getting organized and learning how to slaughter everyone.

The Templar Order however needs to be seriously reigned in. Dehumanizing the mages has had the effect of them forgetting how quickly people rebel in restrained enviroments.

They need to be reigned in but not eliminated. Their techniqued are too useful to just toss away. Shockingly not all mages are perfect paragons of freedom.

And even then, I wouldn't say total freedom. Mages are dangerous. Plain and simple. They casually twist the Elements to their will and are far more likely to be possessed.

They're dangerous and need to be trained and honestly kept an eye on. For every Solas or Hawke Apostate who shows they'll be fine, I know there has to be ten we don't see who can't control themselves and hurt people willingly and not.

[AlexiaRevan]

I agree. But the solution is to fix it and build upon the good ideas.

 

Not just oversimplifying everyone's opinions and throwing everything out in a fit. 

But the chantry will never allow it and neither will the Templar . Thats similar like saying 'let dalish , dwarf and anyone else who want belief in their own idea of God' . It's something that is impossible.....

If something is build with the idea of control , it can't shrink back and control this and let that go free . It just doesn't work like that . 

 

You can't fix what is broken . For the system isn't broken , its full of errors . And it was integrated into the economie and many others things . It can't be separated without tearing a few thing in the process (Tranquil/Lyrium) . 

 

And the Templar..what will they do if there is no mage to watch over ? 

[Lumix19]

What are you telling me for? It's the OP who said to get rid of the Circles. I'm just making fun of the idea.

 

This is what rampant, uninformed "mage rebellion!!!111" looks like. They're so hyper that they want to get rid of everything.. even the good things.

My apologies, I misinterpreted what you were saying.

[ManOfSteel]

I don't see why anyone would allow people who present such a danger to everyone else to walk free. But that's the good thing about differing viewpoints, isn't it? The option for both perspectives is offered in Dragon Age, so support the side you wish to support. I will support both sides over the course of multiple playthroughs, but I shall support the Templars first and foremost.

[Darkly Tranquil]

...Just to put it simply for me, I blame how Dragon Age II handled this situation because it was either one or the other.

 

I like to believe that Inquisition will fix this and give more reasons to be on the side of the Templars without the unfortunate implication of also being pro-slaughter of mages.

 

EDIT; Personally, my Inquisitor would be pro-Mage, but seriously, some perspective on the Templars in a more forgiving light would be nice.

 

People tend to forget that Kirkwall was pretty much a "worst case scenario" type situation (although the White Spire in Asunder did not seem much better), and tend to treat it like the norm. Perhaps what we need is to see the positives of the Circle and see how it works when its not in a state of crisis?

[dantares83]

in my views, it is not that simplified because templars are given powers the mages do not

 

The right of annulment??? seriously? you can kill a group of people (including young children) just because of a few demons running around the circles. It is your blardy fault for allowing the demons to run rampant. The templars are specially trained to fight such demons (and mages). If you cannot do your job well, don't blame the mages.

 

Why is such right not given to the mages? when any mage try to resist a templar, they are not to be believed and would most likely be made a Tranquil for daring to fight a mage. it is so blatantly unfair it is sick. 

 

and those templars can leave the circle anytime they like. the mages are trapped in the circle for the rest of their lives and only allowed out under special circumstances/permission. 

 

plus many many more privileges given only to the templar order but not the circle. I mean the fact that the knight-commander is higher than the first enchanter is saying something. 

[Yinello]

But the chantry will never allow it and neither will the Templar . Thats similar like saying 'let dalish , dwarf and anyone else who want belief in their own idea of God' . It's something that is impossible.....

If something is build with the idea of control , it can't shrink back and control this and let that go free . It just doesn't work like that . 

 

You can't fix what is broken . For the system isn't broken , its full of errors . And it was integrated into the economie and many others things . It can't be separated without tearing a few thing in the process (Tranquil/Lyrium) . 

 

And the Templar..what will they do if there is no mage to watch over ? 

 

People evolve and so do ideas. Saying change is impossible is claiming we're still living in the stone age. Change is always possible.

 

What will the police do when criminals are gone? Get a different job where they're needed.

[carlo angelo]

People tend to forget that Kirkwall was pretty much a "worst case scenario" type situation (although the White Spire in Asunder did not seem much better), and tend to treat it like the norm. Perhaps what we need is to see the positives of the Circle and see how it works when its not in a state of crisis?

This is partly the reason why I'm looking forward to seeing Vivienne, despite that she's reputed to be ruthless and power-hungry. I'm sure she'll give some pretty eye-opening points for being pro-Circle and what's the deal with the Templars.

 

Besides, we had a couple of good Templars in DAII, anyway. Meredith was just a nutjob made worse because of the red lyrium.

[Lumix19]

I don't see why anyone would allow people who present such a danger to everyone else to walk free. But that's the good thing about differing viewpoints, isn't it? The option for both perspectives is offered in Dragon Age, so support the side you wish to support. I will support both sides over the course of multiple playthroughs, but I shall support the Templars first and foremost.

Not so much walking free but rather guided by people who understand them and are in the best position to help them. I speculate that's why Tevinter, for all it's flaws, hasn't fallen to abominations - the people who guide the new mages actually understand what the limits of magic are and how to push them without going over the line. Templars, and to an extent the Chantry, sadly do not understand mages yet are given the power to govern them as they see fit. But each to their own.

[AlexiaRevan]

People evolve and so do ideas. Saying change is impossible is claiming we're still living in the stone age. Change is always possible.

 

What will the police do when criminals are gone? Get a different job where they're needed.

We are living in the stone age . When the right of Annulement is asked for..instead of doing your job . Yeah 

 

change is possible . I believe that . Thats why there is a war in DAI . 

[Althix]

del

[MisterJB]

He is trolling, right? I mean Hitler and Ghandi
and LGB and all Templars are rapists and Pro-Templars kill their sister all in the OP. I mean, this is clearly a troll thread.

[Althix]

 

The right of annulment??? 

you have a contradiction in the second paragraph. i suggest you to rephrase before continue with trolling.

[Yinello]

The right of annulment??? seriously? you can kill a group of people (including young children) just because of a few demons running around the circles. It is your blardy fault for allowing the demons to run rampant. The templars are specially trained to fight such demons (and mages). If you cannot do your job well, don't blame the mages.

 

 

This is the second time this argument has been given and it's still terrible. The tower was overrun. Your special superWarden was the only one who could stop it. The fact that Uldred, a seasoned Mage, was the one to take over the tower AND to make other mages into abominations is more a pro-templar argument.

[Yinello]

We are living in the stone age . When the right of Annulement is asked for..instead of doing your job . Yeah 

 

change is possible . I believe that . Thats why there is a war in DAI . 

 

The right of annulment is part of their job. What should they have done, let templars run in and see them die / become demons one by one? Seriously, what would you have done if there was no Warden to solve the problem for you and time was running out?

 

Should the templars have cracked down harder on the Mages so that people like Uldred can't take over?

[MisterJB]

Lol, acusing Templars of being self rigtheous and then comparing Pro-mages to Ghandi.
Really hope he is trolling.