515 réponses à ce sujet

[X Equestris]

If a mage is suspected of abusing his or her powers, he or she is made Tranquil or executed immediately with no possibility of appeal. Sometimes as a prophylactic measure before the actual abuse of power takes place.
 
If a templar is proven to have abused his or her powers, often repeatedly... nothing happens. We have yet to see a templar be publicly or privately disciplined for even the most heinous abuse.
 
There is blame on both sides, but there is no parity.

Actually, no. It was like that in Kirkwall, but Kirkwall is commonly accepted as a cesspool. For the most part, it was much more balanced.

[Melca36]

true

 

but many more mages abused demons and blood magic

 

mages are more to blame than templars 

 

 

Um...they resorted to that due to the Templars abusing them. Like Cassandra said...the Templars LOST their way.

[berelinde]

Objection just because you don't see it happen doesn't mean that they always get away with it without punishment from either the Templar hierarchy, or the seekers who pointedly do hunt down bad Templars. Your making assumptions from what little evidence we get into the workings of the Templars and the seekers that over see them which isn't helped as you only see it from the outside and not within either the seekers or the Templars.

Actually, no. This is a game, i.e.storytelling. Show, don't tell. If we don't see it, we can't assume it's happening. Yes, in DA2, we see an abundance of mages being made tranquil for reasons ranging from potential sedition to the mere possibility of refusing sexual favors to templars. In DAI, this is reinforced by just about every tranquil mage you speak with. If you ask Cullen about the circumstances of Samson's dismissal, he will corroborate this. If we ever encounter a templar who has been disciplined for abusing a mage, I will gladly revise my statement, but it hasn't happened yet. It's important to note that Samson was not dismissed for abusing mages. He was dismissed for attempting to facilitate a relationship between a templar and a mage, in which neither party was unwilling. I never said that mages never welcome advances from templars. There are plenty of mages who do fall in love with templars, and not always without reason. But that does not excuse those who abuse their charges.

[SnakeCode]

I didn't feel sympathy for them to begin with. It always puzzled me that people on here decided to champion the mages when they have it so much better off than so many other groups. Unlike your average serf and especially the city elves they are afforded many luxuries. Free education, good food, a warm bed and a roof over their head every night. Yes the circle has it's nastier aspects as well, but they still have it far better than those outside the circle who aren't fortunate enough to be born into nobility. They don't have to fear starvation, dying alone in the cold, disease (due to magic,) not having enough gold to pay for food, shelter, their taxes etc, and many other horrors those on the outside face regularly.

 

Their condition is the reason most cannot or do not leave the circle (although we know mages can and did with the exception of Kirkwall, until the Anders incident that is...) They can burn down villages, bring bad harvests, kill many people. "Anybody can do that! " Some will say, and it's true, but here's the clincher. Mages can not only do these things quicker and more effectively, but they can do so without meaning or even wanting to. They risk becoming an abomination whenever fear or anger completely takes over them.

 

Inquisition was the mages chance to prove they were worthy of freedom and the responsibility that comes with it. They were given free harbour and protection by the monarchy of Fereldan, who gave them their most defensible keep. They betrayed them, alligning themselves with the known enemy of the free world (as their slaves, no less) Kicking their protecters out of Redcliffe altogether. So no, I have no sympathy for the mages.

 

It isn't even that they allied with Tevinter (though believe me that is bad enough as it is.) It is the betrayal of those who trusted them when nobody else would and the fact they accepted indentured servitude (or slavery, something they never were in the circles.) They showed that they didn't really care about freedom, so long as it was other mages holding the leash.

[Navasha]

Actually, its just the opposite for me.    I am still unable to feel any sympathy whatsoever for the Templars.   Mages are by and large abused and scared children lashing out at their abusers.    Templars are more often than not the abusive authority figure.   Templars are held to a much higher standard for impropriety for me.

 

When a teenager who is becoming a mage is terrified not only of the demons that whisper in her mind, but also the world at large that has been told to hate her.   Then comes along the "protectors" that rape them in the night.    When she lashes out and loses control, its almost a sympathetic moment.  

 

Now compare that to the person who CHOSE to become a Templar.   Abuses the power and authority granted to them, to live out power trip fantasies by beating and raping the children they are meant to protect.     I don't get how anyone develops sympathy for that stance. 

[Asari_Party]

Quite the opposite for me as well. I just can't bring myself to do the templar quest. I'd feel guilty about abandoning the mages to their fate while at the same time I can't say the same about the templars. As one of the chantry sisters put it: "We wanted the templars to treat mages more fairly and they rebelled for it." I can't feel sorry for them.

[SnakeCode]

Quite the opposite for me as well. I just can't bring myself to do the templar quest. I'd feel guilty about abandoning the mages to their fate while at the same time I can't say the same about the templars. As one of the chantry sisters put it: "We wanted the templars to treat mages more fairly and they rebelled for it." I can't feel sorry for them.

That would be a false narrative though. (ASUNDER SPOILERS FOLLOW)

 

Spoiler

The divine sent her agents to kill Lord Seeker Lambert's men and help mages escape the white spire. That's not merely "wanted the templars to treat mages more fairly" as the sister put it. She conveniently left out the part where the divine constantly kept the templars out of the loop when fighting for mage freedom, then played an active hand in having templars killed. No wonder they rebelled. The divine was wholly corrupt.

[N7 Spectre525]

The rebel mages allowed the Tranquil, who were unlucky enough to be caught up in their rebellion to be killed and their skulls turned into glorified telescopes. After making this gruesome discovery the rebels lost any sympathy I may have had for their cause, and my main Inquisitor is a mage.

[Enrychan]

 

Inquisition was the mages chance to prove they were worthy of freedom and the responsibility that comes with it. They were given free harbour and protection by the monarchy of Fereldan, who gave them their most defensible keep. They betrayed them, alligning themselves with the known enemy of the free world (as their slaves, no less) Kicking their protecters out of Redcliffe altogether. So no, I have no sympathy for the mages.

 

It isn't even that they allied with Tevinter (though believe me that is bad enough as it is.) It is the betrayal of those who trusted them when nobody else would and the fact they accepted indentured servitude (or slavery, something they never were in the circles.) They showed that they didn't really care about freedom, so long as it was other mages holding the leash.

 

I find it rather disturbing that someone should "prove that they are worthy of freedom". Freedom is not a "noble ideal" like Fenris says, it is one of our fundamental human rights. It doesn't matter that you think I am potentially dangerous, I have the right to be free and I don't have to prove anything to you. In a trial, it's the prosecution that has the burden of proof, not the defense.

Plus, did you actually pay attention to what Fiona and Alexius say during the dialogue with the Inquisitor? The monarchy of Ferelden gave Redcliffe to the rebel mages as a safe sanctuary, but the Templars pursued them even across the border and were about to attack them. Fiona was terrified to see her fellow mages slaughtered by the Templars, that's why she resorted to an alliance with the magisters from Tevinter. It is even reported on the DA wiki if you want to check it out by yourself. It is called self-defense. If someone is attacking you, you're risking your life, and you find a knife lying around and use it to defend yourself, it doesn't matter if you wound of even kill your assailant. It is self-defense. It doesn't make you a murderer.

Not to mention that Fiona decided to ally with Alexius, not all the rebel mages. On the contrary, if you speak to them, for the most part they disapprove of this decision. But for all their life they have been subjected to an authority who told them what to do and when to do it, how can you expect them to suddenly be all autonomous and determined? It's obvious they will follow Fiona, who was First Enchanter and leads them by default.

[MisterJB]

That would be a false narrative though. (ASUNDER SPOILERS FOLLOW)

 

Spoiler

The divine sent her agents to kill Lord Seeker Lambert's men and help mages escape the white spire. That's not merely "wanted the templars to treat mages more fairly" as the sister put it. She conveniently left out the part where the divine constantly kept the templars out of the loop when fighting for mage freedom, then played an active hand in having templars killed. No wonder they rebelled. The divine was wholly corrupt.

 

Besides, that same Sister also says that the Chant should never needs swords to be spread conveniently forgetting Andraste was a warrior, that the Templars weren't converting but rather policing dangerous people and that she is standing next to a requisitions officer tasked with placing swords in the hands of the faithful.

Someone needs to open an history book. Without Drakon's army, there wouldn't be a Chantry to begin with.

And what about her claims mages learn fear and Templars cruelty? True in some cases, certainly, but it is still a generalization. Uldred was not afraid and Ser Otto the Blind was not cruel.

 

That Sister is revolting.
 

[Enrychan]

The rebel mages allowed the Tranquil, who were unlucky enough to be caught up in their rebellion to be killed and their skulls turned into glorified telescopes. After making this gruesome discovery the rebels lost any sympathy I may have had for their cause, and my main Inquisitor is a mage.

 
The rebel mages abandoned the Tranquil because they were a burden and they were pursued by the Templars. Minaeve says that the Tranquil "can barely take care of themselves". There was no way the rebel mages could take care of them and defend themselves from the Templars at the same time. Fiona and the other mages weren't aware of Alexius' operation: in fact, Alexius' men took the Tranquil that were left behind, as you can read here:
 

There must be more Tranquil in the area — the rebels abandoned most of them when they fled their Circles. Remember, the skull will only attune properly if the Tranquil is in close proximity to one of the shards when the demon is forced to possess him. [codex]

  
By the way, it was the Templars who made the mages Tranquil through the Right of Tranquility. Why aren't you as indignant with the Templars who didn't do anything to protect their charges?

[SnakeCode]

I find it rather disturbing that someone should "prove that they are worthy of freedom". Freedom is not a "noble ideal" like Fenris says, it is one of our fundamental human rights. It doesn't matter that you think I am potentially dangerous, I have the right to be free and I don't have to prove anything to you. In a trial, it's the prosecution that has the burden of proof, not the defense.

Plus, did you actually pay attention to what Fiona and Alexius say during the dialogue with the Inquisitor? The monarchy of Ferelden gave Redcliffe to the rebel mages as a safe sanctuary, but the Templars pursued them even across the border and were about to attack them. Fiona was terrified to see her fellow mages slaughtered by the Templars, that's why she resorted to an alliance with the magisters from Tevinter. It is even reported on the DA wiki if you want to check it out by yourself. It is called self-defense. If someone is attacking you, you're risking your life, and you find a knife lying around and use it to defend yourself, it doesn't matter if you wound of even kill your assailant. It is self-defense. It doesn't make you a murderer.

Not to mention that Fiona decided to ally with Alexius, not all the rebel mages. On the contrary, if you speak to them, for the most part they disapprove of this decision. But for all their life they have been subjected to an authority who told them what to do and when to do it, how can you expect them to suddenly be all autonomous and determined? It's obvious they will follow Fiona, who was First Enchanter and leads them by default.

OK where to start. Yes freedom is a right that people in the western world have IRL. Thedas has no such laws governing freedom the way we do. Nor are there people who can read minds and control us through our blood, if you think people like that IRL wouldn't be policed or quarantined, then you are looking at our world through rose tinted spectacles. Not to mention we aren't truly free. W have laws restricting what we are and aren't allowed to do, for both our safety and the safety of others. The greater threat you pose the more restrictions are placed upon you. It's the same deal with the mages.

 

The templars pursuing the rebel mages was a lie told by tevinters who had infiltrated the mage ranks. It tells you this in game. The templars had been called back to Val Roxeaux, only a few stragglers (those we kill in the hinterlands) remained behind. They were far outnumbered and no threat to the rebel mages. 

 

As for the rest of the mages, yes not all of them agreed with Fiona's decision, but NONE of them did a damn thing about it. They stood by and let it all happen, watched their protectors get usurped and thrown from their homes. Watched the tranquil got systematically murdered for their skulls. They aren't exactly innocent.

[MisterJB]

I find it rather disturbing that someone should "prove that they are worthy of freedom". Freedom is not a "noble ideal" like Fenris says, it is one of our fundamental human rights. It doesn't matter that you think I am potentially dangerous, I have the right to be free and I don't have to prove anything to you. In a trial, it's the prosecution that has the burden of proof, not the defense.

Your freedoms were restricted from the moment you were born, so were mine. And we didn't give any indication we were a threat.

That is the point of the legal system. It tells citizens what we can and can't do because we all have the potential to be dangerous. It does this so society can exist and we don't live in anarchy.

The restrictions placed upon mages are simply harsher because they are a greater threat than the common man.

 

Also, I find it ironic you feel so strongly about freedom being a fundamental human right when the character in your avatar supports enslaving people if they disagree with him.

 

 

Plus, did you actually pay attention to what Fiona and Alexius say during the dialogue with the Inquisitor? The monarchy of Ferelden gave Redcliffe to the rebel mages as a safe sanctuary, but the Templars pursued them even across the border and were about to attack them. Fiona was terrified to see her fellow mages slaughtered by the Templars, that's why she resorted to an alliance with the magisters from Tevinter. It is even reported on the DA wiki if you want to check it out by yourself. It is called self-defense. If someone is attacking you, you're risking your life, and you find a knife lying around and use it to defend yourself, it doesn't matter if you wound of even kill your assailant. It is self-defense. It doesn't make you a murderer.

Three things.

First of all, the Templars were not about to attack them. They were recalled to Val Royeaux and then lead to Therinfal Redoubt. The few extremists who refused to obey and remained were being kept at bay by a faction of mages that broke away from the main one and thus, were not a threat.

Maybe Fiona should have checked her intel before betraying everything and everyone.

 

Second, assuming the Templars were going to attack, the mages had been given refuge by Ferelden's monarchy meaning it is theirs and Teagan's duty to look to the defence of Redcliff, something the mages could have helped with.

Instead, Fiona chose to betray the non-mages who sheltered them by opening the gates to hostile foreign forces who then occupied Ferelden territory thus proving just how scummy this rebellion was.

 

Third, I thought this rebellion was about freedom. Instead, Fiona chose to allow her people to be enslaved by Tevinter.

 

Not to mention that Fiona decided to ally with Alexius, not all the rebel mages. On the contrary, if you speak to them, for the most part they disapprove of this decision. But for all their life they have been subjected to an authority who told them what to do and when to do it, how can you expect them to suddenly be all autonomous and determined? It's obvious they will follow Fiona, who was First Enchanter and leads them by default.

I wonder if you'd accept this line of defence if used for the Templars who annulled Kirkwall's Circle.

[MisterJB]

 
The rebel mages abandoned the Tranquil because they were a burden and they were pursued by the Templars. Minaeve says that the Tranquil "can barely take care of themselves". There was no way the rebel mages could take care of them and defend themselves from the Templars at the same time. Fiona and the other mages weren't aware of Alexius' operation: in fact, Alexius' men took the Tranquil that were left behind, as you can read here:

Ah, the glorious mage rebellion.

Abandon the weak, betray those who helped them, surrender the freedom you claim to be fighting for at the first sign of defeat.

Why should we sympathize with them again?

[DameGrace]

 

As for the rest of the mages, yes not all of them agreed with Fiona's decision, but NONE of them did a damn thing about it. They stood by and let it all happen, watched their protectors get usurped and thrown from their homes. Watched the tranquil got systematically murdered for their skulls. They aren't exactly innocent.

 

But as Enrychan noted Templars are the ones to turn mages into tranquils. Tranquils are their wards as much as mages are - and unlike mages, they are practically helpless. Why hadn't Templars protected them? They had waltzed off to Val Royeaux, letting Tranquils be systematically murdered for their skulls. Templars aren't exactly innocent. It's kind of ironic that one of the few characters to show some sympathy to a Tranquil is Samson. 

[SnakeCode]

 

 

 

But as Enrychan noted Templars are the ones to turn mages into tranquils. Tranquils are their wards as much as mages are - and unlike mages, they are practically helpless. Why hadn't Templars protected them? They had waltzed off to Val Royeaux, letting Tranquils be systematically murdered for their skulls. Templars aren't exactly innocent. It's kind of ironic that one of the few characters to show some sympathy to a Tranquil is Samson. 

 

The templars left the circles to bring the mages back, a far more dire situation. Obviously the tranquils didn't stay behind either, else they wouldn't be with the rebel mages in the first place would they?

[DameGrace]

The templars left the circles to bring the mages back, a far more dire situation. Obviously the tranquils didn't stay behind either, else they wouldn't be with the rebel mages in the first place would they?

 

I'm sorry I don't fully understand the second part. You mean, didn't stay behind in the Circles? Like, rebel mages took tranquils with them and then abandoned them?

[SnakeCode]

Ah, the glorious mage rebellion.

Abandon the weak, betray those who helped them, surrender the freedom you claim to be fighting for at the first sign of defeat.

Why should we sympathize with them again?

This is what gets me as well. The whole crux of the mage rebellion is freedom. And they finally had it, yet the first thing they do is hand that freedom over and become slaves to a foreign power. They put themselves in a worse position than they had ever been in at the circles. As the circles aren't slavery.

[SnakeCode]

I'm sorry I don't fully understand the second part. You mean, didn't stay behind in the Circles? Like, rebel mages took tranquils with them and then abandoned them?

Yes, I'm saying the tranquil obviously went with the rebel mages, whether by force or by choice we don't know, but they did. Otherwise their remains wouldn't be at Redcliffe, where the Tevinters butchered them all. Whilst the rebel mages stood by and watched. 

[gombie]

stop forgetting that

 

templars are people

 

mages are people

 

people in general cannot be trusted, just because someone slapped a mage label on their forehead does not suddenly make them "good" or "bad"

 

like anything, it all depends on who holds the reigns otherwise anarchy will ensure, and id rather have mages under the thumb by others because what is worse than a bunch of pricks is a bunch of pricks with magic.

[SnakeCode]

people are pricks,

 

templars are people

 

mages are people

 

like anything, it all depends on who holds the reigns otherwise anarchy will ensure, and id rather have mages under the thumb by others because what is worse than a bunch of pricks is a bunch of pricks with magic.

Not to mention the good of the many comes before the good of the few. 

[ThreeF]

This is what gets me as well. The whole crux of the mage rebellion is freedom. And they finally had it, yet the first thing they do is hand that freedom over and become slaves to a foreign power. They put themselves in a worse position than they had ever been in at the circles. As the circles aren't slavery.

This is the reason I really want to lock Fiona somewhere for good. Especially after hers "I'd do it again" Do what again? Sell your people to slavery? Mind-numbing.

 

As for the tranquil, I sort of got the impression that with few exceptions nobody cared about them, for the most part to Mages they reminded them of what can be done to them, to Templars they were mages that did something wrong. Good thing Minaeve saved a bunch of them.

[DameGrace]

Yes, I'm saying the tranquil obviously went with the rebel mages, whether by force or by choice we don't know, but they did. Otherwise their remains wouldn't  be at Redcliffe, where the Tevinters butchered them all. Whilst the rebel mages stood by and watched. 

 

It makes sense then, thanks. However the "far more dire situation" argument can be easily used by mages themselves. From their POV their situation is seen as far more dire and protecting tranquils is not the top of their agenda. 

 

Come to think of it, kind of strange that they would take tranquils with them, though. It's safer to leave them at the Circles - tranquils are unlikely to be killed by Templars (because they are not mages and aren't as dangerous); tranquils are not of much help in the battle; tranquils don't even take sides in the war. By taking tranquils with them mages risked to lose more than they could gain. But the whole business with tranquils and skulls was rather strange.

 

Not to mention the good of the many comes before the good of the few. 

 

Highly questionable. Quite often in the pursuit of the "good of the many" one could harm more people than actually aid. After all, there are more rebel mages than tranquils, which makes the former "many" and the latter "few". Following this logic rebel mages were justified in letting the Tranquils be killed for their skulls. 

[Gileadan]

I have some sympathy for mages, and I have some sympathy for templars. The world isn't black and white, though I am sure that some people find the simplicity of that idea kinda comforting.

 

After having played the recruiting missions of both sides, it's templars every time for me. Those templars still faithful to their order actively fight the corrupted ones, so you know you're getting some good men and women when you work with them. Mages? They shuffle their feet and mumble something about how maybe that Venatori deal wasn't the best of ideas. Yeah, good attitude, guys. And I'm honestly not sure what Fiona would do if someone made her a better offer than the Inquisition.

 

Also, of course, Ser Barris >>> <--- 5 km --> >>> Fiona.

[Vilio1]

Not really. The mages in redcliffe all have differing opinions on the alliance, some for it, some against it, I guess the children don't even know what's going on. I feel sorry for them. But I am unable to feel sympathy for templars. I think Thedas will be better off without them and their "protection".