8 réponses à ce sujet

[Joseph Silver]

I'm a big fan of the Wheel of Time series, and I've seen a lot of Wheel of Time references and similarities in Dragon Age. The Circle of Magi is similar to the Aes Sedai, the Maker is similar to the Creator, and the taint on the Black City is similar to the taint on saidin.

The Seanchan Empire's most powerful weapons are their damane, channelers (mages) controlled by the sul'dam. The damane are literally controlled by a leash (a magic item called an a'dam) held by a sul'dam. The ability to channel is considered dangerous in Seanchan, and they believe that all channelers must be leashed for their own good. Becoming damane is the worst thing that could happen to a Seanchan, while becoming a sul'dam is the opposite, a very prestigious position that affords power and respect throughout the Empire.

What most Seanchan don't realize is that those who can become sul'dam can be taught to channel while those who become damane possess an innate spark that makes them channel even if they don't want to. To use D&D terms, sul'dam are untrained wizards while damane are sorcerers. Basically, the Seanchan Empire's army of enslaved mages are actually controlled by those who can become mages.

Alistair may or may not be the half-elf child of King Maric and Fiona. This means that he may or may not have inherited the magic gene from Fiona. Anyway, Alistair tells the Warden that templars are given lyrium to develop their antimagic powers and to control them through lyrium addiction. He further reveals that only full templars are given lyrium, not trainees like himself. The fact that he possesses antimagic powers despite not being given lyrium is a bit suspicious.

Also, templars are made to swear a vow of celibacy. What for? I can understand the magic-fearing Thedosians forbidding mages from having children, since they see magic as a curse that shouldn't be spread, but why forbid templars from having children when they are not mages? A possible explanation could be that templars are required to make similar vows as Chantry priests, who are also required to be celibate. But is this all there is to it? Could there be another reason for this?

What if those who become templars are people who can be taught to wield magic, while those who become mages are those who possess the spark? What do you think?

[Sandtigress]

He also says though that he can train any warrior in your party to be a Templar. Not saying that you're wrong, because it doesn't mean that your other party members might not also have that ability, but it does seem to make it unlikely.

[EthanDirtch]

Perhaps the more pertinent question is just how necessary *is* lyrium consumption to being an effective Templar? As both of you pointed out, warriors do not use lyrium, and yet Alistair can teach other warriors to become Templars. Alistair himself doesn't consume lyrium. So perhaps lyrium is just a method to keep Templars dependent on the Chantry?

[Sandtigress]

Such is Alistair's musing on the subject when you ask him about it, using the dialogue option about the Templar running the chantry.

[SusanStoHelit]

Of course, if you ask Alistair if the Templar powers are not, in fact, magical themselves he says something like - you could look at it that way, but the Chantry doesn't think so because they only use the abilities on mages. This is totally illogical in my view - a power can't be magic because it's only used on mages? What?



I also love the Wheel of Time - and you're right, there are some similarities there. The Chantry's attitude to magic and mages is very similar to that of the Seanchan to Aes Sedai and the various others who use the Source (Wise Ones, Windfinders, etc). I'm not sure the similarity is much deeper than that though.

[draxynnus]

Sandtigress wrote...

He also says though that he can train any warrior in your party to be a Templar. Not saying that you're wrong, because it doesn't mean that your other party members might not also have that ability, but it does seem to make it unlikely.

More importantly, even a dwarf can become a Templar. Although, like making Wynne a blood mage, this could be because Bioware didn't think of all the implications when they didn't put in limitations of who could become what specialisation.

Templar abilities do appear magical in nature, though, although that may be at a level of "everyone can learn to do a LITTLE magic, but only mages have the truly powerful stuff". Regarding the attitude of the Chantry - the impression I got there was that the Chantry didn't really care if it was magic because if it was, it was magic that could only be used against mages (although this is ignoring the fact of Holy Smite). Possibly more likely is that they're simply not worried about it because it's "magic" they can control...

[EthanDirtch]

Aye, draxynnus, that's likely it. Templars are trained as young kids and are hooked on Lyrium (most of them are anyway). It's a good way to keep a leash on their only real weapon/defense against mages.



It's possible in some angles and lights that the abilities of Templars aren't really magic so much as a specialized technique, a fighting style and mindset that works. Of course it's hard to quantify this; in-game evidence via combat won't really show anything. I'm thinking it's more about psychological combat than anything else. The Circle of the Magi are trained to fear Templars, and to accept Templars as necessary; the Templar are trained to be devoted to their faith and to be vigilant in their observance of mages. Perhaps it's just a case of mind over matter, than actual magic or gift-by-lyrium?

[SusanStoHelit]

If Templar abilites (some of them, at least) are magic, and the 'we can teach any warrior to be a Templar' is an error on the writers' part, what can we infer? That anyone and everyone who undertakes warrior training (not rogues, you know) is a de facto mage, or has magical ability? I don't think that's likely.

It seems far more likely to me that Templar abilities are not magic. Or if they are magic, maybe it's magic of an entirely different kind. I just don't know. If all warriors can learn to be Templars, and the abilities are magic - that just seems to be saying that everyone has the ability. This would mean that rogues of course have the inherent magical nature - but not the training to actualise it. Seems incredibly unlikely to me.

But if it isn't magic - what is it? Now that's a question I'd like to have an answer to.

[RangerSG]

Or maybe it's a small enough amount of magic involved in the technique that you don't need lyrium to replenish the mana pool, just to keep them on the leash.



I do think dwarves (and Sten) being Templars falls in the "class oversight" category with Wynne as BM though.