1029 réponses à ce sujet

[Rannik]

Templars.

[Maman Brigitte]

Templars just make the most sense.

[Hazegurl]

Templars. I think the story is unfair by not setting up the urgency of both groups before a permanent choice is made. On the Mages side they set up the need to be there at that moment, and dangle a companion in your face while the Templars, you get nothing but a scene of punching out a mother and some crap about how you must gather some nobles to smooze with them.

 

However, I was pleasantly surprised by how well done the Templar side was and preferred them over the mages. You get to purge the bad, lyrium controlled leaders, recruit Ser Barris who is an outstanding Templar, you save a bunch of people from forced corruption, battle your inner demons and deal with the potential future of your actions. Afterwards, you gain a group of men and women who truly want to do good and you give them the chance to do it. The Templars are also more useful overall whereas the mages are only used to close the breach and nothing more. Also, you never seem to resolve the whole Fiona mind control thing. You also never get to address the deaths of the Tranquil to make the Occulum skulls in Redcliffe. There was just too many loose ends with the mages to make me feel comfortable having the rebel group in my stronghold conscripted or not. I thought these issues would have been addressed but they never were.

[tobynator89]

At this point I've witnessed 3 seperate mage crises that all were caused by too much bloodmagic being thrown around vs 1 templar messup. It has come to a point where I don't trust them and want them under a VERY firm leash if I pick their side.

[Fox News]

Templars.

[Ashevajak]

I went with the Templars, first time around, mages on my second as well.

 

I think you can make good, in-story arguments for either, and I'm not terribly sympathetic to either side at this point...but the resolution to the Templar story was pretty awesome.  And it was nice to redeem the Templars, after a game where they were mostly portrayed as hardcore assholes (notable exceptions aside).

[Pierce Miller]

Mages because magic is inherently interesting.

[RobRam10]

Mages because they're the true masters of this world.

[Mushashi7]

I refuse to ally with people simply for what they were born as.

Say what?

I hope I misunderstand you here?

[Darkly Tranquil]

Mages. I never trust zealots of any kind.

[Pierce Miller]

StreetMagic, on 07 Dec 2014 - 11:19 AM, said:

You obviously don't know Fiona.

 

They're all zealots.

I think Fiona was more scared for her life and worried about her people, Not really saw her be zealous

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

I went with the Templars, first time around, mages on my second as well.

 

I think you can make good, in-story arguments for either, and I'm not terribly sympathetic to either side at this point...but the resolution to the Templar story was pretty awesome.  And it was nice to redeem the Templars, after a game where they were mostly portrayed as hardcore assholes (notable exceptions aside).

 

I wonder, does making the mages your allies net you an awesome speech when recruiting them?

 

I liked the small speech the inquisitor could give to the Templars at the end, a few words of encouragement after such a bleak day.

[Goldarmy]

I chose both sides, because both has good people that die because of our choices. Both deserve a playthrough for that.

I wonder, does making the mages your allies net you an awesome speech when recruiting them?

 

I liked the small speech the inquisitor could give to the Templars at the end, a few words of encouragement after such a bleak day.

It has Fiona eating Humble pie.

[Xilizhra]

It has Fiona eating Humble pie.

Regrettable, but Fiona is less important than the success of the rebellion as a whole.

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

It has Fiona eating Humble pie.

 

That always happens? Good to know.

[Barquiel]

At this point I've witnessed 3 seperate mage crises that all were caused by too much bloodmagic being thrown around vs 1 templar messup. It has come to a point where I don't trust them and want them under a VERY firm leash if I pick their side.

 
These crises were the direct result of the current circle system, which caused more problems than it solved. Connor/Isolde, Uldred and Kirkwall were all in large part a product of circle oppression...and I don't think an even shorter leash will solve anything.

[herkles]

 
These crises were the direct result of the current circle system, which caused more problems than it solved. Connor/Isolde, Uldred and Kirkwall were all in large part a product of circle oppression...and I don't think an even shorter leash will solve anything.

agreed. the best bet would be for us mundanes to accept that we are inferior and allow mages to assume their rightful place as our rulers. we should be lucky i tell you, lucky if a mage selects us to be his or her servent. 

[raging_monkey]

agreed. the best bet would be for us mundanes to accept that we are inferior and allow mages to assume their rightful place as our rulers. we should be lucky i tell you, lucky if a mage selects us to be his or her servent.

love your satirical jokes lol

[raging_monkey]

It's funny that Tevinters literally think like that. It's a comical level of villainy.

idk if all of them but yeah its funny both north and south are nuts... lets go east maybe they are nice XD

[Barquiel]

agreed. the best bet would be for us mundanes to accept that we are inferior and allow mages to assume their rightful place as our rulers. we should be lucky i tell you, lucky if a mage selects us to be his or her servent.

Right, because all these libertarians we meet in the games and novels want to create a magocracy (Tevinter 2.0)...