Are we expecting there not to be any slip-ups in the course of 900+ years? Stuff like that might happen from time to time, but that occasional thing is still far preferable to what the mages did with their own Circle (slavery and blood-magic, with neither one an occasional thing).
The mages? Are they a hivemind now?
Five of the six characters you can't kick out are in DAI. None of the characters in any game have ever been considered sacrosanct, with the exception of Varric in DA2 and that's only because he's the narrator.
I don't see how that dictates a marketing change. Maybe writing? It makes sense that Cassandra and Solas would stay for plot reasons. They are dedicated to the cause and won't leave, even if they disagree with the Inquisitor. Vivienne wants to be for influence or power purposes. She's not going to leave either, even if you want her to.
Don't know about Varric or Iron Bull... I thought Iron Bull could leave...
It's surprising that Greagoire didn't call for a RoA right after those 3 templars were killed by Mr.Wiggums whom Anders had possessed.So, I guess they rebelled because...? The blood mage who asks you to spare her life talks about how the templars were always watching. Before Anders' escape attempt, they were allowed out for weekly exercise sessions. Even in Sing Sing, prisoners get to go in the yard once a day.
Staying in one place for that long. Staying inside for that long. Lack of privacy. No family (not the one you're born to, not the one you'd make). Limited career options. I also have the impression that mages aren't paid for any labor they do for the Circle--so no spending money, either.
They do get a free education, though, that was unavailable to most people. Also housing and food and clothing. That would be worth a fair bit of money. (I'm not saying you're wrong about what you said, just pointing out they had it better from a monetary standpoint than your average peasant.)
I am sorry but if someone said 'my dear' every five minutes I would lose my ****.
Oops. That should be 7 instead of 4*.
I understand this person but she is so patronizing.
Being funny does not excuse that... Bioware.
I've seen conflicting stories on this, though. I've seen people say that the only people that you can't kick out in DA: I are Cassandra, Vivienne, and Solas. And I've seen you say that you can't kick out Varric and Iron Bull, too.
Does anyone have a list of companions with an explanation of how they can leave?
Also, how do you kick out Dog, Sten, and Anders?
You can put a knife in between Anders' shoulder blades.
You can kick Sten out after you defeat him in Haven.
I didn't count dog amongst the companions because Dog is a special case. I honestly have no idea if you can force him out.
Vivienne wants to be for influence or power purposes. She's not going to leave either, even if you want her to.
I'm the INQUISITOR. I don't think it matters what she wants.
I can single handedly decide who sits on the Throne in Orlais. I can forcibly remove all the Grey Wardens from Orlais. But I can't make one random mage leave Skyhold?
I didn't count dog amongst the companions because Dog is a special case. I honestly have no idea if you can force him out.
Considering he's permanently at max approval, I doubt it. Aww. Dog. 
I'm the INQUISITOR. I don't think it matters what she wants.
I can single handedly decide who sits on the Throne in Orlais. I can forcibly remove all the Grey Wardens from Orlais. But I can't make one random mage leave Skyhold?
So it's okay that Solas and Cassandra can't leave because it fits their character, but not Vivienne? I agree it would nice to be able to kick her out, but I don't see why it matter all that much in the long run.
Considering she wishes to get power so that as many people are safe as possible while at the same time doing as much for free mages as you can, it's not that bad.
Like, her divine epilogue slide is the least full of conflict, yet mentioned mages getting more freedoms than before.
It follows the same logic as a benevolent dictator theoretically being a good thing. Wanting power doesnt make you bad if you want to do good things with it.
Eh? My Divine Vivienne epilogue side was full of blood and had her cramping down on everyone--mages included. So.... much..... blooooood....
The only one worse was Leliana unsoftened.
You can put a knife in between Anders' shoulder blades.
You can kick Sten out after you defeat him in Haven.
I didn't count dog amongst the companions because Dog is a special case. I honestly have no idea if you can force him out.
I totally forgot about that thing with Sten in Haven.
The Anders one is a bit of a stretch since it happens in the final quest. You can't get rid of him until the absolute last quest has already started. Functionally, that's no difference than not being able to get rid of him with the exception of about 40 mins worth of gameplay. I mean, technically you are correct, but you still have to put up with Anders (who I find infinitely more irritating than Vivienne) for 99.9% the time that he can be with you.
So, I guess they rebelled because...?
Actions taken to restrict mages AFTER Anders tells you his pity story and blows up a Chantry. That and statements in DA:I and before confirming mages had the privilege to leave towers, live like kings, and enjoy education beyond that of the turnip farmer in Ferelden makes me incredulous of the sobbing Anders does all the time about the "mage plight." Of course I could just take him at his word. He's the one causing all of these problems; he knows more than anyone of the consequences of his actions.
iirc you can give Anders the boot after his act 2 quest or snitch on him to Cullen during his Act 3 quest.I totally forgot about that thing with Sten in Haven.
The Anders one is a bit of a stretch since it happens in the final quest. You can't get rid of him until the absolute last quest has already started. Functionally, that's no difference than not being able to get rid of him with the exception of about 40 mins worth of gameplay. I mean, technically you are correct, but you still have to put up with Anders (who I find infinitely more irritating than Vivienne) for 99.9% the time that he can be with you.
Your basiclay saying the system is safe from abuse which someone has said it has been abused before Kirkwall. The system as it is now is ripe with abuses that can be inflicted upon a given circle by a knight comander like the one in 9:06 towers.
No, I am saying that when it runs optimally, the Circle is a safe and comfortable haven where mages can thrive. If there is an issue, it means the Templars or mages in question need to be dealt with. Getting rid of the Circle entirely does not solve such problems, it just means that those problems move to the outside world and get even more out of hand.
The police have committed abuses and sometimes brutalize people. Should we just get rid of police-departments everywhere??
No, you deal with the bad cops individually. You do not eliminate them altogether.
And the RoA is a reasonable last-resort for an outbreak of possession, blood-magic, or other very real problems. However, the most worthwhile thing about the RoA is that it makes mages realize there is a greater price for doing something stupid with their magic (consorting with demons, practicing blood-magic, or what have you) than their own lives -- it will also cost them the lives of those closest to them. That reality is true even if the RoA were banned.
So he has nothing to say about the Circle before melding with Justice, despite going on and on about how the templars want to imprison mages just for being alive, about how the smell of pie means freedom to him, about how he wants to destroy his phylactery?
Is this a man who thinks the Chantry and Circle system is peachy?
You folks really need to read my posts slowly, and carefully, before responding! I am not some amateur at this.
I said, "speaking vitriol and getting violent toward." Anders may not have been a fan before Justice, but he was not a raving zealot about it. Nothing he said in DA:A was really what I would call "vitriol," and he was not resorting to violence against it either until after he was abominated by "Justice"-nonsense, and that is not on the Chantry. It was his own doing. Gotta love the accountability, though. 
And he is free to his opinion, but not everyone shares it. Wynne liked that Circle. So did Finn. Hell, even the HoF did if you RP them that way. Why the cherry-picking?
So, I guess they rebelled because...? The blood mage who asks you to spare her life talks about how the templars were always watching.
So what? If you are American, the Feds are always watching you. Some folks complain. Others do not care. It is not something everyone can all agree is a good or bad thing.
**edit** And the mages rebelled because of a self-fulfilling prophecy. Anders decried how terrible the Circle was, so he blew up a Chantry and led some mages to rise up. The Templars responded by tightening restrictions, which drove mages to rebel. Before that, though, Vivienne indicates that the Circles were generally lenient towards mages (<-- not to be confused with mage apprentices), and that Kirkwall was largely the exception/not the rule. Let me reiterate: the Circle only got bad because Mr. AHH THE CIRCLE IS SO BAD!! made it that way.
The mages? Are they a hivemind now?
Whatchu talkin' 'bout, Willis??
So what? If you are American, the Feds are always watching you. Some folks complain. Others do not care. It is not something everyone can all agree is a good or bad thing.
This is simply not true.
So it's okay that Solas and Cassandra can't leave because it fits their character, but not Vivienne? I agree it would nice to be able to kick her out, but I don't see why it matter all that much in the long run.
From a story standpoint, Cassandra technically formed the Inquisition, so she's the single hardest person to justify kicking out.
And you're right, I should be able to kick Solas out too. The point is that the writers have taken away the level of player agency that players once had, and they feel like they're forced to accept things that they don't want to. Which is one of the reasons you see so much backlash against certain characters.
There is nothing I hate about Vivienne. She is just a noble who plays her part.
Are you calling Edward Snowden a liar?This is simply not true.
Are you calling Edward Snowden a liar?
Don't even get me started on that a-hole. I don't like him for a variety of reasons.
They do get a free education, though, that was unavailable to most people. Also housing and food and clothing. That would be worth a fair bit of money. (I'm not saying you're wrong about what you said, just pointing out they had it better from a monetary standpoint than your average peasant.)
But they have to forgo all their freedoms and liberties in order to gain that. And they don't get a choice. They also aren't protected against arbitrary punishment, aren't protected against any form of assault, and even their very life can be taken from them for almost arbitrary reasons.
Plus, there is no guarantee that they would actually receive food, clothing or education nor any guarantee of the quality of such.
So isn't very clear that they are monetarily better off considering they have to give up everything and might gain nothing.
Whatchu talkin' 'bout, Willis??
"but that occasional thing is still far preferable to what the mages did with their own Circle (slavery and blood-magic, with neither one an occasional thing)."
As in, the mages can apparently described as a homogenous collective. Though, not for the other side of the coin, of course. Those are "exceptions", "rogue agents", "not the rank-and-file" etc. It's like saying "we let the Andrastians run their own country, and what do we get? Government sanctioned murder".
The Divine conversation happens every playthrough for me. You can support either Leliana (for disapproval) or Cassandra (for approval) or suggest her, in which she feigns surprise, but then agrees to pursue it, at which point you can formerly support her in that dialogue and at the War Table. Is that scene linked to her approval? Or do people miss it because they don't talk with her enough.
Also, after she brings Bastien's sister and son to a visit to Skyhold, Josephine makes a comment about how she thinks that the timing of their visit is "curious" because of the Divine talks and that she wonders what Vivienne is planning.
In case anyone interested in how the points system works for that: http://dragonage.wik...Divine_election
Interesting. I didn't get Vivienne's Divine conversation/war table mission until after What Pride Had Wrought, although the guide implies it occurs after Wicked Eyes Wicked Hearts. On the other hand, the discussions of cassandra and leiliana as candidates (and cass's convos and war table) did happen after WEWH. I did a lot of quests after WEWH but before WPHW, so there was a loooong period of time between learning of Cass and Leiliana as Divine candidates and speaking with Vivienne about it.
No, I am saying that when it runs optimally, the Circle is a safe and comfortable haven where mages can thrive. If there is an issue, it means the Templars or mages in question need to be dealt with. Getting rid of the Circle entirely does not solve such problems, it just means that those problems move to the outside world and get even more out of hand.
The police have committed abuses and sometimes brutalize people. Should we just get rid of police-departments everywhere??
No, you deal with the bad cops individually. You do not eliminate them altogether.
And the RoA is a reasonable last-resort for an outbreak of possession, blood-magic, or other very real problems. However, the most worthwhile thing about the RoA is that it makes mages realize there is a greater price for doing something stupid with their magic (consorting with demons, practicing blood-magic, or what have you) than their own lives -- it will also cost them the lives of those closest to them. That reality is true even if the RoA were banned.
You folks really need to read my posts slowly, and carefully, before responding! I am not some amateur at this.
I said, "speaking vitriol and getting violent toward." Anders may not have been a fan before Justice, but he was not a raving zealot about it. Nothing he said in DA:A was really what I would call "vitriol," and he was not resorting to violence against it either until after he was abominated by "Justice"-nonsense, and that is not on the Chantry. It was his own doing. Gotta love the accountability, though.
And he is free to his opinion, but not everyone shares it. Wynne liked that Circle. So did Finn. Hell, even the HoF did if you RP them that way. Why the cherry-picking?
So what? If you are American, the Feds are always watching you. Some folks complain. Others do not care. It is not something everyone can all agree is a good or bad thing.
**edit** And the mages rebelled because of a self-fulfilling prophecy. Anders decried how terrible the Circle was, so he blew up a Chantry and led some mages to rise up. The Templars responded by tightening restrictions, which drove mages to rebel. Before that, though, Vivienne indicates that the Circles were generally lenient towards mages (<-- not to be confused with mage apprentices), and that Kirkwall was largely the exception/not the rule. Let me reiterate: the Circle only got bad because Mr. AHH THE CIRCLE IS SO BAD!! made it that way.
Whatchu talkin' 'bout, Willis??
This is all just so wrong on so many levels I don't know where to begin.
I'll just repost the most aggregious and head smacking part of your post, "the most worthwhile thing about the RoA is that it makes mages realize there is a greater price for doing something stupid with their magic (... practicing blood-magic, or what have you)." Being killed over using one's own blood to save someone's life seems totally reasonable. Yep. Totally reasonable.
I'm guessing you also thought it was totally fine for Loghain to sell the alienage elves (who were still Ferelden citizens mind you) into slavery, to poison Arl Eamond, and commit tyranny in order to seize the throne for himself even though he utterly devastated the Ferelden military in the process.
But they have to forgo all their freedoms and liberties in order to gain that. And they don't get a choice. They also aren't protected against arbitrary punishment, aren't protected against any form of assault, and even their very life can be taken from them for almost arbitrary reasons.
Plus, there is no guarantee that they would actually receive food, clothing or education nor any guarantee of the quality of such.
So isn't very clear that they are monetarily better off considering they have to give up everything and might gain nothing.
Man ... I really was hoping this wouldn't be another Circle argument thread, but few things here that aren't quite correct.
1) Most Circles allowed people to live "off campus" so to speak, with permission
2) Arbitrary punishment/killing etc. is only if the thing is super dysfunctional -- a Kirkwall
3) Well ... again, unless we're talking torture/starvation, yes, they do receive food, at least functional clothing and education (though most mage robes we see are actually pretty swanky even in more restricted Circles like Ferelden's
No, mages didn't get a choice about Circle life. Peasants don't get a choice about being peasants either, lol. I'm not saying abuses don't happen -- they clearly do, Kirkwall again being an example of the extreme -- but some mages (including Vivienne specifically, as a child) preferred it to starving/getting kicked around by nobles.
They do get a free education, though, that was unavailable to most people. Also housing and food and clothing. That would be worth a fair bit of money. (I'm not saying you're wrong about what you said, just pointing out they had it better from a monetary standpoint than your average peasant.)
If there were no Circle system, they could provide everyone with a free education, both mage and nonmage.
Retour en haut