584 réponses à ce sujet

[GalacticDonuts]

Yes, I'll mainly follow Leliana and Josephine's advice because I don't care for Cullen all that much

[Revan Reborn]

For the record, you don't know how wrong you are in thinking that Cullen's fans will defend him regardless of what he does. His fans are his heaviest critics, and have no need to excuse or handwave his faults and flaws, as they are an intrinsic part of what makes people like him in the first place.

 

 

The writers of the series seem to think he is a competent enough advisor to lead an army, otherwise they wouldn't have put him in such a role, so basically what you are saying here is that fans with opinions know the story better than the people actually making the game.

 

In any case, yes, let's agree to disengage as I've no interest in stretching this. I'll leave you with your own words, as they were quite appropriate:

 

 

If people really despise Cullen's existence that much, just don't acknowledge him or use his talents in your Inquisition. Problem solved.

Ah, finally some common ground.

 

As if the writers haven't made mistakes before? Leliana dying in DAO ring a bell? Just because the writers do something doesn't mean it's been heavily considered. As others suggested, Cassandra would make a lot more sense as the military advisor than Cullen.

 

Fair enough. I have no plans to ignore him though as that would be put me at a disadvantage. I'm just merely questioning his capabilities to do the job. From a gameplay perspective, I'd be crazy not to use all the advisors, regardless of who they are.

[WarriorOfLight999]

I have a bias against Cullen, fair or not.

For Leliana, I hope she hasn't changed too much. If so, I might not be relying on her too much.

That leaves Josephine I suppose.

[Neeve]

 

 

 

Revan Reborn, on 26 Oct 2014 - 04:55 AM, said:

If people really despise Leliana's existence that much, just don't acknowledge her or use her talents in your Inquisition. Problem solved.

 

If people really despise Cullen's existence that much, just don't acknowledge him or use his talents in your Inquisition. Problem solved.

 

Which leave people with a more - let's say atheistic/apostatic  - worldstate, with only one advisor to go too. I am aware that bioware isn't going to change it, no matter how often I bang my head against the desk. But to equal all critic on the status quo, as whining or Cullen bashing, is hardly fair either. 

It may not be official canon, but it is the canon they sold us (aka let us play it). And I belive it's more then okay to question the ethics & moral compass of a guy, who believes in anulling circles - which not only include the guilty, but also the innocent, the bystanders and lets not forget the children. That doesn't mean I want to kill him at the first oppurtunity, but makes me doubt, if I could trust him. And trust is something, I might value even more than competence in an advisor.

[Revan Reborn]

Which leave people with a more - let's say atheistic/apostatic  - worldstate, with only one advisor to go too. I am aware that bioware isn't going to change it, no matter how often I bang my head against the desk. But to equal all critic on the status quo, as whining or Cullen bashing, is hardly fair either. 

It may not be official canon, but it is the canon they sold us (aka let us play it). And I belive it's more then okay to question the ethics & moral compass of a guy, who believes in anulling circles - which not only include the guilty, but also the innocent, the bystanders and lets not forget the children. That doesn't mean I want to kill him at the first oppurtunity, but makes me doubt, if I could trust him. And trust is something, I might value even more than competence in an advisor.

Who is whining? All that has been discussed is based on how BioWare has developed Cullen's character, he should not be the military advisor. I'm going to use him and all of the advisors regardless. My initial quote about Leliana was for all those who were upset she was still living. Back in regards to Cullen, that doesn't mean I have to like or trust him, of course, as you said he has massacred "the guilty, but also the innocent, the bystanders and lets not forget the children."

 

Cullen will learn his place very quickly if he questions the Inquisitor's authority. I will not tolerate the massacring or more innocents due to his actions.

[Sifr]

Would you want a person with PTSD leading an army, let alone having a weapon around to use? That is a serious mental disorder that does not get enough attention and tragedies happen because of it. If that's the argument you want to make, then Cullen is even less-qualified because of it...

 

While that might have made sense in DAO, the fact that he allows a massacre to happen in DA2 when he clearly isn't going through lyrium withdrawal says otherwise. All I'm saying is that Cullen has terrible judgment, lacks common sense, and shouldn't be in charge of anyone. He has a terrible track record and if he was a real person in the real world, he would have been out of a job a long time ago.

 

Given that it's been over ten years since that incident and people can and do recover from PTSD, then I wouldn't say that he's lost the right to continue his career. That's both a disservice to him and the many people who suffer with the condition in the real world. As Palidane pointed out earlier in the thread, he proved himself as a military leader in the Templars during both the Qunari Crisis and during the Gallows incident, so it's not like he's unable to do the job anymore.

 

I also don't see how he can be held responsible for Meredith's attempts to (illegally) annul the Circle?

 

With the destruction of the Chantry, Orsino revealing himself to be a Blood Mage, in addition to the multitude of blood mages and demons that were ravaging the streets of Kirkwall, as much as I'm loathed to admit it, I'd say that the Templars probably did have some justification for attempting to contain the situation with force, as it was clearly descending into utter anarchy and chaos.

 

In the Templar path, Cullen wants to spare some Circle mages who surrender, showing that he desired containment rather than unbridled slaughter. He was hardly running around with a torch and pitchfork yelling "Kill the witch!"

[Panda]

Which leave people with a more - let's say atheistic/apostatic  - worldstate, with only one advisor to go too. I am aware that bioware isn't going to change it, no matter how often I bang my head against the desk. But to equal all critic on the status quo, as whining or Cullen bashing, is hardly fair either. 

It may not be official canon, but it is the canon they sold us (aka let us play it). And I belive it's more then okay to question the ethics & moral compass of a guy, who believes in anulling circles - which not only include the guilty, but also the innocent, the bystanders and lets not forget the children. That doesn't mean I want to kill him at the first oppurtunity, but makes me doubt, if I could trust him. And trust is something, I might value even more than competence in an advisor.

 

The problem with this is that he doesn't believe in annulling circles: not until they are beyond hope. He said in DA2 that in Ferelden it was justified when demons overun the towers but was against annulment in DA2 cause the situation wasn't as dire and he thought it required more than Merediths word. He was also against killing innocents during annulment in DA2 even if they could be blood mages. Those are his actual lines in the game.

[lil yonce]

Mass murder he didn't approve, tried to stop and even wanted to save innocent: the mages who weren't blood mages or abominations at the time. He could have done more of cource but going against your superior can be hard. Especially if you have had awful experience before and want to prevent it happening again ("I promised myself I wouldn't question the order ever again.")

I understand that it can be hard but there was a sizable faction of templars that questioned her leadership and sanity long before she called down the annulment and wanted her out. Her authority to call it is questionable to begin, and there is no evidence to support that all or even most of the mages in the circle are using blood magic or plan to use it in an upcoming overthrow. I think he had the legitimacy to relieve her of her post before the annulment took place. And his wavering at the annulment makes his following orders in the end worse to me. And, I mean, a mass slaying is bad to him but he doesn't force the issue with Meredith. But her killing Hawke - one person - is crossing the line?

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

@Riverdalewhiteflash; Well, the right of annulment is mass murder and he participated in Kirkwall.

Oh, right, I'd been concentrating on the rest of his career. Well, you're not really oversimplifying this point as much as I'd thought (unless you mean the Right Of Annulment in general, since Gaider has implied that there's situations bad enough to call for that sometimes), though I will note as a point in his favor that he's the one who eventually fired Meredith. (You've also pointed out that he should have done so sooner, and you're right there too.)

 

 

I understand that it can be hard but there was a sizable faction of templars that questioned her leadership and sanity long before she called down the annulment and wanted her out. Her authority to call it is questionable to begin, and there is no evidence to support that all or even most of the mages in the circle are using blood magic or plan to use it in an upcoming overthrow. I think he had the legitimacy to relieve her of her post before the annulment took place. And his wavering at the annulment makes his following orders in the end worse to me. And, I mean, a mass slaying is bad to him but he doesn't force the issue with Meredith. But her killing Hawke, one person, is crossing the line?

No, she unquestionably had the authority in the absence of anyone else who outranked her in the city to hold that authority. We've already got Word Of Gaider on that. You're right in that she should not have called it, and if she hadn't died she would have been facing awkward questions about using that authority on such shaky grounds, but she was legally within her authority. (Though I agree that Cullen should not have let it go that far.)

 

 

I have a bias against Cullen, fair or not.

For Leliana, I hope she hasn't changed too much. If so, I might not be relying on her too much.

That leaves Josephine I suppose.

Leiliana has apparently changed a lot.

[Revan Reborn]

Given that it's been over ten years since that incident and people can and do recover from PTSD, then I wouldn't say that he's lost the right to continue his career. That's both a disservice to him and the many people who suffer with the condition in the real world. As Palidane pointed out earlier in the thread, he proved himself as a military leader in the Templars during both the Qunari Crisis and during the Gallows incident, so it's not like he's unable to do the job anymore.

 

I also don't see how he can be held responsible for Meredith's attempts to (illegally) annul the Circle?

 

With the destruction of the Chantry, Orsino revealing himself to be a Blood Mage, in addition to the multitude of blood mages and demons that were ravaging the streets of Kirkwall, as much as I'm loathed to admit it, I'd say that the Templars probably did have some justification for attempting to contain the situation with force, as it was clearly descending into utter anarchy and chaos.

 

In the Templar path, Cullen wants to spare some Circle mages who surrender, showing that he desired containment rather than unbridled slaughter. He was hardly running around with a torch and pitchfork yelling "Kill the witch!"

You don't understand PTSD then. It's not just something you "get over." It stays with you for the rest of your life, and you have to learn how to live with it. All Cullen proved in DA2 is that he can allow a group of Qunaris to easily take a city, can allow plenty of mages to escape the circle at their leisure, and will instantly support the Right of Annulment without considering any other options. Yes, he sure has proved himself as a military advisor.

 

"Normally, the Right can only be invoked by a Grand Cleric or a de facto successor (Revered Mother); if there is no access to a Grand Cleric or Revered Mother, then Knight-Commanders of the Templar Order have legal authority to invoke the Right." - Dragon Age Wiki

 

Your statement is blatantly false. Meredith was well within her right to enact the Right of Annulment. Whether it was justified or not is another question, but it certainly wasn't illegal.

 

Whether you are the perpetrator (Meredith) or the bystander (Cullen) who is just conforming to what the perpetrator is saying, both are equally responsible to a massacre. This same rationale can be applied to the Nazis in World War Two. Yes, we can solely blame Hitler, his chain of command, and the SS, but honestly the entire country allowed them to get away with it by choosing to do nothing. That is not a valid excuse.

[Panda]

I understand that it can be hard but there was a sizable faction of templars that questioned her leadership and sanity long before she called down the annulment and wanted her out. Her authority to call it is questionable to begin, and there is no evidence to support that all or even most of the mages in the circle are using blood magic or plan to use it in an upcoming overthrow. I think he had the legitimacy to relieve her of her post before the annulment took place. And his wavering at the annulment makes his following orders in the end worse to me. And, I mean, a mass slaying is bad to him but he doesn't force the issue with Meredith. But her killing Hawke, one person, is crossing the line?

 

I don't understand why I couldn't join with Hawke with the mage-templar alliance in DA2 either but maybe it was just lost cause Idk, I don't think it was presented that well in the game, it had more potential. Cullen however is quite pro-templar in time of DA2 so I doubt he would want to join in cause like that. He seemed to look up to Meredith and so even defended her quite far. I guess he wanted to believe best of her? 

 

I actually like his wavering at the point, it was great growing point for his character. His past experiences made it hard to him to judge the situation well and thus he just stated his opinion and hoped Meredith would listen it, which she didn't. I think he has grown to more confident leader in time of DAI, we will see. Hopefully we can question him about Kirkwall, that's one thing I'm looking forward a lot with his character.

[Revan Reborn]

I don't understand why I couldn't join with Hawke with the mage-templar alliance in DA2 either but maybe it was just lost cause Idk, I don't think it was presented that well in the game, it had more potential. Cullen however is quite pro-templar in time of DA2 so I doubt he would want to join in cause like that. He seemed to look up to Meredith and so even defended her quite far. I guess he wanted to believe best of her? 

 

I actually like his wavering at the point, it was great growing point for his character. His past experiences made it hard to him to judge the situation well and thus he just stated his opinion and hoped Meredith would listen it, which she didn't. I think he has grown to more confident leader in time of DAI, we will see. Hopefully we can question him about Kirkwall, that's one thing I'm looking forward a lot with his character.

I'm hoping he admits to being an idiot and committing atrocities against civilization and regretting everything he has ever done. That is the only way I might consider trusting him only slightly. Otherwise, The Inquisitor's word is Law and all will abide by it.

[xSammy13x]

I understand that it can be hard but there was a sizable faction of templars that questioned her leadership and sanity long before she called down the annulment and wanted her out. Her authority to call it is questionable to begin, and there is no evidence to support that all or even most of the mages in the circle are using blood magic or plan to use it in an upcoming overthrow. I think he had the legitimacy to relieve her of her post before the annulment took place. And his wavering at the annulment makes his following orders in the end worse to me. And, I mean, a mass slaying is bad to him but he doesn't force the issue with Meredith. But her killing Hawke, one person, is crossing the line?

 

I remember reading somewhere (and it was something I had agreed with completely) about how Cullen's thought process in DA2 was that after Origins, was that he feared he was wrong about thinking Mages could be treated like people, when he had been so firmly against treating the Templars, and even regular people, treating them like monsters in first game.

 

After Uldred betrayed his trust and turned the Circle on its head with blood magic and demons, and Cullen was tortured and was literally the last Templar left standing who wasn't possessed or dead. I think that's enough to scare the hell out of anyone, and it makes sense why at that point as a Templar (and as anyone) would want to see the people responsible held accountable: it just happened to be a group of mages.

 

By DA2, he goes on to Kirkwall, and at that point he just wants to serve the Templars properly- mages can't be trusted, and aren't like regular people. That makes perfect sense to me, after everything he has been through. When you see Meredith losing her mind over Act 2, he KNOWS something is wrong. He tells you as much, but doesn't think she's as nuts as people suggest just yet. By the end of the game in Act 3, he realizes he isn't serving the Templar Order by agreeing to the Annulment, and he is just serving Meredith's craziness. That's why he saves Hawke (their Champion) from her, and says she is wrong and shouldn't kill the mages who do turn themselves over instead of fighting; those mages can be saved, he says.

 

So it's not that he thinks killing Hawke is crossing the one and only line, he just realizes that he's not helping anyone by serving Meredith, and it's certainly not what the Templar Order stands for. It wasn't a sudden realization, it was a build up of everything he had seen since the Ferelden Circle...and deciding it was too much.

 

But as for the original question about will I be biased?

 

I think I will be. I like spies, but I am curious about how Leliana has changed through the games. I think she knows her job, but I worry about her judgement? Josephine is new, but she seems like she knows what she's talking about. Cullen? There are certainly missions where I know I just want to go in there, guns blazing, and kicking ass.

[Sifr]

You don't understand PTSD then. It's not just something you "get over." It stays with you for the rest of your life, and you have to learn how to live with it. All Cullen proved in DA2 is that he can allow a group of Qunaris to easily take a city, can allow plenty of mages to escape the circle at their leisure, and will instantly support the Right of Annulment without considering any other options. Yes, he sure has proved himself as a military advisor.

 

"Normally, the Right can only be invoked by a Grand Cleric or a de facto successor (Revered Mother); if there is no access to a Grand Cleric or Revered Mother, then Knight-Commanders of the Templar Order have legal authority to invoke the Right." - Dragon Age Wiki

 

Your statement is blatantly false. Meredith was well within her right to enact the Right of Annulment. Whether it was justified or not is another question, but it certainly wasn't illegal.

 

I didn't say you could "get over it", I said that it's something that people can recover from with time, not that it stops being with them. Cullen had a decade to come to terms with the torture he suffered and while he never stopped carrying those scars with him, he did learn to manage it.

 

Why is Kirkwall being attacked by a bunch of Qunari warriors his fault? You had the Captain of the Guard and Hawke parleying with the Arishok when they began their attack and even they were forced to retreat while the Qunari stormed the city? Meredith struck out on her own to try and rescue the Viscount and the Nobles, so wouldn't his place be trying to lead the Templars in aiding the City Guard in holding off the Qunari?

 

Remind me again, when did Cullen become Knight-Commander? A lot of your arguments seemed based on the fact that as a Templar, he's responsible for the numerous things that Meredith performed or let happen on her watch?

 

It seems illegal to me because instead of sending word out to the nearest available branch of the Chantry, Meredith waited a good six seconds after Elthina was atomised before she gave the order to "Suffer not a witch to live". If you want to talk about Cullen supporting annulment without considering other options, I think you should look at her and question whether she considered any either?

 

And as I pointed out earlier, Cullen supported annulment in the way it's supposed to be carried out, wherein the Mages are individually checked for signs of corruption and treated accordingly, with a lot of Chantry oversight in the process. Not, "Kill them all and let the Maker sort 'em out" as Meredith essentially retorts when he brings this up to her in the Templar ending.

 

Whether you are the perpetrator (Meredith) or the bystander (Cullen) who is just conforming to what the perpetrator is saying, both are equally responsible to a massacre. This same rationale can be applied to the Nazis in World War Two. Yes, we can solely blame Hitler, his chain of command, and the SS, but honestly the entire country allowed them to get away with it by choosing to do nothing. That is not a valid excuse.

 

I think now we've reached Godwin's Law, it's time to bow out of the thread...

[lil yonce]

@Panda; What I'm saying is that the fact that such a group of templars existed in the first place supports effort to remove her, and that even uninterested in joining that group Cullen could have used it, among other things, to justify stopping the annulment. And I agree that he was very militant pro-templar in DA2 and DA:O. Its why I can't agree that he has ever been presented as moderate or IMO likable. And about his evolving character and opinions - they came by way of hard and bloody lessons learned to be sure.

 

EDIT: @xSammy13x; Hell yes I'll be biased. I'm rather fixed in my opinion about Cullen and I don't know that his DAI version will sway me. Going on Josephine's personal quest livestream spoiler, her way of doing things can be slow and possibly fruitless. I think I will prefer Leliana. I think she handled the Dalish clan the best, her advice to generate coin is decent, I like her suggestion to Josephine in the livestream spoiler, and she seems to be quite a viable option for most of the war table missions unlike Cullen who is locked out of more than I would have expected so far and Josephine when diplomacy can only go so far.

[Revan Reborn]

I didn't say you could "get over it", I said that it's something that people can recover from with time, not that it stops being with them. Cullen had a decade to come to terms with the torture he suffered and while he never stopped carrying those scars with him, he did learn to manage it.

 

Why is Kirkwall being attacked by a bunch of Qunari warriors his fault? You had the Captain of the Guard and Hawke parleying with the Arishok when they began their attack and even they were forced to retreat while the Qunari stormed the city? Meredith struck out on her own to try and rescue the Viscount and the Nobles, so wouldn't his place be trying to lead the Templars in aiding the City Guard in holding off the Qunari?

 

Remind me again, when did Cullen become Knight-Commander? A lot of your arguments seemed based on the fact that as a Templar, he's responsible for the numerous things that Meredith performed or let happen on her watch?

 

It seems illegal to me because instead of sending word out to the nearest available branch of the Chantry, Meredith waited a good six seconds after Elthina was atomised before she gave the order to "Suffer not a witch to live". If you want to talk about Cullen supporting annullment without considering other options, I think you should look at her and question whether she considered any either.

 

And as I pointed out earlier, Cullen supported annulment in the way it's supposed to be carried out, wherein the Mages are individually checked for signs of corruption and treated accordingly, with a lot of Chantry oversight in the process. Not "Kill them all and let the Maker sort 'em out" as Meredith essentially retorts when he brings this up to her in the Templar ending.

 

 

 

I think now we've reached Godwin's Law, it's time to bow out of the thread...

Based on his decisions in DA2, I'm not so sure I agree.

 

Maybe its his fault because the Chantry and the Templars were the one who instigated the attack to begin with? Aveline and Hawke tried to stop it. The Chantry and the Templar Order were the ones who elevated the tensions and caused the incident to occur.

 

Cullen was Meredith's right hand. It was his sworn duty and obligation to relieve her of command if she overstepped her authority. Without a Grand Cleric or Reverend Mother to keep Meredith on a leash, the duty fell to Cullen. He failed and because of his inaction many innocent people died.

 

This is a strawman argument. Meredith was in charge, hence being the perpetrator. Cullen had to enforce her will, which he did, being a bystander. He should have stopped her a long time ago before the question of Annulment even came up to start. He is definitely responsible and deserves blame.

 

The Right of Annulment is simple. In times of crisis, templars have the authority to put every mage to the sword for fear of them becoming abominations. There is no procedure. It's a blood bath meant to quell any potential fallout. You are committing a necessary evil in order to prevent a much larger and worse one later.

 

I think you probably should bow out. You failed to make any valid points and half of your assertions were false. I'm not even sure why you are even replying if you aren't even certain what you are saying makes sense.

[Panda]

@Panda; What I'm saying is that the fact that such a group of templars existed in the first place supports effort to remove her, and that even uninterested in joining that group Cullen could have used it, among other things, to justify stopping the annulment. And I agree that he was very militant pro-templar in DA2 and DA:O. Its why I can't agree that he has ever been presented as moderate or IMO likable. And about his evolving character and opinions - they came by way of hard and bloody lessons learned to be sure.

 

I don't think Cullen ever wanted to overthrow Meredith but rather was forced to do it in the end when she went batshit-crazy. He could have done it earlier but didn't.

He has been pro-templar in Broken Circle and beginning of DA2. DAO in Mage Origin he was quite pro-mage templar and went more moderate way durin DA2. I never find him unlikeable since he was always friendly with Hawke no matter how anti-templar they were.

[xSammy13x]

You know, Cullen agreed to the Right after Anders blew up the Chantry, but he did spare mages who weren't fighting the Templars.

 

I am confused as to why you all seem to forget that part...or the parts where he wants to educate mages more (in DA2) about why the Chantry and Templars act as they do- when you tell him they're both to blame for the events happening in the game. That's not a, "believe what we say or die," attitude, that's a man who is trying to find a middle ground between two completely different factions...and then finding that middle ground. Killing the bad mages, and mages who are killing Templars, and sparing others.

[Revan Reborn]

@Panda; What I'm saying is that the fact that such a group of templars existed in the first place supports effort to remove her, and that even uninterested in joining that group Cullen could have used it, among other things, to justify stopping the annulment. And I agree that he was very militant pro-templar in DA2 and DA:O. Its why I can't agree that he has ever been presented as moderate or IMO likable. And about his evolving character and opinions - they came by way of hard and bloody lessons learned to be sure.

 

EDIT: @xSammy13x; Hell yes I'll be biased. I'm rather fixed in my opinion about Cullen and I don't know that his DAI version will sway me. Going on Josephine's personal quest livestream spoiler, her way of doing things can be slow and perhaps fruitless. I think I will prefer Leliana. I think she handled the Dalish clan the best, her advice to generate coin is decent, I like her suggestion to Josephine in the livestream spoiler, and she seems to be quite a viable option for most of the war table missions unlike Cullen who is locked out of more than I would have expected so far and Josephine when diplomacy can only go so far.

Exactly this. If the only way Cullen can "learn from his lessons" is by committing atrocities and massacres, why do I want someone like that leading my army? Lol. Perhaps some of you are masochists, but I personally would rather have people who are competent and that I can trust.

 

So far the advisor hierarchy is as follows:

 

Leliana

Josephine

Cullen as a last resort

[R0vena]

I imagine different situations will require different solutions, so my first Inquisitor will think hard and try to get the best outcome possible in the given situation. If as the result she'll end using one adviser (whoever it will be) more than others - so be it.

 

My other Inquisitors might lean more to one particular side, however, but I always roll-play the most level-headed  and balanced first.)

[Revan Reborn]

You know, Cullen agreed to the Right after Anders blew up the Chantry, but he did spare mages who weren't fighting the Templars.

 

I am confused as to why you all seem to forget that part...or the parts where he wants to educate mages more (in DA2) about why the Chantry and Templars act as they do- when you tell him they're both to blame for the events happening in the game. That's not a, "believe what we say or die," attitude, that's a man who is trying to find a middle ground between two completely different factions...and then finding that middle ground. Killing the bad mages, and mages who are killing Templars, and sparing others.

Perhaps because this itself is an incredibly biased and favorable view towards the Templars? Cullen is not absent of fault here. I agree, in his way, he wants to do what is right. The problem is because of his actions, or inaction, he allows atrocities to happen as a result. I don't really care what he says if his actions don't emulate his words. He had plenty of opportunities to check Meredith long before the Right of Annulment was ever enacted. He refused to see reason and followed blindly like a loyal dog even though the truth was right in front of him. That is someone who doesn't have enough sense to make a judgment between what is clearly right and clearly wrong.

[lil yonce]

@xSammy13x; What happened to Cullen in Ferelden was awful, yes, but rather than view Uldred's uprising as a pushback against the oppressiveness of the templars and circle, which is what it originally was, he completely abandons all sympathy he ever had for mages, and within a year is a newbie templar turned militant knight-captain to perhaps the most extreme knight-commander in Thedas - and we all know what happened under Meredith's leadership. I just don't think his past is justification for what he did and did not do.

[The Elder King]

@xSammy13x; What happened to Cullen in Ferelden was awful, yes, but rather than view Uldred's uprising as a pushback against the oppressiveness of the templars and circle, which is what it originally was, he completely abandons all sympathy he ever had for mages and within a year is a newbie templar turned militant knight-captain to perhaps the most extreme Knight Commander in Thedas, and we all know what happened under her leadership.

People don't react in the same way. While I disagree with his views, I understand why he reacted that way.
Anyway, I think he might recognize his views in DA2 were wrong, based on What his writer said, and What Gaider said in reaction of a fanmade dialogue on tumblr.

[Sifr]

 

This is a strawman argument. Meredith was in charge, hence being the perpetrator. Cullen had to enforce her will, which he did, being a bystander. He should have stopped her a long time ago before the question of Annulment even came up to start. He is definitely responsible and deserves blame.

 

The Right of Annulment is simple. In times of crisis, templars have the authority to put every mage to the sword for fear of them becoming abominations. There is no procedure. It's a blood bath meant to quell any potential fallout. You are committing a necessary evil in order to prevent a much larger and worse one later.

 

I think you probably should bow out. You failed to make any valid points and half of your assertions were false. I'm not even sure why you are even replying if you aren't even certain what you are saying makes sense.

 

Really, so it's not a strawman argument to claim that because you have a boss who makes a bad decision, you're responsible for that decision even if there was absolutely no way you could have prevented it?

 

We saw in DA2 that Templars who questioned Meredith tended to either be demoted or expelled from the order. Or in the case of those who openly defied her such as Thrask and his followers, who had a "Mages are people too" beliefs, attempted to stop her by overthrowing her and relieving her of command, who were rewarded for their effectors by being hanged?

 

In Origins, when Greagoir ordered the Rite peformed, they rounded up the mages and sent them to be individually interrogated and checked for signs of corruption, before deciding whether or not executions or tranquility were needed. It wasn't simply them going upstairs and killing them immediately.

 

Yeah, I should bow out of this thread. It's already derailed from the original topic into a hate thread and I can't sit and argue with someone who's used the "X = Nazi" argument and then accuses me of making false assertions and invalid points?

 

[Palidane]

I have no idea why people think Aveline or Cassandra would be good generals. Aveline is a neurotic control freak with a hero complex who fails at every duty she is given. She smothers her soldiers, tries to protect anyone and everything under her jurisdiction, takes every single setback as a personal challenge. Could you guys imagine Aveline knowingly sending soldiers to her death? Performing the calculus of war? No, Aveline is a great fighter and a decent Chief of Police, but she couldn't hack it as a general. Just look at the downward spiral her life goes into if you don't marry her to Donnic.

 

Cassandra is a Seeker of Truth. An agent of the Divine who most often works alone and behind the scenes, making sure the Maker's Will is done on Thedas? What part of that screams "high general" to you? When has Cassandra ever demonstrated leadership qualities? Hell, has there been a single moment where we haven't seen Cassandra be rude, abrupt, or abrasive? Oh, but she's middle-aged, and she hits people with a sword, so she must be a qualified military commander, right?

 

As for Cullen's character, all I'm going to say is that I'm not opposed to the Right of Annulment in theory. I think calling it in was perfectly justified in Ferelden, and an argument could be made for the Kirkwall Circle. I don't blame Cullen for that, as the situation had spiraled way the hell out of control in both cases.