28 réponses à ce sujet

[helpthisguyplease]

 As you all know way before the game was released the mages got sanctuary in Ferelden and the templars followed so why did the king allowed to templars to follow and did not stop them?

[X Equestris]

As you all know way before the game was released the mages got sanctuary in Ferelden and the templars followed so why did the king allowed to templars to follow and did not stop them?

Because fighting the Templars means taking the mages' side, and mages aren't exactly the most popular folks in Thedas.

[LightningPoodle]

Because fighting the Templars means taking the mages' side, and mages aren't exactly the most popular folks in Thedas.

 

But giving them sanctuary means giving them safety.

 

Sanctuary: Refuge or safety from pursuit, persecution or other danger.

 

Allowing the Templars to pursue the Mages is basically saying, "come this way and you'll be no better off".

[Willowhugger]

There's a simple answer for this, actually.

 

In a feudal system, the local lord mobilizes his military forces to deal with threats.

 

A.K.A Arl Teagan.

 

Who is kind of kicked out.

 

The Apostates and Renegade Templars are thus allowed to fight unimpeded across Fereldan territory, preying on the weak.

Beforehand, it's quite likely they were relatively safe.

It also makes the Templar situation a lot more difficult.

[LightningPoodle]

There's a simple answer for this, actually.

 

In a feudal system, the local lord mobilizes his military forces to deal with threats.

 

A.K.A Arl Teagan.

 

Who is kind of kicked out.

 

The Apostates and Renegade Templars are thus allowed to fight unimpeded across Fereldan territory, preying on the weak.

 

[arelenriel]

Kind of hard to kick out people who were already there - the Templars were stationed at the Fereldan Mages Circle, and at every Chantry .. not to mention this could have resulted in an Exalted March being called against Fereldan for disobeying the Chantries interdiction against the mages.

[helpthisguyplease]

Kind of hard to kick out people who were already there - the Templars were stationed at the Fereldan Mages Circle, and at every Chantry .. not to mention this could have resulted in an Exalted March being called against Fereldan for disobeying the Chantries interdiction against the mages.

And who would answer the call Nevarra who has to pass trough Orlais, or Orlais who was in a civil war, the free marches who could not care less or Antiva who has no army or better yet Rivain who does not care about the needs of the Chantry, Anderfels where the royal family does not care enough to even rule?

[Sir JK]

The short answer is: Because Ferelden couldn't openly side with the mages for political reasons.

 

The longer answer is; Ferelden's monarch isn't very powerful, they rely heavily on the decisions of the landsmeet in how they may exercise their power. So in order to do something major they'd need the assembled Banns to vote in their favour. The templars are not only present already in Ferelden, but entrenched. Kinloch hold, The Aeonar, Therinfall redoubt and the Denerim chantry all have (or had) sizeable templar contingents. Adding to this, Kirkwall is just across the Amaranthine ocean. Just a few days with ships. So dislodging them would mean a major military actions, which means asking the Bannorn for soldiers.

 

Now, that is quite unfeasible. For one, many banns have family in the templars. Bann Alfstanna of Dragon's Peak, being a notable example. They're unlikely to vote for anything that's tantamount to a declaration of war on their own kin. Along the same line, many banns have family among the mages. While you'd think this would make them more inclined to support the mages, remember that mages are unlanded. This means they cannot inherit and by thus: won't be heirs. What this means to the family is that they could have spent the last 10-20 years grooming the wrong child to be heir. A process that takes long time and costs a lot of money. Openly siding with the games could be seen as a first step to normalising the mages in society, thus causing that sizeable investment to be completely squandered.

Furthermore, Ferelden is still recovering. People are needed in the fields, not in the army. Not to mention that the leaders of the mage rebellion are mostly Orlesian.

 

Even in the best of circumstances, proposing a vote on those grounds is extremely risky.

 

So why can Ferelden harbour mages at all? Because Ferelden isn't, Redcliffe is. Redcliffe is an Arling , which means that, while hereditary, it is held in the name of the King. Teagan is not the owner of Redcliffe, he's the custodian of Redcliffe. This does not mean he must do whatever the king wants, but he has certain obligations to his monarch. Like opening Redcliffe to refugees. That these refugees happen to be members of the mage rebellion is beside the point.

I am sure Teagan could contest this command in a Landsmeet if he wishes, but why would he?

 

So, Ferelden has not sided with the mages. The monarch is merely exercising the royal prerogative to shelter a few refugees. Even if many Banns does not like those refugees they cannot really stop the monarch from doing so.

 

And if the templars were to attack Redcliffe? Well... now they just attacked Ferelden. That's something quite different than the king wanting to throw them out.

[Willowhugger]

 

And if the templars were to attack Redcliffe? Well... now they just attacked Ferelden. That's something quite different than the king wanting to throw them out.

 

In practice, that's identical to sheltering mages and I doubt anyone but Orlais would see the difference.

 

Certainly, not the Templars.

 

I do wonder, however, if the deciding issue would be whether the mages were using Redcliffe as a refuge or as a BASE.

 

If the mages there were noncombatants, it might make a big difference.

[Mr.House]

It's mostly because as long as Teagan was in Redcliffe it would never go so far, no one wants to risk a full attack on Redcliffe and risk killing the uncle of the king, that is pretty much calling war on yourself, however once Teagan was kicked out, the templars could do whatever they wanted, same with extreme mages who where kicked out of the main group. This is why the hinterlands pretty much go to hell. There was most lcertainly fighting before hand, but I highly doubt it ever got this bad because the fear of killing Teagan and risking another war will loom over you.

[Colonelkillabee]

There's a simple answer for this, actually.

 

In a feudal system, the local lord mobilizes his military forces to deal with threats.

 

A.K.A Arl Teagan.

 

Who is kind of kicked out.

 

The Apostates and Renegade Templars are thus allowed to fight unimpeded across Fereldan territory, preying on the weak.

Beforehand, it's quite likely they were relatively safe.

It also makes the Templar situation a lot more difficult.

Something else we can blame Fiona for, in other words.

[TeraBat]

I *just* started a new playthrough, so I got this dialogue last night. 

 

You find out when you need to talk to the Captain in the Hinterlands as part of The Threat Remains quest. 

 

He tells you that a lot of the rebel mages have dug in at Redcliffe; but that a lot of apostates have basically run amok. It's those apostates (the ones who are not following Fiona) that the Templars are hunting. The Templars would probably like to take on Fiona and her followers, but they'll settle for hunting apostates. 

[Colonelkillabee]

It's because fiona let the venatori kick Teagan out that the renegade apostates aren't crushed and fighting templars and everyone else around, so it still is her fault.

[garrusfan1]

basically he could allow the mages to come in without it being a big deal. If he fought the templars however it would be choosing a side. It is the difference between being sympathic to a cause and actually joining

[helpthisguyplease]

I wonder, yes the templars are a powerful military force but they are nothing without the resources from the chantry because the to emplars need to eat and drink and be addicted to lyrium that is why no religious order ever managed to defeat a country no matter how trained and better equiped they were.

[MagisterMaximus]

Short answer: Politics.

[Colonelkillabee]

Sometimes an enemy considers being sympathetic or supporting to a cause the same as joining it. I think if the templars came, Teagan would be forced to fight them for coming into their land for hostile purposes against his guests. IF Fiona didn't already throw them out.

 

You can't just start fighting someone in territory a non enemy has housed. You either fight them both or none at all.

[Decepticon Leader Sully]

Pluss Fereldan is still rebilding from the Blight yes even 10 years later. whith the Templars being a highly trained unit most standard foot soldiers would stand no chance. now you have small bands of highly trained armed and armored drug users roaming the contery. 

whit no local law enforcement.

[frylock23]

Also, until the Templars openly declared themselves as being in rebellion against the Chantry, they were still an arm of the main religious order of the continent. You can't openly move against that organization without risking its censure (basically risking being excommunicated). Study what that meant in the medieval Europe of old and what a big deal it was when Henry VIII basically declared himself the head of a new religion allowing himself to be excommunicated from the Catholic Church. It led to years of unrest and war in the British Isles alone without factoring in the reactions from the rest of the continent.

 

Yes, the rest of Southern Thedas is more or less in disarray, but how long do you think it would take for the sharks to begin circling to take advantage of Ferelden's status if the King were to do something similar by taking steps against the Chantry? It would like signal the end of Ferelden as a country as everyone else moved to carve it up between them in an Exalted March.

 

Hence, there would be no military action against the Templars until and unless they amply provoked it in some way or the Chantry moved against the Templars too.

[helpthisguyplease]

Actually Henry VIII had more to win then lose and so did his succesors. And he still invaded France and Scotland even if he lost that does not look like a country weakened by civil unrest.

[frylock23]

The monarchy was strong enough that it held up overall, but there was lasting strife between England and the continent and between protestants and Catholics in the Isles.

 

I didn't say that England lost, only that it had to deal with the fallout which was very real. Study it.

 

Ferelden by contrast is no England. Could Ferelden deal with similar levels of fallout? No.

[Br3admax]

Because the Seekers/Templars own land in Ferelden, so they can't be barred from it. They aren't attacking, so Ferelden won't bother. 

[helpthisguyplease]

The monarchy was strong enough that it held up overall, but there was lasting strife between England and the continent and between protestants and Catholics in the Isles.

 

I didn't say that England lost, only that it had to deal with the fallout which was very real. Study it.

 

Ferelden by contrast is no England. Could Ferelden deal with similar levels of fallout? No.

Yes I know but I also know that in less then 100 years they defeated the fleet of the second strongest nation on the planet they began a period of colonisation they financed the war of the protestants in France and HRE. They had a civil war the monarchy was abolished for a time then it came back and then another civil war this time for religious reasons then they started a golden age and became the first world power. Overall  while bad things happened they benefited. To bad Alistair or Anora are not Henry VIII.

Most of these things did not happened during the reign of Henry VIII but I credit a lot of the events to him and his selfish decision that proved later that it did more good then bad.

[Willowhugger]

I wonder, yes the templars are a powerful military force but they are nothing without the resources from the chantry because the to emplars need to eat and drink and be addicted to lyrium that is why no religious order ever managed to defeat a country no matter how trained and better equiped they were.

 

I think it's interesting to speculate on the idea neither the mages nor the Templars really were prepared for warfare. Both Fiona and Lambert entered into the war thinking it would be a short but victorious war with both sides standing proudly against their enemy. When, in fact, neither the Templars nor the Mages were enthusiastic about the thing from the start with many of them horrified about it the same way you'd be if New York suddenly attacked Los Angeles.
 

The Templars and Mages were seeking peace at the Conclave and it seems from all the notes that, aside from a few holdouts, the whole thing was a miserable disaster for both sides.

 

I think all indications are this war was less WW1 and more a weird sort of Vietnam for both sides, the two groups fighting and harassing each other while relatively impregnable from their strongholds. It's gotten to the point Sera, who HATES mages, thinks Templars suck bad because they're so awful at finding who is a mage and who isn't.

[Dean_the_Young]

 As you all know way before the game was released the mages got sanctuary in Ferelden and the templars followed so why did the king allowed to templars to follow and did not stop them?

 

What makes you think he could stop them at the border?

 

Modern nations with much larger populations, far smaller borders, and much greater technology struggle to control their borders in times of peace and security.