The main problem is that we're never shown the story from a templar point of view. We can make mages and be faced with the opression, but any warrior we make is templar in name only.
If Origins had, say, a templar origin story where we try to genuinely help mages and get shanked in the back for our efforts because "More power! Bwahaha!" we'd have a different outlook on mages.
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?
But warden dont help in such situations . They didn't help when the Qunari were attacking . The Templar are supposed to be trained for the situation .
All Gregoire did was let Uldred make his army and wait for the Annulement .
But the Templar say that their training make it they can't be possessed no ?? so it is their Job!!!
And he should've tried getting the survivor out , instead he let them be possessed . More pawn for Uldred . yeah thats a nice strategy there .
The real question is why Uldred did what he did .
Would Loghain have rewarded Uldred if he was able to convince everyone ?
Would he had summoned a Pride demon if he was allowed to leave ?
I'm not defending Uldred . His actions were wrong and he was an annoying charachter . But I still think , things may have turned differently if there weren't chains in place .
Lol, acusing Templars of being self rigtheous and then comparing Pro-mages to Ghandi.
Really hope he is trolling.
Given this...
that is not fair and going off the topic!
stay within the topic please and don't spy on me like you are a templar and i am a mage.
...I would say it is a safe bet. That or he has a habit of eating paint chips.
The main problem is that we're never shown the story from a templar point of view. We can make mages and be faced with the opression, but any warrior we make is templar in name only.
If Origins had, say, a templar origin story where we try to genuinely help mages and get shanked in the back for our efforts because "More power! Bwahaha!" we'd have a different outlook on mages.
I would love to see the Mage Origin from the other side, perhaps one where you get to see how Greagoir and Irvin talk about the possibility of Jowan being a blood mage and to state your opinion on it.
Well, the oppressed elven threads have expired, guess it's the mages turn now.
A logical conclusion but it doesn't hold up to scrutiny. Can you tell me a single instance where the Chantry used mages to keep their power.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.
Yawn....not this AGAIN!
Dear OP I hate to break it to you...but this is a role playing game, not a self-insert. Rules and history of Thedas apply, not modern morality. Under the standard RPG rules the Templar are Lawful Good, they follow the law.
Yes there are bad Templar, just as there are evil mages, and if you take your most Pro-Templar team members in DA2 on the Ser Alrik quest, they give you approval points for killing the sick SoB.
But warden dont help in such situations . They didn't help when the Qunari were attacking . The Templar are supposed to be trained for the situation .
All Gregoire did was let Uldred make his army and wait for the Annulement .
But the Templar say that their training make it they can't be possessed no ?? so it is their Job!!!
And he should've tried getting the survivor out , instead he let them be possessed . More pawn for Uldred . yeah thats a nice strategy there .
The real question is why Uldred did what he did .
Spoiler
Would Loghain have rewarded Uldred if he was able to convince everyone ?
Would he had summoned a Pride demon if he was allowed to leave ?
I'm not defending Uldred . His actions were wrong and he was an annoying charachter . But I still think , things may have turned differently if there weren't chains in place .
Sometimes a situation gets so out of control that they have to take drastic measures. It also happens in real life. What happened in the Circle was definitely a rare problem.
When did templars say they can't get possessed? I never saw/read that. And they certainly did get possessed in the tower, if not outright killed.
The survivors were surrounded by demons and they didn't know if they were already dead/taken over. Did you know Wynne was standing there with kids before you entered the tower? She easily could've been dead, the people above the tower could've been dead, it was just a matter of chance that you got there on time.
You keep saying it's their job but don't provide a solution how they could've solved this problem. That's no way to convince someone the annulment is unnecessary in a fatal situation.
I have no doubt that Uldred's actions may not have happened if he had more freedom in the first place. But the deed was done and Greagoir made a choice, one I could have made had I been in his position. If anything, people should work on changing the system instead of attempting to eliminate each other.
I think the Circles could implement policies more respectful for mages as human beings (like letting them see their families and allowing them to have families of their own) with maintaining a supervision. Sadly I don't think the Mage-Templar war will be so easily solved X)
Guest_StreetMagic_*
What was the line Ines said about Wynne. How Uldred would've been OK if she hadn't pestered him so much. Heh.
It's all Wynne's fault. Not the Templars.
What was the line Ines said about Wynne. How Uldred would've been OK if she hadn't pestered him so much. Heh.
It's all Wynne's fault. Not the Templars.
*snap snap* Oh no you didn't! *shields Wynne*
I think Uldred put way too much hope in Loghain.
I think the Circles could implement policies more respectful for mages as human beings (like letting them see their families and allowing them to have families of their own) with maintaining a supervision. Sadly I don't think the Mage-Templar war will be so easily solved X)
They are allowed to see their families. Most families however, does not have the means to just up and stop workign for weeks on end while they travel across the country to see their family. We are talking medieval world here, where entire families usually lived and died in the same village.
Sadly mages aren't allowed to have families of their own, because it presents a clear danger. The family would be an excelent pressure point for eventual demons. Until safety measures can be enforced, mages must seek proper dispensation to establish families, for good reason.
What was the line Ines said about Wynne. How Uldred would've been OK if she hadn't pestered him so much. Heh.
It's all Wynne's fault. Not the Templars.
Gotta love Ines 
Here is the full quote:
Ines: "She used to pester Uldred about his "duty" to the apprentices when he just wanted to be left alone. No wonder he went crazy and tried to kill everyone."
PC: "You don't seem to like her very much."
Ines "Shocking isn't it? How could anyone not love golden, glorious Wynne to bits? Well what does little miss "I'm so special the Fade shines out of my bum" want from me?"
A logical conclusion but it doesn't hold up to scrutiny. Can you tell me a single instance where the Chantry used mages to keep their power.
The fear of magic in the general populace, and the Chanty's (dubious) assertion that only it can protect them from magic is one of the Chantry's greatest sources of power, legitimacy, and wealth. The Chantry has a massive interest in ensuring that mages remain feared and hated by wider Thedosian society; opposing magic is practically the Chantry's raison d'être. The mere existence of the Circle system gives the Chantry immense power.
The fear of magic in the general populace, and the Chanty's (dubious) assertion that only it can protect them from magic is one of the Chantry's greatest sources of power, legitimacy, and wealth. The Chantry has a massive interest in ensuring that mages remain feared and hated by wider Thedosian society; opposing magic is practically the Chantry's raison d'être. The mere existence of the Circle system gives the Chantry immense power.
The Chantry doesn't get money from the Circles.... Any money the Circle earns goes to the funding and maintaining of the Circles..
As to your original question, I usually do multiple playthroughs. First, in DA2, I did think it would be hard to side with the templars, because of the extremism of the templars in Kirkwall (it's worth remembering that most Circles are much better than the one in Kirkwall, by everyone's admission). However, I can see how the extremism is a product of the fear of the mages, much as many mages turned to blood magic in fear of the Templars in Kirkwall. The fear runs both ways, and it's a complicated issue.
Yes, mages are people. No, they shouldn't be abused, nor should they be made Tranquil if there is another way. But how many can they be allowed to kill? Not only do they possess great, unstoppable power themselves to kill if they so desire but they can be possessed and become abominations that kill hundreds, thousands, etc. After playing through DA2 as a mage-sympathetic, Anders-romancing rogue, I could see how I could side with the Templars. Mages were trouble all through the game. Yes, you could say some turned to it because so many of the Templars in Kirkwall were awful (but some were not) and it was overly oppressive, but nonetheless, they caused a lot of trouble, evoked a lot of blood magic, and so forth. Then, there is Tevinter. Fenris is a victim of the mages in Tevinter, and magic could just as easily be the oppression as the Templars could. We see many historical examples of that in Thedas. Then, there is Hawke's mother; that mage was not in the Circle, not using blood magic because of Templars, but rather for his own personal gain. Mages are dangerous. Something has to be done.
When I sided with the Templars in Kirkwall on another playthrough, I still was not evil and didn't wish to kill the mages truly. It started small. I wished the mages controlled. It was only when everything was spinning out of control that Meredith called for the rite. People were going to die either way. By that time, I saw her side more. I'd spoken with her (you only get to really understand Meredith on a pro-Templar playthrough, as there is additional content there). I thought it was the better of two evils, lest the whole city be brought down by abominations ("I thought" = my roleplay there).
In truth, my inclinations are more towards siding with the Mages (though not to disband the Circles) but that doesn't mean I can't see both sides of the issue.
The templars are specially trained to fight such demons (and mages).
The templars are specially trained to track and resist mages, not demons. They have some knowledge and training of demons, but the purpose of a templar is to prevent demon possession and track down apostates, not to fight demons outright. It is a rare individual who faces a demon and lives and is not something Templars can ever really be prepared for.
The Chantry doesn't get money from the Circles.... Any money the Circle earns goes to the funding and maintaining of the Circles..
Not directly, no. But the Chantry's role as "defender against the evils of magic" is one of the main reasons that nobles and common folk alike are so keen to throw their money at it.
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.
I played through DA:O four times, and the only time the annulment was performed was when I failed to save the mages, and they were all possessed. It's been a few years, but I seem to remember that it was a straight dialogue choice to convince the Knight Commander to let you rescue the circle.
I'm probably not the most reliable source, but it seems to me that in DA:O, the Templars didn't actually want to kill or harm mages. I'm obviously remembering that detail differently.
In any case, all of the points you made actually contradict the first half of your first sentence, including the second half of that same sentence. You essentially reinforced that the writers simplified the conflict as Dragon Age progressed.
They are allowed to see their families. Most families however, does not have the means to just up and stop workign for weeks on end while they travel across the country to see their family. We are talking medieval world here, where entire families usually lived and died in the same village.
Sadly mages aren't allowed to have families of their own, because it presents a clear danger. The family would be an excelent pressure point for eventual demons. Until safety measures can be enforced, mages must seek proper dispensation to establish families, for good reason.
On the logistics of seeing their families or escorting them out of the Circles to do so I would tend to agree with you. It would be costly but on the other hand, one could argue that so much restrictions are what make some mages go crazy. So maybe it would be a worthy investment.
There is also the argument that mages are sometimes more well-off than some peasants so some people think they have no real reason to go crazy and that regardless of their treatment they would always be a danger so why bother?
The restriction to build a family have been enforced on some groups in history so it's possible Thedas view it as necessary. But this lack of self agency over your life throw me off (including being constantly watched like a child). I know I would go crazy.
*looks at title of thread in astonishment*
It's like DA2 debates all over again.
I guess we're all antsy for Inquisition, which is coming out in a few weeks, but....so off the mark. I may be pro-mage, but there are some really good templars simply trying to do their job. Bryant doesn't care for Morrigan or a mage Warden, and only cares about keeping the people safe from the Darkspawn. Otto volunteered to help the elves in the alienage, and genuinely tried to track the source of corruption within the orphanage. Emerick was probably the only templar in all of Kirkwall trying to do his job and catch the blood mage, a work that was being hampered by both Meredith and Aveline, despite the evidence and an eye-witness saying that there is something going on at the Foundry, Hawke being the witness.
It is not my main but I do have a pro Templar warden/Hawke playthrough that is also my renegade.
I'm neither, I understand where both templars and mages are coming from. If I had to put a label on myself I would say I'm just anti-circle above all else. It doesn't mean I'm pro-mage; sure I think mages should be free and be able to live life like people without magic. But I don't think magic should be taken lightly either. Some areas of magic I just don't agree with, like blood magic or conjuring demons. I believe those offences should be met with death, or at the very least tranquility. I think there should be a system put into place where both templars and mages come together to rid Thedas of truer threats.
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut