I think it's just that at that point she had given up on actually winning the war, she was just trying to get her people to survive it. Some people aren't willing to fight to the bitter end especially when you think martyrdom won't actually accomplish anything or change the way people view you.
Okay, but the thing is you can argue that she gave up just when this was starting to look less suicidally stupid than it previously had.
The templar march on Redcliffe wasn't a false rumor. It was actually going to happen until the envy demon ordered everyone back to Val Royeaux; Alexius' time shenanigans had him appear before that order happened. Why do you think there were so many templar deserters in the Hinterlands?
I think it's just that at that point she had given up on actually winning the war, she was just trying to get her people to survive it. Some people aren't willing to fight to the bitter end especially when you think martyrdom won't actually accomplish anything or change the way people view you.
She was willing to martyr herself, all the First Enchanters, and every mage in White Spire, though.
She was willing to martyr herself, all the First Enchanters, and every mage in White Spire, though.
That's when there didn't seem to be another option. Alexius gave one.
That's when there didn't seem to be another option. Alexius gave one.
SHe had an option then: don't hijack the conclave.
SHe had an option then: don't hijack the conclave.
So templar fists crush them either way?
So templar fists crush them either way?
Not necessarilly. Justinia was amenable to reform. She might have been able to rein Lambert in if Fiona hadn't given him an excuse.
Not necessarilly. Justinia was amenable to reform. She might have been able to rein Lambert in if Fiona hadn't given him an excuse.
By that point, it was never going to end without bloodshed. The templars were no longer listening to Justinia, nor were the Seekers.
The templar march on Redcliffe wasn't a false rumor. It was actually going to happen until the envy demon ordered everyone back to Val Royeaux; Alexius' time shenanigans had him appear before that order happened. Why do you think there were so many templar deserters in the Hinterlands?
Even if there was a Templar army camped outside Redcliffe, it wouldn't justify the mages turning on people who gave them shelter and stabbing them in the back. The seizure of Redcliffe is arguably the mage rebellion's most reprehensible act, considering the victims are people who offered the mages their hands in friendship. Allying with the Venatori is also indefensible.
There are some valid reasons for people not caring for Fiona. Conscripting the mages should have resulted in her being thrown in chains and judged, IMO.
That she dies on the Templar path is one of the reasons why I prefer it. She dies in battle, and the Templar replacement for Fiona (forget his name) ends up captured and judged. You can get rid of both problems on the Templar path, whereas on the Mage path you can only get rid of one.
Even if there was a Templar army camped outside Redcliffe, it wouldn't justify the mages turning on people who gave them shelter and stabbing them in the back. The seizure of Redcliffe is arguably the mage rebellion's most reprehensible act, considering the victims are people who offered the mages their hands in friendship. Allying with the Venatori is also indefensible.
There are some valid reasons for people not caring for Fiona. Conscripting the mages should have resulted in her being thrown in chains and judged, IMO.
Atleast as an option
Atleast as an option
Right.
If there had been a judgement scene it should also have 'release' as one of the options, with the others being exile, sent to the headsman, and made tranquil. I think that would cover all the bases.
By that point, it was never going to end without bloodshed. The templars were no longer listening to Justinia, nor were the Seekers.
Except they were. They were allowing the Conclave to go forward, at Justinia's express order.
The templar march on Redcliffe wasn't a false rumor. It was actually going to happen until the envy demon ordered everyone back to Val Royeaux; Alexius' time shenanigans had him appear before that order happened. Why do you think there were so many templar deserters in the Hinterlands?
Cullen describes the Castle as unassailable, Eamon says it can hold against emissaries and ogres, and it apparently throws back the Ferelden army and the Inquisition several times in the Bad Future. A bunch of knights with no mages and who've been divorced from their financial backers for years can march on that all they want.
Even if there was a Templar army camped outside Redcliffe, it wouldn't justify the mages turning on people who gave them shelter and stabbing them in the back. The seizure of Redcliffe is arguably the mage rebellion's most reprehensible act, considering the victims are people who offered the mages their hands in friendship. Allying with the Venatori is also indefensible.
There are some valid reasons for people not caring for Fiona. Conscripting the mages should have resulted in her being thrown in chains and judged, IMO.
That she dies on the Templar path is one of the reasons why I prefer it. She dies in battle, and the Templar replacement for Fiona (forget his name) ends up captured and judged. You can get rid of both problems on the Templar path, whereas on the Mage path you can only get rid of one.
I find it extremely unlikely that Alexius said anything about evicting the arl and such when he outlined his terms. It's not even made clear whether he opened negotiations with Fiona before or after he did so. Simply put, there's no evidence to convict Fiona for deliberately screwing over Teagan.
And I hope you can see that there are valid reasons for allying with Fiona as well.
Except they were. They were allowing the Conclave to go forward, at Justinia's express order.
I doubt it'd have lasted. Lambert's biggest bugbear was the Tranquility cure.
Cullen describes the Castle as unassailable, Eamon says it can hold against emissaries and ogres, and it apparently throws back the Ferelden army and the Inquisition several times in the Bad Future. A bunch of knights with no mages and who've been divorced from their financial backers for years can march on that all they want.
Evidently not that unassailable, if the Venatori took over. Not to mention that there's no indication that the castle was offered to the rebellion to begin with.
Aside from Fiona, what the game should have given us was a war table mission to initiate a man-hunt for Anders (if he was alive) and bring him to justice.
Aside from Fiona, what the game should have given us was a war table mission to initiate a man-hunt for Anders (if he was alive) and bring him to justice.
I hardly think you'd need bother; Anders is never far away from justice.
I hardly think you'd need bother; Anders is never far away from justice.
I knew there was a pun there I missed.
Aside from Fiona, what the game should have given us was a war table mission to initiate a man-hunt for Anders (if he was alive) and bring him to justice.
Except that some of us actually agreed with what he did, romanced him or otherwise liked him.
I liked the boom, myself.
No one in the game ever says that Fiona or the Mages had the option or suggested the idea of using Redcliff Castle to defend themselves so, imo, it shouldn't be used as an argument.
I find it extremely unlikely that Alexius said anything about evicting the arl and such when he outlined his terms. It's not even made clear whether he opened negotiations with Fiona before or after he did so. Simply put, there's no evidence to convict Fiona for deliberately screwing over Teagan.
The Tranquil Clemence says that Alexius came to Redlciff two days after the Conclave exploded, at night, and evicted the Arl and any non-Mage, non-servant out of the Castle.
Here's the conversation:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObVtDCW9ir4
The Tranquil Clemence says that Alexius came to Redlciff two days after the Conclave exploded, at night, and evicted the Arl and any non-Mage, non-servant out of the Castle.
So, yeah. Fiona had absolutely nothing to do with Teagan's eviction; the Venatori moved into Redcliffe beforehand and made the offer while already ensconced in the castle. Which the rebels would most certainly not be able to use for protection if they hadn't accepted it.
So, yeah. Fiona had absolutely nothing to do with Teagan's eviction; the Venatori moved into Redcliffe beforehand and made the offer while already ensconced in the castle. Which the rebels would most certainly not be able to use for protection if they hadn't accepted it.
Except that the conversation seems to me to imply that there were already mages inside the castle. And it was my understanding that the deal that allowed the mages into Redcliffe at all was with Anora/Alistair/both, not Alexius. Not to mention that the easiest way to reconcile how easily the Tevinters took Redcliffe with how hard it is supposed to be to get in unless you've been allowed to is if the Tevinters took advantage of the pre-existing deal with the mage rebellion by pretending to be part of it like they did in order to trick Fiona into taking their bargain. (This would not be quite as effective if the rebel mages were not allowed into the castle.)
Edit: As for your basic conclusion that Fiona didn't deliberately screw Teagan over, I think you're right. Her understanding of the plan, as I understand it, is that they were all going to flee to Tevinter in short order. That not only doesn't require taking over Redcliffe castle but is something from which doing so is a dangerous distraction. Which leads me to think that that was another of the plans Alexius had that she wasn't in on. I've several times communicated a belief that she's stupid and shortsighted, but I don't think she's malicious.
No one in the game ever says that Fiona or the Mages had the option or suggested the idea of using Redcliff Castle to defend themselves so, imo, it shouldn't be used as an argument.
Considering that we have seen no evidence so far that Teagan is a heartless *******, I would be more inclined to think those who don't think he'd let the mages into his castle should have to provide evidence. (Not to mention that I think the first sentence of my response to Xilizhra provides weak evidence that he did allow them in.)
Except that the conversation seems to me to imply that there were already mages inside the castle. And it was my understanding that the deal that allowed the mages into Redcliffe at all was with Anora/Alistair/both, not Alexius. Not to mention that the easiest way to reconcile how easily the Tevinters took Redcliffe with how hard it is supposed to be to get in unless you've been allowed to is if the Tevinters took advantage of the pre-existing deal with the mage rebellion by pretending to be part of it like they did in order to trick Fiona into taking their bargain. (This would not be quite as effective if the rebel mages were not allowed into the castle.)
Edit: As for your basic conclusion that Fiona didn't deliberately screw Teagan over, I think you're right. Her understanding of the plan, as I understand it, is that they were all going to flee to Tevinter in short order. That not only doesn't require taking over Redcliffe castle but is something from which doing so is a dangerous distraction. Which leads me to think that that was another of the plans Alexius had that she wasn't in on. I've several times communicated a belief that she's stupid and shortsighted, but I don't think she's malicious.
If you talk to Fiona in Skyhold, she tells you that the mage rebellion was infiltrated by Venatori spies before Alexius showed up. If those spies entered the castle first, they could laid the way open for Alexius to move in, and then make the deal with Fiona... and, as I said before, it doesn't matter whether Teagan would have let them inside or not, because the question of allying with Tevinter or not didn't come up until Alexius had already moved in.
If you talk to Fiona in Skyhold, she tells you that the mage rebellion was infiltrated by Venatori spies before Alexius showed up. If those spies entered the castle first, they could laid the way open for Alexius to move in, and then make the deal with Fiona... and, as I said before, it doesn't matter whether Teagan would have let them inside or not, because the question of allying with Tevinter or not didn't come up until Alexius had already moved in.
Are you saying the mages didn't ally with Tevinter until after they allied with Alexius, because I'm pretty there isn't a difference
Are you saying the mages didn't ally with Tevinter until after they allied with Alexius, because I'm pretty there isn't a difference
I'm saying that they didn't ally with Alexius until he'd taken over the castle.
Retour en haut