232 réponses à ce sujet

[Karlone123]

I am on the side of the Templars, although I am in support of Cassandra's views of Templars being protectors and not judge, jury and executioner of Mages. And Mages being allowed to serve in the Chantry.

[atamajakki]

I've been a hardline Templar from Origins onward. The mages really don't make it easy to sympathize with them, what with all the possession and blood magic.

[Barquiel]

I support mages more so than templars. I have been anti-circle since DAO and that has not changed for DA2 or DAI. I think Leliana's/Fiona's reformed college of enchanters is a good approach because the templar caused more problems than they solved.

[RavenousIron]

I'm always pro Mages. Even when I'm not playing a Mage I always vote for them. I think they should be free to govern themselves and that's one of the main reasons Lily was picked as the next Divine in my game. No one should feel like they're being watched for the rest of their lives because they've been given a gift they didn't ask for. I think they should be watched over by their own kind, not by some Templar that would bully them and make them feel like a monster every chance they get. Now I know all Templar's are not the same but most of them are horrible people that hate Mages and everything they stand for. So, yes I'm pro Mage. Until the day I day die I will always vouch for the Mages freedom.

[berrieh]

I'm basically on the side of anyone who wants to solve the problem of magic in Thedas openly and safely with reasonable reforms and freedoms but some mandated training and some kind of force like the Templars. Whether or not they belong to the Chantry, I'm not sure I care any more. I used to be very anti-Chantry, but honestly, I think the average person in Thedas is more helped by the Chantry than hindered. 

 

When I first played DAO, I started out very anti-Chantry, very pro-Mage, but mildly respectful of the Templars (while being very skeptical of them, since Alistair told me some stuff that made me skeptical). My first character (female City Elf) wasn't necessarily these things (though she was close), but it was my initial impression. In DA:A, I agreed with Anders almost entirely and saw no problem with him running off. However, then I read more, played the actual Circle origin, and considered the kinds of choices Templars have to make and the reasons they exist. I began to see both sides. In DA2, I at first saw the Mage side super-clearly but in re-playing could see both sides (and that both sides were basically terrible). I also noticed that Kirkwall was clearly not a normal Circle (I didn't need Viv to tell me that in this game - DA2 conveys it fairly clearly). 

 

After reading Asunder, I was even less convinced that the Mages were justified. Their rebellion started on such bad terms. Yes, Lord Seeker Lambert was awful, but he really just played into the hands of extremist mages - his biggest crime was stupidity. A few select mages (or maybe one if you believe she acted alone - I don't buy it) pushed all the other mages to this bloody revolution, by force and treachery, and most of them didn't even want it. They would never have voted on it honestly. This didn't make me less on the side of the average mage - just the revolution. 

 

As to Inquisition, I think it's clearly better for Thedas, as a whole, to save the Templars. Ser Barris and his men go around doing a lot of good for people (includong Mages who are still being hunted) while Fiona sits in her Tower. That doesn't mean I prefer the mission - I've said otherwise in another thread - but as to what's better for the masses, I think saving the Templars is far more crucial. Other than that, it hasn't changed my opinions - I suppose they're more firmly set by now. The problem is extremists on all sides - mages unwilling to admit or even see that their magic makes them more powerful and dangerous than a person ought to be and that a few natural concessions are reasonable and that reforms can be gained without extremism and templars unwilling to see themselves as a shield as well as a sword who feel they are more destined to hunt and cage mages than to simply help control the dangers of magic.

 

Basically my view is - Mages and templars need to work together, much like the cowboy and the farmer in Oklahoma (see a musical), they should be friends. And sometimes you need a friend to stab you in the chest if you fall to a demon. 

 

As to the Chantry, I can see why Mages and Templars might need a 3rd party. My agnostic RL self was not a fan of the Chantry at first but it has grown on me. I would prefer a more neutral and less "Magic ate my baby" (the actual religious doctrine is slightly anti-Mage or interpreted as such too often) group as the 3rd party, but who? It cannot be the country's government, or it will be too disparate. Maybe a whole new 3rd party need be invented for this - perhaps that is what something like the Inquisition can do, but that's a fairly scary thought. Assuming there are still Tranquil, I kind of want to put them in charge of settling disputes. I think for the Tranquil to be the true power of some new kind of Mage+Templar Circles would be a strange kind of poetic justice and also effective - they would always find the most efficient and fair solutions, if that was their aim, without passion or personal ambition. (I want to emphasize here I am not suggesting anyone be made or left Tranquil against their will, but many do choose it willingly because they do not believe they can resist temptation or could, in theory, if this idea worked, choose it willingly to lead for the greater good.) 

[leaguer of one]

Magic is extremely dangerous in the world of Thedas; and mages absolutely must learn how to control their powers so they are not a danger to themselves or others. So for that reason, the Circles, as places where mages can not only study but also find the support of people going through the same thing, are critical. But Circles as prisons don't work. You can't imprison someone for something they might do. I like Vivienne's position the most - keep the Circles as institutions, and retain the Templars for safety. But Templars do not rule over mages; and abolish the Rite of Tranquility as a punishment and retain it only for a last-resort for an incompetent mage who would otherwise have to be executed. 

But Cassandra wants what you want as well.

[Eterna]

Spoiler

 

What if their freedom impedes my freedom because they summon demons and light me on fire? 

[leaguer of one]

What if their freedom impedes my freedom because they summon demons and light me on fire? 

It's freedom. Not freedom with no regulation.

[Dark Helmet]

What if their freedom impedes my freedom because they summon demons and light me on fire? 

 

Well that was just your fault then.

 

Filthy plebs shouldn't get in the way of their glorious mage masters...

[WolfForce99]

The rebel mages had the protection of redcliffe and the fereldan king.  Tevinter and Blood magic are reasonable enough reasons as to why the rebel mages in redcliffe should be controlled in some fashion atleast. I'm not against mages like Wynne, irwin, vivianne etc walking free since they are mature and reasonable. Its mages like Fiona, Anders and the Ostwick MWHAHAHA Tevinter idolizer turned blood mage girl from the redcliffe pub that needs controlling.

When you say rebel mages, are you refering to the mages outside of Redcliffe? Because if you are, Corporal Vale tells the inquisitor that the Redcliffe mages do not support the mages outside Redcliffe. And that they've washed there hands of them. If you don't believe me go to the hinterlands and talk to him about the mages while the fighting is going on.

[Ogillardetta]

When you say rebel mages, are you refering to the mages outside of Redcliffe? Because if you are, Corporal Vale tells the inquisitor that the Redcliffe mages do not support the mages outside Redcliffe. And that they've washed there hands of them. If you don't believe me go to the hinterlands and talk to him about the mages while the fighting is going on.

No by rebel mages I mean the Tevinter allying smartasses that had the protection and support of king Alistair and redcliffe.

[Warden Commander Aeducan]

Filthy plebs shouldn't get in the way of their glorious mage masters...

Power Mad Mage no.1: I'm sorry I can't hear you over the sound of muh FREEDOM.

 

Power Mad Mage no.2: Filthy peasants dare touch my robe, **** those mundane. 

 

Power Mad Mage no.3: Who cares about regulation, law or human ethics, and moral. We have FREEDOM to throw a fireball at people and shoot lightning at fools.

 

 

[carolxs]

I find it difficult to agree with mages being killed and made tranquil for every little thing, so I usually side with them... Critically. But I just finished the In Hushed Whispers quest and I feel like I made a bad decision, maybe because everyone is judging the Inquisitor now. Why can't I do both quests and be friends with everyone? =P

[Steelcan]

Team Templars as part of the Inquisition

[Zarb the Bard]

In the context of the mage rebellion, I'm more in support of the Templars than I am of the mages. For one, the idea of a warrior designed to nullify magic just sounds awesome to me. And secondly, after what Orsino did at the end of the second game, I can no longer support the mages. The Templars, for the most part, are just doing what they feel they must. Obviously, there are exceptions to this, but for the most part, I feel like the Templars are in the right. But, with that in mind, I want the mages to be more or less free to come and go from the Circles, once the mages are adequately skilled with their gift. I'd rather the Circles be sort of a school for magic, rather than a prison where mages are forced to live forever. 

[Decepticon Leader Sully]

Idino.. im all for the guys that win.

[VoidOfOne]

Mages. Always mages. Let them run their own lives and they will better appreciate their powers and do better for all.

[earl of the north]

1st Playthrough, Noble Human warrior = Templars

 

2nd Playthrough, Mercenary Qunari mage = Mages

 

Planned 3rd Playthrough, Dwarven rogue = Templars, and probably for the 4th, 5th etc as well since I found the Templar mission much more interesting than the Mages mission.....also demon problem, best to go with the military force trained to fight demons.

 

Oh and Fiona is an idiot and we get to make the world a better place without her, so bonus right there.

[pottman]

Screw the Templars, Mage FREEDOM!!!

[leadintea]

Templars. I don't need a mage that has anger issues burning down a whole block just because they're in one of their fits nor a weak mage that will succumb to a demon, turn into an abomination, and destroy entire villages just for fun.

[Current Future]

For me, the Mage Rebellion boils down into these 3 points;

1. Chantry Oversight - The Templar Order was the military arm of the Chantry for how many years?  Having a religious power overseeing a military operation is a recipe for abuse; a real world parallel would be the Catholic Church supervising the U.S. Army Delta Forces.  Many (if not all) of the Chantry's major players act as if faith is fact; Mother Giselle is, by far, the worst.  Talking with her after "In Your Heart Shall Burn" about the identity and revelations of the villain... (being general to try and avoid spoilers) ...anyway, I wanted a Renegade Interrupt to shut her up so bad.  
2. Too Wide Spread - Getting disparate nations to agree on what to order for lunch can be a back-breaking, time consuming task.  Getting them to agree on 1 (albeit major) issue would take decades, maybe even an entire Age... and this is the best the could come up with?  When the fastest method of long-range communication is messenger bird... and what binds those chosen (Seekers) to oversee these principles?  A treaty... did they not realize treaties can be broken, especially with nothing to enforce them, like a U.N.?  Or was the Chantry was supposed to be that too?
3. Abuses of power/authority on both sides - While points 1 & 2 have to do with the framers of the broken system, this issue is aimed directly at the current parties.  Granted we've only seen the extremes, on both sides: "Broken Circle" in Origins showcases the Mage's faults and pretty much the entirety of II exposes the Templar's.

Long story short, I'm neither Pro-Templar or Pro-Mage; I'm Pro-Stuff-not-getting-blown-the-hell-up. If I had to pick one, however, it'd probably be Templars; if only for the fact that Templar extremists aren't threats to everyone the way Mage extremists are.

[TheDragonOfWhy]

What if their freedom impedes my freedom because they summon demons and light me on fire?

You shouldn't wear flammable clothes then.

Team Mage. My 'canon' is alway Mage hero, pro Mage. Though I do make a crapsake world of all the wrong choices with is anti-Mage and what not.
Also if you recruit the mages in DAI you get to spend more time with Cullen. So there's that.

[Livi14]

I am pro-Mage freedom, especially after DA:I. The game showed me that templars are completely unnecessary. At the end of my game, mages had unprecedented acceptance without the "protection" of templars or circles.