At the absolute best you have an incompetent, brash, and strategically stupid Leader. At the absolute worst, you have a treasonous manipulator who will stop at nothing for 'freedom' even if it means handing over her people to Tevinter.
There is no 'argument' to be had here.
Because we totally don't see mages doing the exact same thing, stealing homes, and lighting people on fire. You have excellent reasoning. It's also not like we didn't know that literally all the Templars were recalled and most followed. Excellent reasoning, indeed.
I'm pretty sure that nice herbalist lady knows the difference between a templar and a mage. So if she says that there are many injured from attacks by templars...I'd say templars attacked Redcliffe, and not renegade mages. But please...if you have any ingame lines to prove that there weren't any templar attacks on Redcliffe, feel free to share them.
At the absolute best you have an incompetent, brash, and strategically stupid Leader. At the absolute worst, you have a treasonous manipulator who will stop at nothing for 'freedom' even if it means handing over her people to Tevinter.
There is no 'argument' to be had here.
And, just as a note, one can be charged with treason for being incredibly ****** stupid, depending on the result.
She should have waited until she had finished preparations for the inevitable war that she was inciting. By rebelling, she basically turned every single mage in Theda's into public enemy number one with a giant red target on their backs saying "Templars strike here." They had nowhere to go, they had no idea of how to live outside of the circle, and they had no way of surviving. By forcing the vote to rebel multule times, she threw every mage to the wolves without any regard for their lives because she couldn't be bothered to think of how to prepare for what she brings upon them. She is a failure of a leader to such a degree that it makes my blood boil that anyone can even try to defend her.Then what exactly would you want her to do? The templars imposed more and more restrictions after Kirkwall and we have a Lord Seeker who has no interest in any kind of compromise (according to Cole, he also planned to overthrow the divine). I think she would have been a worse leader if she had done nothing.
And who says she didn't have a plan? Yes, the situation grew desperate for the mages after the conclave...but I'd imagine many powerful mages were killed there, something no one could have foreseen.
She should have waited until she had finished preparations for the inevitable war that she was inciting. By rebelling, she basically turned every single mage in Theda's into public enemy number one with a giant red target on their backs saying "Templars strike here." They had nowhere to go, they had no idea of how to live outside of the circle, and they had no way of surviving. By forcing the vote to rebel multule times, she threw every mage to the wolves without any regard for their lives because she couldn't be bothered to think of how to prepare for what she brings upon them. She is a failure of a leader to such a degree that it makes my blood boil that anyone can even try to defend her.
She picked a fight with a group of people who have been trained for years to counter her forces. The only comparison that I can think of is the mages are rebels with hand guns and she picked a fight with a tank division that was already in the field.
The mage-templar war lasted several months. We don't know much about the war before the conclave was destroyed, but it seems that there wasn't a clear winner. I think that would have only been possible with some kind of preparation. And if Fiona was that incompetent the rebellion wouldn't have lasted for as long as it has (unless the templars were just as incompetent)..
I'm starting to wonder how much opposition to the mages is hate against Fiona rather than mages in general. Would there still be as much hate if say Fiona died at the conclave and Rhys was the leader of the mages? or if the mages never made a deal with Tevinter but were instead enslaved by the Venatori
I'm starting to wonder how much opposition to the mages is hate against Fiona rather than mages in general. Would there still be as much hate if say Fiona died at the conclave and Rhys was the leader of the mages? or if the mages never made a deal with Tevinter but were instead enslaved by the Venatori
can you tell me what sort of person Rhys is like I haven't read Asunder. However IIRC he had a friendship with cole, thus making him better IMO.
If they were enslaved outright, then yea I would feel different, then it is the tevinters just enslaving a group of mages. Not a leader declaring "freedom!" with no thought of 1.) what does this entail and 2.) how to get there. Fiona is an inept leader. The rebel mages need someone like ser baris on there side.
She should have waited until she had finished preparations for the inevitable war that she was inciting. By rebelling, she basically turned every single mage in Theda's into public enemy number one with a giant red target on their backs saying "Templars strike here." They had nowhere to go, they had no idea of how to live outside of the circle, and they had no way of surviving. By forcing the vote to rebel multule times, she threw every mage to the wolves without any regard for their lives because she couldn't be bothered to think of how to prepare for what she brings upon them. She is a failure of a leader to such a degree that it makes my blood boil that anyone can even try to defend her.
She could have also timed it better. I think Vivienne has a bit of snark about
She picked a fight with a group of people who have been trained for years to counter her forces. The only comparison that I can think of is the mages are rebels with hand guns and she picked a fight with a tank division that was already in the field.
The Arab Spring revolts, perhaps?
Considering how experienced so many of those regimes were at suppressing dissent, is anyone surprised at how it turned out at the end?
(Key to success: win the favor of the security patron of the country you're rebelling against.)
The mage-templar war lasted serveral months. We don't know much about the war before the conclave was destroyed, but it seems that there wasn't a clear winner. I think that would have only been possible with some kind of preparation.
Fiona claims she was losing... perhaps the only credible assessment she gives, considering that by the time of DAI the only rebellious mages in the field are those in the Hinterlands.
And if Fiona was that incompetent the rebellion wouldn't have lasted for as long as it has (unless the templars were just as incompetent)..
Nah. Even incompetently led rebellions take awhile to put down, especially when they are both geographically dispersed (across southern Thedas) and you don't have the luxury of modern transportation to move your armies around. Factor in the nature of campaign seasons, and three years to bottle it up in the hinterlands is actually pretty quick.
I'm starting to wonder how much opposition to the mages is hate against Fiona rather than mages in general. Would there still be as much hate if say Fiona died at the conclave and Rhys was the leader of the mages?
If Rhys made the same sort of errors?
Rhys's defense would be that he wasn't involved in pushing the initial revolt. He'd still be a bad leader who made the bad call, but there'd be far less responsibility or expectation on him to have been a good leader.
or if the mages never made a deal with Tevinter but were instead enslaved by the Venatori
That would depend on the circumstances in which they were enslaved. The Templars deservedly get held responsible for not noticing the corruption in their own ranks.
Rhys would be in the bad position of trying to fix Fiona's mess, I'd feel sorry for him. And if he accepted Alexius' offer, I'd still judge him harshly, but feel sorry for him.
Good thing Rhys made the smart decision then, and got the **** out of dodge.
She should have waited until she had finished preparations for the inevitable war that she was inciting. By rebelling, she basically turned every single mage in Theda's into public enemy number one with a giant red target on their backs saying "Templars strike here." They had nowhere to go, they had no idea of how to live outside of the circle, and they had no way of surviving. By forcing the vote to rebel multule times, she threw every mage to the wolves without any regard for their lives because she couldn't be bothered to think of how to prepare for what she brings upon them. She is a failure of a leader to such a degree that it makes my blood boil that anyone can even try to defend her.
She picked a fight with a group of people who have been trained for years to counter her forces. The only comparison that I can think of is the mages are rebels with hand guns and she picked a fight with a tank division that was already in the field.
Okay, this is ridiculous since the Mages kind of won the war.
It's a miserable UNNECESSARY war but the Templars were at the negotiating table.
Which is all they needed in the first place.
The only truly sad thing about it all is the war was probably "won" when Cole assassinated Lambert.
Lambert was pushing to disband the Mage's government completely, a Circle was just annulled for sketchy reasons (which were not shared with the College of Enchanters), and First Enchanters had just been killed. It was Lambert's intention to eliminate the parity which had existed between the Enchanters and Templars and make the former subordinate to the latter.
THAT'S what prompted the war. People who think the war was inevitable or that Fiona is at fault miss the fact it very much was something which could have been avoided and there was a lot of room to compromise on, especially once Lambert was dead.
Lambert was pushing to disband the Mage's government completely
Factually inaccurate.
Anders had already strained relations, Fiona had the college closed and then she refused compromise that would have enabled peaceful coexistence.
The fault of the war beginning is entirely on the side that scoffed at peace.The Mages.The Seekers
Fixed that for you. Its fully acknowledged in the game that the seekers along with lord seeker Lambert are the most responsible. As Cassandra puts it: "The seekers have failed, without question".
Fixed that for you.
Hardly.
You cannot dismiss personal action.
Which in this case entirely led to war from the magi spectrum.
Vivi plainly admitted this as well.
Lambert viewed mages as animals that needed to be put down, not people. This and the fact that Lambert wanted to overthrow the Divine or make her a Seeker puppet clearly indicate he simply wanted to kill the mages. He was a mage hater plain and simple. Cassandra even admits he deserved to die.
Lambert viewed mages as animals that needed to be put down, not people. This and the fact that Lambert wanted to overthrow the Divine or make her a Seeker puppet clearly indicate he simply wanted to kill the mages. He was a mage hater plain and simple. Cassandra even admits he deserved to die.
Factually inaccurate.
Anders had already strained relations, Fiona had the college closed and then she refused compromise that would have enabled peaceful coexistence.
The fault of the war beginning is entirely on the side that scoffed at peace.
The Mages.
The compromise was the disbanding of the College of Enchanters.
There's not really a way to spin that.
The compromise was the disbanding of the College of Enchanters.
There's not really a way to spin that.
He actually expressed the opposite.
He views magic as a terrible thing to inflict upon people.
He even gave the mages a final out to prevent fighting in Asunder, he would have let the first enchanters, even that moron Fiona leave and return to their circles.
Only after she betrayed him, his order and the Templars.
No she doesn't.
She said she believed Cole.
Cole never lies, he says what's in people's hearts. Considering what Cole says, Lambert was simply looking for an excuse to kill the mages. He always knew tranquility could be cured but was perfectly willing to keep it a secret before the cat was out of the bag.
Maybe you should listen to Cole on Lambert again.Cole never lies, he says what's in people's hearts.
Like Meredith, Lambert gets retconned by Inquisition into something much worse I fear.
Lambert was trying to protect the Seekers from being exposed as ex-Tranquil as much as the Mages being kept from such a cure.
Lambert knew once it was revealed they'd always had a cure for Tranquility and possibly demonic possession, the Seekers would be disbanded.
Lambert was the one who started the war
Retour en haut