584 réponses à ce sujet

[lil yonce]

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.)

And since it was said that she could "be wrestled to the mat" in Val Royeaux for the annulment that is why I say her authority was questionable. On paper she could call it but in reality it was a very questionable decision.

[The Elder King]

Meredith had The Right to call the Annulment at that moment. The problem was that the situation might've not required an annulment.

[Revan Reborn]

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 ended up getting hanged simply for their "Mages are people too" beliefs, as well as attempting to stop her by overthrowing her and relieving her of command.

 

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?

 

That's where you are wrong. He could have prevented it. He had the authority to relieve her of command. He could have gone to the Chantry, before it was destroyed, to reprimand Meredith for her abuse of power. He chose not to. That's the problem. His inaction led to a massacre.

 

The difference between Cullen and these other templars is Cullen actually has authority and is an officer rank. He isn't just a common grunt who must follow orders to the letter.

 

Hey man, if you don't have a grasp or World War Two, the National Socialist Party, and how it clearly can relate, that's on you. The only one who seems to be trying to make a strawman to disregard a clearly considered and solid argument is you.

 

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.

Aveline cares and is passionate for her men and women. That's why she makes a difference. She will go to hell and back to do anything to protect them. That's the kind of leader that inspires and motivates armies to make a difference in the most impossible of odds.

 

Cassandra comes from nobility, of which are always bred and trained to lead armies. Just because she comes across a bit strong-willed, does not mean she is not qualified to lead an armed force. I think you will be surprised by what Cassandra is actually capable of, especially when compared to Cullen.

 

I blame Cullen for letting the question of the Right of Annulment even becoming an issue. Had he done his job and taken necessary precautions, Meredith would have never had the chance to throw all of Kirkwall into chaos and destruction. His inaction and stubbornness to ignore Hawkes world led to blood being on his hands. He is not innocent.

[Hammerstorm]

I don´t see how the other advisers are any better than Cullen on their job.
Leliana is a Bard: Which is a other word for assassin and spy. Have I missed something about her have any experience on leading a spy ring or be a spy master?

Josephine is a diplomat: sure she has a lot of experience be the voice for a country to a another country, but the Inquisition is NOT a country, it is a organisation that is relative new and thus have no real power that she can play with (except the "glowing hand" thing) and the fact that her connection to other countries may actually be more of a problem than a bonus.

 

What I try to say is that he is just as qualified in his job as a ADVISER as the other two.

P.S. As he is a adviser he is not the supreme leader of our armed forces, we are. any fault is our not his.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

And since it was said that she could "be wrestled to the mat" in Val Royeaux for the annulment that is why I say her authority was questionable. On paper she could call it but in reality it was a very questionable decision.

She's middle management. Of course she can be called on the carpet by her superiors if she abuses her power. That doesn't mean she doesn't have the power that she's abusing.

[LilithMB]

That's where you are wrong. He could have prevented it. He had the authority to relieve her of command. He could have gone to the Chantry, before it was destroyed, to reprimand Meredith for her abuse of power. He chose not to. That's the problem. His inaction led to a massacre.

 

 

I blame Cullen for letting the question of the Right of Annulment even becoming an issue. Had he done his job and taken necessary precautions, Meredith would have never had the chance to throw all of Kirkwall into chaos and destruction. His inaction and stubbornness to ignore Hawkes world led to blood being on his hands. He is not innocent.

Nah. Anders blowing up the Chantry and Elthinas inaction led to a massacre. Not Cullen.

[Revan Reborn]

Nah. Anders blowing up the Chantry and Elthinas inaction led to a massacre. Not Cullen.

You are missing the point. Anders and the Chantry being destroyed are moot. Cullen had a duty to uphold the tenants of his sacred obligation to maintain order and to be held accountable for his actions. He failed in his task as he refused to handle Meredith, heed the pleading of Hawke, and chose to sit by and do nothing. Ever single time an issue or question about mages came up, Cullen always needed the guidance of Hawke in order to come to a proper conclusion. He does not think. He lacks the capacity to make judgments. It's one thing for him to be a soldier where his actions only affect him. It's another thing entirely when he is a leader and his actions affect the lives of many. We've already seen what he is capable of when he is in a position of authority. This cannot be disputed.

[Muspade]

 Anders and the Chantry being destroyed are moot. 

What.

 

 He does not think. He lacks the capacity to make judgments.

 

I think you're voluntarily blanking your own memory to make this argument valid.

 

This cannot be disputed.

O'rly.

[Sifr]

That's where you are wrong. He could have prevented it. He had the authority to relieve her of command. He could have gone to the Chantry, before it was destroyed, to reprimand Meredith for her abuse of power. He chose not to. That's the problem. His inaction led to a massacre.

 

The difference between Cullen and these other templars is Cullen actually has authority and is an officer rank. He isn't just a common grunt who must follow orders to the letter.

 

Hey man, if you don't have a grasp or World War Two, the National Socialist Party, and how it clearly can relate, that's on you. The only one who seems to be trying to make a strawman to disregard a clearly considered and solid argument is you.

 

No he couldn't, Meredith had a firm grasp on her power in Kirkwall, to the extent that the nobility weren't even allowed to elect a new Viscount for three years because Meredith wouldn't allow it. I doubt Cullen had enough power from his fellow officers or support to effect that kind of change?

 

As we repeatedly see in DA2, there are numerous Templars who are of lower rank that Cullen, yet are considered untouchable because of they're Meredith's cronies.

 

How does his inaction make him any more responsible than any other person in a position of power in the city, the nobles, or any other Templar, who refused to act against her? I've seen this same argument used against Hawke before and it was just as dubious then as it is against Cullen?

 

I have a fine grasp on World War Two and the Nazi Party, but your argument is invalid because, and I don't know how clearly this has to be stated;

 

1: This isn't World War Two, because no-one is at War (yet).

2. The Templar Order aren't the Nazi party, because they're not a poltical entity.

3. This isn't the Nuremberg Trials. Furthermore, Cullen defied orders, rather than follow them.

 

C'mon, you must know you're grasping with this?

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

You are missing the point. Anders and the Chantry being destroyed are moot. Cullen had a duty to uphold the tenants of his sacred obligation to maintain order and to be held accountable for his actions. He failed in his task as he refused to handle Meredith, heed the pleading of Hawke, and chose to sit by and do nothing. Ever single time an issue or question about mages came up, Cullen always needed the guidance of Hawke in order to come to a proper conclusion. He does not think. He lacks the capacity to make judgments. It's one thing for him to be a soldier where his actions only affect him. It's another thing entirely when he is a leader and his actions affect the lives of many. We've already seen what he is capable of when he is in a position of authority. This cannot be disputed.

It's too bad it's him making the judgments, not the PCs.

[R0vena]

I find that quite an.. interesting leap of thoughts.

Anders blows up the Chantry, Meredit calls Right of the Annulment, Elthina doesn't act, Orsino supports blood mages.

So - who is at fault for the resulting massacre in the Gallows? Cullen. 

[In Exile]

That's where you are wrong. He could have prevented it. He had the authority to relieve her of command. He could have gone to the Chantry, before it was destroyed, to reprimand Meredith for her abuse of power. He chose not to. That's the problem. His inaction led to a massacre.

 

Cullen is our subordinate. If his fault is that he's so loyal he will never betray you even when you've gone obviously insane, that seems to be a pretty strong recommendation in his favour. 

[lil yonce]

Meredith had The Right to call the Annulment at that moment. The problem was that the situation might've not required an annulment.

Okay, I can accept this and will say instead that her judgement was very questionable.

[Queen Rowan]

This isn't a matter of judging anyone. That would suggest these assertions we are making are subjective. BioWare has told Cullen's story. He was a lyrium-addict serial killer in DAO. That is undisputed fact. He was a naive captain who conformed to Knight-Commander Meredith and allowed the massacre of innocent people. That is undisputed fact. Only at the very end did he realize how "mad" Meredith was and change sides. How dense can you be? Cullen has a terrible track record in Dragon Age, which is why many are questioning why he should be in charge of anything. That isn't judging, that's just questioning whether BioWare has common sense to realize how utterly strange this design choice is.

 

You have no right to criticize the developers of this game who have worked their asses off day and night for years to make the best game they can. I'd like to see you do everything they've done while experiencing hate from ignorant people such as yourself. You don't realize that they have feelings too, and you especially don't understand that (believe it or not) they're not solely catering to your experience. They're catering to what the majority of the fans want, and if you want them to make changes to the way they create their stories in the future maybe you should be polite with your criticisms instead of bashing them. I would never do what you wanted if you spoke about my game with such disrespect. 

[Palidane]

Aveline cares and is passionate for her men and women. That's why she makes a difference. She will go to hell and back to do anything to protect them. That's the kind of leader that inspires and motivates armies to make a difference in the most impossible of odds.

 

Cassandra comes from nobility, of which are always bred and trained to lead armies. Just because she comes across a bit strong-willed, does not mean she is not qualified to lead an armed force. I think you will be surprised by what Cassandra is actually capable of, especially when compared to Cullen.

 

I blame Cullen for letting the question of the Right of Annulment even becoming an issue. Had he done his job and taken necessary precautions, Meredith would have never had the chance to throw all of Kirkwall into chaos and destruction. His inaction and stubbornness to ignore Hawkes world led to blood being on his hands. He is not innocent.

Which would make her a good sergeant. But that's not what a General is. Commanding armies of men requires a certain amount of calm, ice-cool detachment, and Aveline most definitely does not have it. Seriously man, you should see a Rivalry or no Donnic playthrough of DA2. The women is downright unstable.

 

Perhaps, but just because you're noble and have training doesn't mean you are any good at it. I literally cannot remember a single scene Cassandra was in where she wasn't yelling, insulting, or cutting people off. I am utterly underwhelmed by her leadership qualifications.

 

I don't know what you wanted the guy to do. Stab her in her sleep? Meredith was his direct superior. He went along with her until she started killing innocent people, and then he took a stand.

[Revan Reborn]

What.

 

 

I think you're voluntarily blanking your own memory to make this argument valid.

 

O'rly.

Don't be dense. The Templar Order was long in decline before the Chantry blew up. That was merely the catalyst that made everything unravel that would have happened anyways. I'm ignoring the rest of your post as it's not actually offering anything substantive to the discussion. You are just being obnoxious.

 

No he couldn't, Meredith had a firm grasp on her power in Kirkwall, to the extent that the nobility weren't even allowed to elect a new Viscount for three years because Meredith wouldn't allow it. I doubt Cullen had enough power from his fellow officers or support to effect that kind of change?

 

As we repeatedly see in DA2, there are numerous Templars who are of lower rank that Cullen, yet are considered untouchable because of they're Meredith's cronies.

 

How does his inaction make him any more responsible than any other person in a position of power in the city, the nobles, or any other Templar, who refused to act against her? I've seen this same argument used against Hawke before and it was just as dubious then as it is against Cullen?

 

I have a fine grasp on World War Two and the Nazi Party, but your argument is invalid because, and I don't know how clearly this has to be stated;

 

1: This isn't World War Two, because no-one is at War (yet).

2. The Templar Order aren't the Nazi party, because they're not a poltical entity.

3. This isn't the Nuremberg Trials. Furthermore, Cullen defied orders, rather than follow them.

 

C'mon, you must know you're grasping with this?

Then you clearly lack an understanding of the Templar hierarchy. Again, the Templars are subordinate to the Chantry. Consider how the President of the United States of America is the Commander-in-Chief while also being a civilian. The same principle. Even if Cullen couldn't force Meredith to change her ways, he could go to someone who could and defuse the entire situation before it began.

 

We aren't talking about anyone else here. We are talking about Cullen. The point is he lacks good judgment to make decisions, as we have seen in not one, but two games.

 

This isn't rocket science... Cullen didn't defy orders until the very end after things had already devolved into chaos and anarchy. If you want to be ignorant of Cullen's clear incompetence, more power to you.

 

It's too bad it's him making the judgments, not the PCs.

It's a good thing the Inquisitor is in charge. Under Cullen's leadership, the Inquisition wouldn't last very long given his history.

 

Cullen is our subordinate. If his fault is that he's so loyal he will never betray you even when you've gone obviously insane, that seems to be a pretty strong recommendation in his favour. 

Not really. You want subordinates who are loyal, but are not fanatics. They should have enough sense to recognize whether what you are doing is right or wrong. The Inquisition isn't a full-fledged dictatorship. You have advisors in order to aid you on matters that you may not have expert knowledge on. Cullen is the "military expert," which is the concern here.

 

You have no right to criticize the developers of this game who have worked their asses off day and night for years to make the best game they can. I'd like to see you do everything they've done while experiencing hate from ignorant people such as yourself. You don't realize that they have feelings too, and you especially don't understand that (believe it or not) they're not solely catering to your experience. They're catering to what the majority of the fans want, and if you want them to make changes to the way they create their stories in the future maybe you should be polite with your criticisms instead of bashing them. I would never do what you wanted if you spoke about my game with such disrespect. 

I have every right. I'm a consumer. I purchase their product. I am within my right to critique and provide feedback to them so that they can improve their games in the future. I do not have to be a thoughtless zombie fanboy who jumps on the bandwagon thinking "BioWare can do no wrong." Sorry, I've been through SWTOR. No developer is immune from fault. That is why this forum exists. BioWare wants to hear from the community. You don't have to agree with what I'm saying, but then again my posts aren't for you anyways. They are for BioWare.

 

Honestly, throwing around insults does not build your case or your argument. Everything I have said has been based on how BioWare has developed Cullen. I question his ability to lead and be a true advisor based on what BioWare has shown of his character. In all truth, I'm sure BioWare is much more appreciative of the fans who won't sugar coat their games because of blind loyalty. They want the unbiased, uncensored feedback so that they can learn from their mistakes and improve with the next game. That's what this industry is all about.

[kroganjetpack]

I think it really depends on what inquisitor I'll be playing, but through my first playthrough I think I'll be siding toward Josephine, as I'm playing the "everyone stop fighting there's a tear in the rift" inquisitor.

[sylvanaerie]

Well, this thread is degenerating into a total hate on for Cullen with a side serving of Leliana dislike.  

I like all the advisors and companions, some more than others, but even those I'm not that interested in it's because I just don't know them yet.  I'm not going to make judgements based on 1) how they behaved previously.  People can change a lot over the course of even just 3 years, let alone 10, or 2) snippets of dialogue taken out of context.  I plan on utilizing all of them.  There are literally 100+ hours of gameplay involved in Inquisition.  That, plus multiple playthroughs should be enough for me to enjoy every part of the game that I can. As far as I'm concerned anyone who would not utilize every asset they can for their game enjoyment is an idiot, no matter how intelligent they try to make themselves seem on the boards.

 

Jiminy Crickets!  If you hate someone in the game, it's as simple as 'don't use them'. 

 

The game story is plotted out and done.  The final few days is QA working overtime while the developers work out all the (hopefully) final bugs to the system.  Whining and complaining impotently on these boards that "so and so shouldn't be an advisor" or "so and so died in my game" isn't going to remove them from the game.  

 

And I say, give Bioware a chance to tell their story before opening up the criticism can.

[Revan Reborn]

Which would make her a good sergeant. But that's not what a General is. Commanding armies of men requires a certain amount of calm, ice-cool detachment, and Aveline most definitely does not have it. Seriously man, you should see a Rivalry or no Donnic playthrough of DA2. The women is downright unstable.

 

Perhaps, but just because you're noble and have training doesn't mean you are any good at it. I literally cannot remember a single scene Cassandra was in where she wasn't yelling, insulting, or cutting people off. I am utterly underwhelmed by her leadership qualifications.

 

I don't know what you wanted the guy to do. Stab her in her sleep? Meredith was his direct superior. He went along with her until she started killing innocent people, and then he took a stand.

What was calm or ice-cool about Patton? He was far from your depiction of the "ideal" General and he is one of the greatest military tacticians of modern warfare. My point is it's one thing to treat your troops as tools. It's another when you motivate and inspire them to be more than they are. Aveline has that. Cullen doesn't.

 

I never said she was a nice person. Then again, when was being nice or mean every a qualification of being a leader? If she can get results and she knows what she is doing, that is all that matters.

 

Confront her much earlier on personally. Converse with the Chantry about his concerns with her ability to lead. Be a counter to her extremist views as to not lead the Templar Order into chaos and tragedy, as it was. My point is in a position of authority, Cullen did nothing. He is not a leader. Why should he then be leading the army of the Inquisition?

[Yermogi]

I have to say, I think any mage that I play is probably not going to be too trustful of Cullen, seeing as he was, y'know, one of the head Templars in a place where Templars were horrifically abusive towards mages. I would have a hard time wanting to make him happy in those playthroughs. It doesn't make sense to me to play a mage where they trust Cullen unreservedly, given his background and high degree of intolerance to those who are magically-inclined.

 

That being said- he certainly does have something of a military background. And perhaps, if he proves that he's somewhat over his mindless hatred of mages, he'd probably be more respected by my Mage-quizzies in the future.

[Livi14]

I'll be biased towards Leliana, followed by Josie. They both seem competent and I love espionage. I've always hated Cullen, so I guess I'll simply ignore him.

[In Exile]

Not really. You want subordinates who are loyal, but are not fanatics. They should have enough sense to recognize whether what you are doing is right or wrong. The Inquisition isn't a full-fledged dictatorship. You have advisors in order to aid you on matters that you may not have expert knowledge on. Cullen is the "military expert," which is the concern here.

 

Blind loyalty is always better. You want your friends to be real with you. You want subordinates to carry out orders. And Cullen's knowledge of military is separate and apart from his moral views on what I'm going to use that knowledge for (e.g. to crush the templar order and obtain freedom for the mages). 

[(Disgusted noise.)]

I'm not sure how to approach the advisers yet. I adore Josephine so far, and both Cullen and Leliana have been some of my least favorite characters in the series (although I'm open to them changing my mind about them this time), yet from a role playing stand point, I would be much more likely to favor force or espionage over diplomacy.

[Revan Reborn]

Blind loyalty is always better. You want your friends to be real with you. You want subordinates to carry out orders. And Cullen's knowledge of military is separate and apart from his moral views on what I'm going to use that knowledge for (e.g. to crush the templar order and obtain freedom for the mages). 

This is of course assuming Cullen keeps his military knowledge separate from his subjective perspective on mages and the templars. The war is not over yet, and Cullen is far from being on good terms with mages. We already know based on some streams that the advisors will definitely give their opinion and try to persuade the Inquisitor to follow one path rather than another (Leliana and Josephine handling the same situation entirely differently). The question is how much will Cullen's military judgments be compromised by his questionable views and poor sense of morality? Honestly, I see his judgments being compromised a lot, especially if we are dealing with a situation of the Chantry, Templars, or Mages.

[Palidane]

What was calm or ice-cool about Patton? He was far from your depiction of the "ideal" General and he is one of the greatest military tacticians of modern warfare. My point is it's one thing to treat your troops as tools. It's another when you motivate and inspire them to be more than they are. Aveline has that. Cullen doesn't.

 

I never said she was a nice person. Then again, when was being nice or mean every a qualification of being a leader? If she can get results and she knows what she is doing, that is all that matters.

 

Confront her much earlier on personally. Converse with the Chantry about his concerns with her ability to lead. Be a counter to her extremist views as to not lead the Templar Order into chaos and tragedy, as it was. My point is in a position of authority, Cullen did nothing. He is not a leader. Why should he then be leading the army of the Inquisition?

Patton could be calm and ice-cold when he needed to be. And if you know anything about Patton, you know that he was almost as much a liability to the Allies as an asset. Aveline never struck me as being a fantastic leader. Her guardsmen respect her, but I wouldn't say they adore her. She's too overbearing, too much of a workaholic. The woman is unstable, she obsesses over her work, as if protecting Kirkwall will erase all the guilt she feels for Wesley's death. And heck, if she was that bad when things were mostly under control, imagine how she is handling things now. I'll put it this way: the devs have said that after the Kirkwall Rebellion, Cullen helped hold the city together. Where was Aveline then?

 

What does being nice or mean have to do with a person's ability to lead? Seriously?

 

I'm sure he did personally confront her beforehand. We see them disagreeing onscreen multiple times. He privately shares with us his concerns about her, so it is only logical he would mention it to the Grand Cleric first. He indisputably was a counter to her extremist views. You're blaming Cullen for the actions of every psycho maleficar and dogmatic Templar that contributed to the Rebellion.