235 réponses à ce sujet

[Gaz83]

Templar's 4 life!

*Throws up gang sign resembling the letter "t"

 

In Britain, that's how we great close friends. 

[rigron]

Releasing what amounts to a biological weapon of mass destruction in the middle of a city state is understandable?

 

As understandable as killing thousands of innocents, including children just because of "maybe" after the acts of a single person who by the way was possessed by a Fade entity.

[Helmetto]

As understandable as killing thousands of innocents, including children just because of "maybe" after the acts of a single person who by the way was possessed by a Fade entity.

 

I'm pretty sure nobody actually thinks of the civilian casualties that their weapon of mass destruction will cause, especially when the one behind it is thinking about other things.

 

Was Orsino a selfish bastard? Yes. Was what he did justified? No. Was he thinking of the children? Of course not.

 

Maybe if there were more children thrown at his face he would've reconsidered.

[thesuperdarkone2]

I'm pretty sure nobody actually thinks of the civilian casualties that their weapon of mass destruction will cause, especially when the one behind it is thinking about other things.

 

Was Orsino a selfish bastard? Yes. Was what he did justified? No. Was he thinking of the children? Of course not.

 

Maybe if there were more children thrown at his face he would've reconsidered.

I think he was talking about Anders. The morality argument kinds of falls apart when you agree to kill an entire group of people for something you know they didn't do. Gaider himself outright confirmed that the Gallows mages were completely innocent of aiding Anders.

[thesuperdarkone2]

I hope when we visit Tevinter in the next game, we'll meet a few magister's who aren't all HURR HURR BLOODMAGIC. I want to see a different side of Tevinter.

 

So far we've only seen and heard the bad sides.

If it actually turns out that Tevinter actually isn't as bad as people think and they wind up getting the same treatment the Templars got in this game, I think the pro-templars would rage since one of the arguments begins to fall apart.

[mireisen]

Yeah I find that the mage story is a little overplayed here. I get it. Even for a female mage it gets interesting. Cullen's romance becomes a little more flushed out because of it. I played mages in all three games. I agree that it feels like they want you to support or help mages...A LOT. I almost think that mages are the majority in Thedas. Everyone seems to be a mage. You've got three as your companions in DAI although statistically you probably should have one at best. 

 

I went back and forth. Pro-mage DAO, pro-templar DA2 (because Anders just got on my nerves), and then pro-mage in DAI ONLY because I got Dorian sooner. I don't like Fiona either-even with her backstory. I guess I'm very Asian for not having sympathies on "self-responsibility". Fiona's made plenty of dumb choices to land her in bad situations, so no help from me-conscript them all!

[Helmetto]

If it actually turns out that Tevinter actually isn't as bad as people think and they wind up getting the same treatment the Templars got in this game, I think the pro-templars would rage since one of the arguments begins to fall apart.

 

No, then it'd be Templars vs. Mages "Plus that one bad apple."

 

Tevinter is basically considered and has been presented as Evil. Not because they're mages. But because you know, they're the ones who fucked everything up, made the maker turn away from anybody, burned their prophet to ashes?

 

Being mages is just sprinkles on that cupcake.

[berelinde]

Actually, I thought they got the balance about right this time. In DAO, siding with the templars or with the mages didn't matter all that much. You could get Wynne either way, if that's what you wanted to do. In DA2, siding with the templars made me feel as if I kicked puppies for a hobby. I did it once for the achievement, but doing so filled me with self-loathing, and I had to start a violently pro-mage playthrough immediately afterward to get the taste out. But this time, it seemed less evil to side with the templars. Yes, there were insane, power-mad templars aplenty, especially if you did In Hushed Whispers, but if you did Champions of the Just, Ser Barris seemed like a decent sort, as did the various templars involved in his War Table operations. So yeah, I'll probably always prefer to side with the mages for preference, but at least this time, I didn't feel monstrous for doing a pro-templar run.

[Milan92]

If it actually turns out that Tevinter actually isn't as bad as people think and they wind up getting the same treatment the Templars got in this game, I think the pro-templars would rage since one of the arguments begins to fall apart.

What is it with "pro templars this" and "pro templars that".

[Bethgael]

I do think that the "oppressed templar" position was also attempted in DA:O--especially if you like Alistair enough to talk to him about it. He's the first to let you know that the Templars are leashed by the Chantry, for example, something Cassandra elaborates on in DA:I when you do Cullen's lyrium-addict miniquest. ("The mages have made their suffering known, but the Templars never have.")

 

You see the older Templars in Denerim, for example, the oldest being completely addled. You have the jailed Templar in Howe's basement that Loghain grabbed Jowan from in full lyrium withdrawal. You see a Templar (Cullen) after having been tortured for weeks (at least, longer if the Circle quest isn't done first, given the game spans a year). In the mage origin, you see that same Templar before his torture: someone who will do his duty, sure, but who doesn't actually like the killing bit (his attitude changes somewhat after the Circle falls. Can't... think... why....). And anther one in the Hold, who is taken by a desire demon because he wanted a family (cf: "humanising the subject"). Wynne is not anti-Templar (Rhys' father was a Templar, although that is in the EU, so doesn't count for the games). In fact, it is the lyrium leashing shown in DA:O that made me think after DA2, "well, Anders, I strongly disagree with your actions, but I sure don't disagree with your target: who the real problem here is." Greagoir and Irving actually get along pretty well, despite some disagreement in the Mage Origin, and Greagoir trusts Irving's judgement re: the Kinloch Hold fall, if the Warden doesn't make the decision him/herself, over that of his own (clearly traumatised) Templar. Wynne talks about the kindness of a Templar who took her to the Circle (he gave her sweets and a piggy back ride), and how she felt like she was at home in the Circle. A counterpoint to Morrigan, who finds all Templars stupid (in fact, they get a good education), and who was happy to kill them (but then again, Morrigan actually pushes you to agree to Annul the Circle when you first meet Wynne, so, yeah--that's clearly "pro-mage").

 

DA2, the first time you meet any Templar other than Wesley is during a quest string in which a blood mage turns out to be attempting to have Templars installed with demons (or failing that, being food for the installations). Anders and Merrill give you approval if you agree to kill Thrask, the only Templar thus far to have shown himself to be truly sympathetic towards the Gallows' mages. (I always RP my Hawke getting him home and literally Gibbs-smacking him for that bit of idiocy if they're in a romance). Oh, and then Thrask gets killed by a mage... that he helped... for his leniency. Which happens because she hates Hawke.... even if Hawke lets her go free--because apparently it was Hawke's fault they were captured by Meredith, later. /desk, meet head.

 

Perhaps the "attempt at equal representation for both sides" and "there are real problems on both sides" was too subtle for some?

 

(I do tend to side with the mages in most of my games... but I disagree that this is what Bioware pushes you to do. Ironically, one of the few games i didn't side with the mages in DA:O was in the game I played with the girl I use as my avatar: who is an arcane mage. She didn't agree with Cullen, but did tell Gregoir to test after rescuing Irving--because she was horrified at what Uldred and his blood mages did, not only to Cullen and his friends, but also to her fellow not-blood mages. So she "sided with the Templars").

[Sjofn]

DAO: Yes, the Tenplar path is portrayed as the "bad choice." That's how any person who plays the choice-oriented games would think. Killing a large group of possible innocents=bad.

 

The Templars are shown to not really want to do this (except Cullen, and he has his reasons), regarding it as a grim duty because everything has blown WAY out of control in the tower. It's not like in DA2, where Meredith is super clearly just itching to murder mages. The Fereldan Templars are not at all eager to kill their charges. On top of that, and I can't believe how many times this needs to be repeated, you don't have to Annul the Circle to side with the Templars. You go through the Tower, tell Cullen to shut up, beat up Uldred, then when it's wrapping up, tell Greagoir you think he really needs to test all the survivors to see if there are any blood mages hiding amongst them, and go on your merry way. Irving even agrees it's probably a good idea!

 

This results in you having "sided" with the Templars. You get the Templar army at the end, and the mages are unavailable to help you out with Redcliffe because they're busy. Now, it still might not feel like a "good" choice, given they're unavailable presumably because the Templars are cracking down hard on them, but it's not nearly the same as actually Annuling the Circle.

[LobselVith8]

 

The Templars are shown to not really want to do this (except Cullen, and he has his reasons), regarding it as a grim duty because everything has blown WAY out of control in the tower. It's not like in DA2, where Meredith is super clearly just itching to murder mages. The Fereldan Templars are not at all eager to kill their charges. On top of that, and I can't believe how many times this needs to be repeated, you don't have to Annul the Circle to side with the Templars. You go through the Tower, tell Cullen to shut up, beat up Uldred, then when it's wrapping up, tell Greagoir you think he really needs to test all the survivors to see if there are any blood mages hiding amongst them, and go on your merry way. Irving even agrees it's probably a good idea!

 

This results in you having "sided" with the Templars. You get the Templar army at the end, and the mages are unavailable to help you out with Redcliffe because they're busy. Now, it still might not feel like a "good" choice, given they're unavailable presumably because the Templars are cracking down hard on them, but it's not nearly the same as actually Annuling the Circle.

 

Greagoir talks about the Grand Cleric deciding their fate; it's never said that the Circle isn't annulled. Cullen makes reference to the annulment of the Circle when you speak to him in Kirkwall, if you import this worldstate into Dragon Age II.

[Hellion Rex]

I feel like the games really, really want you to side with the mages.

DAO: If you don't side with the mages, you pretty much lose the only real healer in the game.
DA2: Orsino is portrayed as a far more sympathetic figure who pretty much turns to blood magic out of complete desperation, versus Meredith who was a ball of crazy who with red lyrium slowly became even more crazy/extreme
DAI: Ignoring the fact that "MOTHERFUCKING TIME TRAVEL" is a much more pressing issue - I mean, you enemy can travel through time for gods sake, that's pretty hard to ignore - but you have to choose between killing Fiona, who, by the way, is the mother of one of DAO's potential love interests, but also someone who we're far more acquainted with through the books... versus some random douche bag who we've never met. Oh, and the fact that we don't even NEED to fight Calpernia.

I feel like in pretty much every game, siding with the Templars at all is viewed as the "evil" option. I don't recall a single time where the game didn't make me feel like an ass for siding with them. Except, no, I disagree with the mages at times, Templars during others. I'd like to make morally ambiguous decisions, but not when the decisions are heavily implied to have rights and wrongs in them. Either give me someone just as sympathetic as Fiona, or give me some **** I shouldn't care about.

Sympathetic Fiona? Good lord, I could not handle the amount of stupid that she was spouting in this game.

Barris was a much better character.

[Hellion Rex]

What is it with "pro templars this" and "pro templars that".

Who knows. Its getting pretty damn old though.

[AresKeith]

What is it with "pro templars this" and "pro templars that".

 

I told y'all, the DA Auld Wulf

[AlexMBrennan]

Origins: maybe
Da2: that nice guy Orsino is heavily implied to cooperate with/enable the serial killer responsible for Hawke's mom's death.
Da:I both the fight against the mage leader and Templar leader are avoidable if you do a side quest

[Sjofn]

Greagoir talks about the Grand Cleric deciding their fate; it's never said that the Circle isn't annulled. Cullen makes reference to the annulment of the Circle when you speak to him in Kirkwall, if you import this worldstate into Dragon Age II.

 

DA2's world importing was so screwed up, I can't take that seriously (although in my sided-with-the-templars save, he didn't mention it at all that I can recall).

[DementedSheep]

Origins: maybe
Da2: that nice guy Orsino is heavily implied to cooperate with/enable the serial killer responsible for Hawke's mom's death.
Da:I both the fight against the mage leader and Templar leader are avoidable if you do a side quest

You can't avoid fighting Samson, you just weaken him. 

[mbeckham]

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.

that always annoyed me esspessially sense Flesh golems were a dwarven invention not a mage thing.  they could just as easily cannoned that the anxcient dwarves invented flesh Golemns too and the rebel mages or Meridith people found a harvester and brought it to the surface.     

[Shahadem]

I feel like the games really, really want you to side with the mages.

 

DAO: If you don't side with the mages, you pretty much lose the only real healer in the game.

DA2: Orsino is portrayed as a far more sympathetic figure who pretty much turns to blood magic out of complete desperation, versus Meredith who was a ball of crazy who with red lyrium slowly became even more crazy/extreme

DAI: Ignoring the fact that "MOTHERFUCKING TIME TRAVEL" is a much more pressing issue - I mean, you enemy can travel through time for gods sake, that's pretty hard to ignore - but you have to choose between killing Fiona, who, by the way, is the mother of one of DAO's potential love interests, but also someone who we're far more acquainted with through the books... versus some random douche bag who we've never met. Oh, and the fact that we don't even NEED to fight Calpernia.

 

I feel like in pretty much every game, siding with the Templars at all is viewed as the "evil" option. I don't recall a single time where the game didn't make me feel like an ass for siding with them. Except, no, I disagree with the mages at times, Templars during others. I'd like to make morally ambiguous decisions, but not when the decisions are heavily implied to have rights and wrongs in them. Either give me someone just as sympathetic as Fiona, or give me some **** I shouldn't care about.

 

Orsino turns to blood magic because he was secretly just as insane as Meredith.

 

After you completely wipe out all the Templars and have already saved all the mages, Orsino decides to use blood magic to turn himself into a rage monster for absolutely no reason at all. And of all the things you can do with blood magic, turning yourself into a pile of corpses is probably one of the most useless. I mean, why not use that blood magic to shatter Meredith's sword, that at least would have made sense. But no one in Act 3 ever acted logically.

[FOE]

I thought that this game was perfect?  You all like it unconditionally.  Enough said.  No room to question/complain.

[Vit246]

Orsino turns to blood magic because he was secretly just as insane as Meredith.

 

After you completely wipe out all the Templars and have already saved all the mages, Orsino decides to use blood magic to turn himself into a rage monster for absolutely no reason at all. And of all the things you can do with blood magic, turning yourself into a pile of corpses is probably one of the most useless. I mean, why not use that blood magic to shatter Meredith's sword, that at least would have made sense. But no one in Act 3 ever acted logically.

Blame the writers. They wanted Orsino for a boss fight no matter what and all they could come up with was a spell that apparently turns the user into a harvester.