235 réponses à ce sujet

[Marshal Moriarty]

Its all in how they are portrayed. Up until Inquisition, the Mages main representation on screen has been that of the oppressed slave. They are the outcasts, the ostracized - and people tend to sympathize with that. Also take into account that Mages represent what many gamers and readers want to be - someone with remarkable powers that help them go beyond the banality of the mundane world etc etc,Meanwhile Templars have the unfortunate position of being the people who restrain that freedom, which is never going to endear them to these aforementioned people. They are the 'No you can't!' to the Mages 'Yes we can!'

 

As with all representations of Knights and Magicians, it depends what role they are seen to inhabit, In games where the Templars' role is to restrict and enforce, they seem like 'The Man' and with their intimidating full face helms and large, armoured presences they seem very threatening and dangerous. But in Inquisition, it is flagging up their status as Knights and Champions, and people *really* love things like that (the whole King Arthur ideal - its pretty much the foundation of the appeal of the lore in games like Dark Souls, for example).

 

By the same token, if you focus on Mages as shadowy, political schemers, and/or people who dabble in magics that threaten the world around them, they will start to lose the support of the audience (Basically if the game wants you to sympathize with any given spellcaster, it calls them Mages because that sounds friendly and non threatening. If it wants them to be mysterious, it calls them Wizards or add words like Fade and Sky to their title. if it wants them to seem dangerous it calls them Sorcerors or adds Blood or Death to the name etc), If mages cast in their lot with the enemies, people will also not support them (the Mages join Corypheus out of desperation, but nevertheless do so willingly, whereas the Templars are essentially drugged and poisoned before they join). The Mage's desire for freedom is not gone into in much detail in this game, making their rebellion seem far less justifiable than it did in previous games, whereas the Templars desire to protect the people is flagged up much more this time.

 

Plus the amount of Mages who have ulterior motives of the most dangerous sort are piling up. 'A Mage did it' could be the series catchphrase at this point. With the Magisters invading the Golden City and causing the Blights (which unless some kind of solution is found, will eventually destroy the world, as the darkspawn keep breeding), Anders blowing up the Chantry, Solas and his magic Orb 'o' Destruction, Corypheus, the various schemes of Morrigan and Flemeth, Alexius trading the lives of everyone in Theads for that of his son, and a whole legion of well meaning fools like Avernus and Merrill messing about with forces they should;t...

 

Is it any wonder that the people of Theads mistrust magic?

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

Coming from someone who saved the mages in 1 and sided with them in 2, I had a very easy time siding with the templars in 3. And Fiona certainly played a large part in that, alongside Ser Barris.

[chr0n0mancer]

There was no logical reason for it, and we've had developers say that it was done because they needed another boss battle for the pro-mage playthrough. It's even brought up by the Inquisitor, who literally tells Varric that Orsino becoming a 'Super-Abomination' (as the developers called it) made absolutely no sense.

Yeah, I remember hearing something about him just doing that because bioware wanted another boss fight. I was laughing when I saw you could call Varric out for it making no sense.

[Ashagar]

And Karras the Mage raper. And Alrich aka Hugo Strange. And every Templar that wasn't named Kieran or Cullen.

 

The good Templar Emeric would like to have a word with you, well he would if he hadn't gotten killed doing his duty hunting a blood mage serial killer as would the Templar Moria. 

[Aaleel]

There was no logical reason for it, and we've had developers say that it was done because they needed another boss battle for the pro-mage playthrough. It's even brought up by the Inquisitor, who literally tells Varric that Orsino becoming a 'Super-Abomination' (as the developers called it) made absolutely no sense.

 

And Varric disapproves when you say it lol.

[fhs33721]

And Karras the Mage raper. And Alrich aka Hugo Strange. And every Templar that wasn't named Kieran or Cullen.

Even Cullen makes the templars seem like total jerks for the most part of DA2. Only in Act 3 he developes some redeeming qualities. In Act 1 he stands around in the Gallows and insists on things like:" You can not treat mages like people." and in Act 2 he says something along the line of :"Ser Alriks solution might have been more merciful than what else is to come."

[Daerog]

Its all in how they are portrayed. Up until Inquisition, the Mages main representation on screen has been that of the oppressed slave. 

 

Finn really enjoyed his life in the Circle and preferred it, so there are his very supportive voice and Wynne's accepting voice. However, most main cast mages were opposed to it, I agree.

[Helmetto]

So, he is motivated by a general hatred of everyone in Kirkwall. Be they a Templar who enjoys beating mages, a Templar who is just doing his job, a working mother whose husband just passed away and has a couple of children to feed or her children who barely know what a mage is.

 

And that justifies his actions? Because mages in Kirkwall has it hard. In Thedas, a crapsack world.

 

You know, if those are your standards, I'm not surprised you believe there is a bias against Templars.

 

Feeling sympathetic toward someone does not mean you think their actions were justified. They're two entirely different things.

 

It's hard to think about the small people when they're people that you've probably not only never met, but take absolutely no fraction of your life at all. And considering that the multitude of people around you are suffering, you tend to doubt the legitimacy of the "goodness" in the people you deal with.

[The Baconer]

Its all in how they are portrayed. Up until Inquisition, the Mages main representation on screen has been that of the oppressed slave.

 

Not really. Even at its worst, the life of a Circle mage is a far cry from Saarebas.

[MisterJB]

I will argue, with the devs themselves if I must, that Orsino's actions made perfect sense if we take his character into account.

 

Take a look at the quote from his codex entry:

 

“You deny us our freedom so that you may sleep better at night, but I say it is a restless and undeserved slumber.”

 

What can you take from it? Resentment. Orsino clearly resented the normal population. 

Then, what did Orsino do? He covered for Quentin because he feared Meredith would take even harsher measures if he was discovered.

What does this tell us? That, in order to protect the mages, Orsino was perfectly willing to sacrifice the lives of every non-mage his serial killer friend would target.

 

Then, we reach the endgame. 

I know that through Hawke we feel we are winning but we are not. Kirkwall has the largest contigent of Templars in Eastern Thedas. There was never any chance of winning that battle. Every single mage who did not escape was going to die. Period.

So, every mage will die, he clearly does not care about the lives of non-mages as evidenced by the above and he is about to be killed by the person he hates the most in the world, Meredith.

So, what does he do? He creates a monster that kills indiscriminately because, after all, the mages were already dead and he did not care for collateral damage therefore, might as well make sure Meredith dies with him.

[Daerog]

Feeling sympathetic toward someone does not mean you think their actions were justified. They're two entirely different things.

 

It's hard to think about the small people when they're people that you've probably not only never met, but take absolutely no fraction of your life at all. And considering that the multitude of people around you are suffering, you tend to doubt the legitimacy of the "goodness" in the people you deal with.

 

I really get what you mean, I'm not arguing against it, just want to point out that not everyone around Orsino was suffering.

 

Bethany was quite content and happy within the Circle. If the Circle was such a hell hole (oddly, Kirkwall is literally one), why were some mages enjoying themselves there at times? We never actually got to see inside the Circle, a lot of bad things did happen, but it wasn't on every mage...

[MisterJB]

Feeling sympathetic toward someone does not mean you think their actions were justified. They're two entirely different things.

 

It's hard to think about the small people when they're people that you've probably not only never met, but take absolutely no fraction of your life at all. And considering that the multitude of people around you are suffering, you tend to doubt the legitimacy of the "goodness" in the people you deal with.

And you do not think that the same applies to the citizens of Kirkwall in regard to the mages?

[Helmetto]

I agree with your assessment. It's valid. I also have had trouble getting "encouraged" to choose the templars. I want to save the Templars from themselves in the next run-through when the patches fix my PC version of the game. I know what you mean that you feel compelled to peer pressure to choose the mages. However, that makes for a brilliant story angle. When the game is fixed, I'm going all paladin-like and telling the templars to mount up and save Thedas.

To each his own, I guess. I dunno, I feel like I'm being told that it's "balanced" and "impartial" toward both sides, and as a player, I don't see why my character would side with the Templars when there's a lot of compelling reasons not to intervene with the mages.

[llandwynwyn]

This. You're the First ****** Enchanter of a Circle of Magi. You should be putting down maleficarum, not enabling them. Look at Irving, his Circle (barring a couple bad eggs) was so chill they had books on blood magic in their library. Orsino definitely had ulterior motives and while I don't blame and even protected his subordinates in DA2 nothing... nothing justified his actions.

 

That's because Irving was a piece of **** that toyed with weak minded apprentices, enabling Uldred in the process. Corrupted old goat just as Orsino.

 

I will argue, with the devs themselves if I must, that Orsino's actions made perfect sense if we take is character into account.
 
Take a look at the quote from his codex entry:
 
“You deny us our freedom so that you may sleep better at night, but I say it is a restless and undeserved slumber.”
 
What can you take from it? Resentment. Orsino clearly resented the normal population.
Then, what did Orsino do? He covered for Quentin because he feared Meredith would take even harsher measures if he was discovered.
What does this tell us? That, in order to protect the mages, Orsino was perfectly willing to sacrifice the lives of every non-mage his serial killer friend would target.
 
Then, we reach the endgame.
I know that through Hawke we fell we are winning but we are not. Kirkwall has the largest contigent of Templars in Eastern Thedas. There was never any chance of winning that battle. Every single mage who did not escape was going to die. Period.
So, every mage will die, he clearly does not care about the lives of non-mages as evidenced by the above and he is about to be killed by the person he hates the most in the world, Meredith?
So, what does he do? He creates a monster that kills indiscriminately because, after all, the mages were already and he did not care for collateral damage therefore, might as well make sure Meredith dies with him.

 

Thank you for your post, so many people miss that.

[DementedSheep]

In DAI I actually think the Templars have the better quest and it gives you the better villain but with how it is set up I feel it pushes you more towards mages. You go to city and meet the Lord Seeker and he is a complete jackass who won't give you the time of day. There might be something going on because Cass says he's not usually like that and there is one who isn't happy about what he is doing  but it's not really urgent. You then have to spend power and lock into the Templars to get any further. After that you meet Fiona who is willing to at least talk. You go to Redclif, find out the mages have been stupid and allied with Tevinter who have taken over the castle, there is a Tevinter cult out to get you with time travel shenanigans and you meet Dorian who asks for your help. By the time you have to spend power and lock in to continue you know much more about the plight of the mages and while it doesn't paint the mages in a great light, its not something you should just ditch.

[The Baconer]

I know that through Hawke we fell we are winning but we are not. Kirkwall has the largest contigent of Templars in Eastern Thedas. There was never any chance of winning that battle. Every single mage who did not escape was going to die. Period.

 

[...]

 

So, what does he do? He creates a monster that kills indiscriminately because, after all, the mages were already and he did not care for collateral damage therefore, might as well make sure Meredith dies with him.

 

Actually sounds, uh, not as insane when you put it that way.

[Ashagar]

To each his own, I guess. I dunno, I feel like I'm being told that it's "balanced" and "impartial" toward both sides, and as a player, I don't see why my character would side with the Templars when there's a lot of compelling reasons not to intervene with the mages.

 

Its what makes the game good depending on views people find strong reasons to side with the Templars or they find strong reasons to side with the mages. Personally I find it extremely hard to side with the mages just from what I find in Redcliff much less the rest of the hinterlands.

[Daerog]

I will argue, with the devs themselves if I must, that Orsino's actions made perfect sense if we take is character into account.

 

Take a look at the quote from his codex entry:

 

“You deny us our freedom so that you may sleep better at night, but I say it is a restless and undeserved slumber.”

 

What can you take from it? Resentment. Orsino clearly resented the normal population. 

Then, what did Orsino do? He covered for Quentin because he feared Meredith would take even harsher measures if he was discovered.

What does this tell us? That, in order to protect the mages, Orsino was perfectly willing to sacrifice the lives of every non-mage his serial killer friend would target.

 

Then, we reach the endgame. 

I know that through Hawke we fell we are winning but we are not. Kirkwall has the largest contigent of Templars in Eastern Thedas. There was never any chance of winning that battle. Every single mage who did not escape was going to die. Period.

So, every mage will die, he clearly does not care about the lives of non-mages as evidenced by the above and he is about to be killed by the person he hates the most in the world, Meredith?

So, what does he do? He creates a monster that kills indiscriminately because, after all, the mages were already and he did not care for collateral damage therefore, might as well make sure Meredith dies with him.

 

I agree, except I'll add he was also okay with one of the Circle mages being kidnapped and killed for a blood magic ritual... or he was ignorant and was not interested in the disappearance of an elderly Circle mage.

 

He doesn't even ask Hawke to look for a missing mage who, rumor had it, had an admirer that she was going to go see (it seems she was able to leave the Circle, too...). A Templar... one who is going outside his duties since the Order told him to drop it, so good for him... had to ask for Hawke's help.

 

Still, Orsino was resentful and had no love for non-mages, I agree with that. He ended up being in a hopeless situation and just decided to make his end as spiteful as he could, which even Cullen advised the Inquisitor to do when Cory was destroying Haven...

[Marshal Moriarty]

But however you pretty it up, you will never convince a player (who values their freedom to roam) that being stuck in a Mage Tower is a good thing. You can talk all you like about positive examples and of Mages who support, but you the player never had to live through that reality, You leave the Tower in the intro, and then as a Warden are free to roam as you please, That is not the reality of most mages, and the vast majority of players would be (and were) opposed to such an idea because it is something they would never want for themselves.

 

Ask yourself how interesting Origins would be if a Mage character were treated like other Mages. You are not confined to the tower, or kept on a short leash like the other mages, You do not have people treating you like a dangerous outcast, because your status as Warden supercedes that. Solas makes a point that is basically referencing this kind of thing when he speaks to Vivienne, as he criticizes such armchair philosophy. Its all well and good saying the Circle is necessary and beneficial when you are a Mage who never has to live in one or be confined by one, By a similar token, the player (even if play as a Mage) does not have the experience of the Circle, of being an everyday member of the Circle. Your mages are always free to roam, so any opinions you have on the Circles serving a function and being necessary will seem like utter hypocrisy,

 

As soon as you start talking about a group having its freedoms in any way curtailed, you instantly win over a large section of the audience who don't agree with such oppression, any oppression. Some characters may be okay with it, but many of those are older, 'establishment' figures like Irving and Wynne - people who are associated with lecturing and conservative values, people who (to many gamer's minds) represent different but no less antagonistic forms of restriction and authority,

[thesuperdarkone2]

But you can blame Orsino for turning into a harvester after an easy fight, and while surrounded with nothing but allies. Seriously, what was going through his head at that time...

Bad writing. The devs outright admit that you weren't supposed to fight Orsino if you sided with the mages but the devs decided the endgame needed another boss so he went full derp if you side with mages. Inquisition even pokes fun at this.

[Helmetto]

And you do not think that the same applies to the citizens of Kirkwall in regard to the mages?

I think if you asked the citizens of Kirkwall they'd all be pretty happy that the mages are locked up in their towers.

 

Kirkwall was far more aware of its mages, than the mages were of them.

 

I really get what you mean, I'm not arguing against it, just want to point out that not everyone around Orsino was suffering.

 

Bethany was quite content and happy within the Circle. If the Circle was such a hell hole (oddly, Kirkwall is literally one), why were some mages enjoying themselves there at times? We never actually got to see inside the Circle, a lot of bad things did happen, but it wasn't on every mage...

 

Human Treadmill, first of all. Psychology also says that you also tend to focus more on the negatives than the good.

 

And I agree that not everybody hated life with the circle. In fact, if you go to Redcliffe and talk with the people there, the sheer majority of the people you talk to wish the circles hadn't rebelled/split apart. In fact, the choice TO disband hardly had a majority vote. But that's what Orsino saw: suffering. I don't think a lot of things in Kirkwall proved otherwise.