824 réponses à ce sujet

[keesio74]

Viv is arrogant, power hungry and very political. Seems like in the dark world of Dragon Age (or just in general), those qualities are bonuses for being a ruler (like Divine). It's why many fear Cass will not make strong Divine in the long run while Lili and Viv seem to have the demeanor to handle the job.

[Phoe77]

I don't think that Vivienne is a terrible person, but I wouldn't want her in charge of how the Circles work.  I think that she's too willing to believe that the experiences of other mages in Thedas mirror her own experiences in the Circle.  When asked about the restrictions of the Circle, she speaks of having her own quarters in the palace and being allowed to come and go as she pleases.  I think that it goes without saying that those freedoms are based on her wealth and political influence and that the average mage without those benefits isn't anywhere near as free as she is, but she doesn't acknowledge that fact at all.  

 

I agree that she is an optimist in the sense that she truly believes that the current system can work, but I think she's too invested in making it work as is.  

[theflyingzamboni]

Except Vivienne is a mage.  She is not for the mistreatment of mages.  She wants the Circle to be a haven, not a prison.  A place where mages can practice thir magic in safety.  She wants Templars to be guardians of mages, against threats from without and within.  Tempalrs and mages living in a symbiotic relationship, working together to achieve something greater.

 

 

Vivienne is, in her own way, as idealistic as Lelianna.  While Leliana wants to tear down the whole insitution and let mages govern themselves, Vivienne is convinced the system can still work.  That the abuses were perpetrated by individuals and lack of oversight, and don't speak to the system in general.  I'm not so sure she's right about this. 

And she fallaciously believes that that gives her the right to make that decision for all mages. People internalize criticism and negative stereotypes all the time. It can be hard not to when you are constantly bombarded explicitly and implicitly with the idea that you are a danger to everyone. They still do not have any more right than people outside that group to make that decision for everyone. To extend my analogy yet again: A patriotic Japanese American agrees that some other Japanese Americans still harbor loyalty to Japan, and will attempt to betray America or kill Americans. To protect his country, he supports the internment camp policy.

 

Even if he knew for a fact that there was an active plot by some Japanese-Americans, that does not make his view any more moral than that of a white politician. Knowing that some people could cause danger does not make it right to remove the choice of freedom from everyone in that group.

Further, I'd say her actions in the epilogue slides if she is made Divine belie that idealism. In the Templar ending, it says she gives them more freedom within the Circle, but being constrained within the Circle is not a choice. She subjugates any mages who don't surrender to her will by violence. She also centralizes all power over the magers and Templars to herself, making her deepest motivations more than a little suspect. In short, she expouses the opinions of and behaves as a dictator.

[Sarielle]

I think that she's too willing to believe that the experiences of other mages in Thedas mirror her own experiences in the Circle.  When asked about the restrictions of the Circle, she speaks of having her own quarters in the palace and being allowed to come and go as she pleases.  I think that it goes without saying that those freedoms are based on her wealth and political influence and that the average mage without those benefits isn't anywhere near as free as she is, but she doesn't acknowledge that fact at all.  

 

She does say that, except in a couple of more restrictive Circles, mages were allowed to live outside it (as long as they had the First Enchanter's permission). Now as the First Enchanter herself she got to allow her own freedoms, of course. And I'm sure most mages don't have suites in palaces. She does address the topic, though -- and even explicitly states that each mage's experience is unique.

[QueenCrow]

While I can see how Vivienne can appeal to people who appreciate a certain sharp charm - my husband adores Viv to bits - I think she's extremely narcissistic and always throw her over for companions with a better sense of humor.

[Cantina]

While I can see how Vivienne can appeal to people who appreciate a certain sharp charm - my husband adores Viv to bits - I think she's extremely narcissistic and always throw her over for companions with a better sense of humor.

 

LOL! My husband hates Vivienne as much as I do.

 

Whenever he laughs its usually because he put Vivienne in some ghastly outfit.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

In the Templar ending, it says she gives them more freedom within the Circle, but being constrained within the Circle is not a choice.

 

That would matter if a mandatory Circle were a problem.

[Sarielle]

Whenever he laughs its usually because he put Vivienne in some ghastly outfit.

 

I actually felt bad for taking Vivienne to the Winter Palace with me after I saw what everyone was wearing. I might as well have slapped her in a Cone of Shame. And my Inquisitor, too for that matter >:{

[theflyingzamboni]

That would matter if a mandatory Circle were a problem.

Given her response to fracture groups within the Chantry, her response to the Mage's College, and everything she says in the game, you think that it isn't mandatory in that one ending?

[thesuperdarkone2]

Given her response to fracture groups within the Chantry, her response to the Mage's College, and everything she says in the game, you think that it isn't mandatory in that one ending?

I think he means that having circles be mandatory isn't wrong. I think that as long as the Chantry controls the circles, abuses and corruption will no doubt flare again. When you think it's your divine duty to punish and watch over a group of people, inevitable abuses are going to occur.

[Boost32]

I think he means that having circles be mandatory isn't wrong. I think that as long as the Chantry controls the circles, abuses and corruption will no doubt flare again. When you think it's your divine duty to punish and watch over a group of people, inevitable abuses are going to occur.

But dont you think withouth the Chantry (a almost neutral third party), the nobility will not conscript them to fight in petty wars? Can you imagine a mage under pressure of the battlefield? A weak mage will become a abomination.
Someone must regulate the Circles to prevent it from happening. Under the Chantry, the mages only fought in the Exalted Marches.

[Sarielle]

Hmm. Mages being used in nobles' battles wasn't something I ever considered ... but I don't think you're wrong.

[Boost32]

Hmm. Mages being used in nobles' battles wasn't something I ever considered ... but I don't think you're wrong.

If I remember correctly, Gaspard wanted to nationalize both the Circles and the Templars. I doubt he will be the last noble with this idea and without the Chantry what will stop them? Leliana spy network and assassins are shared with the Inquisition, they cant be everywhere to prevent it and she is not the only one with assassins and spies.

[Sarielle]

If I remember correctly, Gaspard wanted to nationalize both the Circles and the Templars.

 

Hmm, I honestly don't remember for sure either now. I'm nearing that point in the story again though so I should get a refresher soon.

 

While we can argue whether that's better than Circle life, I do think that seems pretty inevitable if the Circles were dissolved.

[Giantdeathrobot]

And she fallaciously believes that that gives her the right to make that decision for all mages. People internalize criticism and negative stereotypes all the time. It can be hard not to when you are constantly bombarded explicitly and implicitly with the idea that you are a danger to everyone. They still do not have any more right than people outside that group to make that decision for everyone. To extend my analogy yet again: A patriotic Japanese American agrees that some other Japanese Americans still harbor loyalty to Japan, and will attempt to betray America or kill Americans. To protect his country, he supports the internment camp policy.

 

Even if he knew for a fact that there was an active plot by some Japanese-Americans, that does not make his view any more moral than that of a white politician. Knowing that some people could cause danger does not make it right to remove the choice of freedom from everyone in that group.

Further, I'd say her actions in the epilogue slides if she is made Divine belie that idealism. In the Templar ending, it says she gives them more freedom within the Circle, but being constrained within the Circle is not a choice. She subjugates any mages who don't surrender to her will by violence. She also centralizes all power over the magers and Templars to herself, making her deepest motivations more than a little suspect. In short, she expouses the opinions of and behaves as a dictator.

 

And Leliana doesn't? Unless she's softened, she drowns dissent in blood and imposes her reforms by force. One might agree with said reforms, certainly, but let's not kid ourselves, whoever is Divine save Cassandra (maybe) and Softened!Leliana will have blood on their hands. It,s the quickest way to change a group as monolithic as the Chantry.

 

And anyway, if you're a leader in Thedas, you're a dictator by default. The only difference is if you're an hereditary one (king of Ferelden, Emperor of Orlais) or selected by a council composed of the top 0.01% of your society (king of Orzammar, Archon, Divine, etc.). The only leader that is elected by anything resembling a democracy we see is Fiona, which has the result we saw.

 

This is not a setting where we can apply 21th century morality of prefering soft reforms enacted by democratically elected people. If you want change in Thedas, blood will most likely flow. If you want power, it will come from the high priesthood and the nobility. Even the Inquisitor, who is an exceptional individual coming at an exceptional time, explicitely derives power from their noble allies, armed forces and Leliana's cutthroats.

[fcedric]

Vivienne is a $#@% !!! 

Egoist, Opportunist, snob, ....

[Cantina]

I actually felt bad for taking Vivienne to the Winter Palace with me after I saw what everyone was wearing. I might as well have slapped her in a Cone of Shame. And my Inquisitor, too for that matter >:{

 

OK! A Modder needs to make a "Cone of Shame" so I can put it on Vivienne.

[citizen002057394]

I think the biggest reason that Viv wants the circles back is that she knows full well that the people of Thedas do not trust mages to be amongst them. The only way she knows that the mages can mingle with society while freely practicing magic is when they are in a circle where they have been taught discipline and control of their magic and that they are no risk of being abominations. She dislikes the mage rebellion because they just made people more fearful of mages. She also dislikes Tevinter magisters because they keep perpetuating the perception of being evil magic-drunk mages. And lastly, if all mages end up being outcasts that means she will also be an outcast and she will no longer be able to go to balls, parties, etc... Lol this is Vivienne after all and I don't fault her for that.

 

Btw... Am I the only one who got the Blackwall and Vivienne banter early in the game where he lashes out at Vivienne and the nobles for hiding behind the castle walls while everyone does their bidding? I think that was the start of their hostilities. I didn't see the dialog on the wiki but I remember getting it on my second playthrough.

[Sarielle]

OK! A Modder needs to make a "Cone of Shame" so I can put it on Vivienne.

 

It's already there, it's called plaidweave. xD

 

Btw... Am I the only one who got the Blackwall and Vivienne banter early in the game where he lashes out at Vivienne and the nobles for hiding behind the castle walls while everyone does their bidding? I think that was the start of their hostilities. I didn't see the dialog on the wiki but I remember getting it on my second playthrough.

 

That doesn't sound familiar. I know I took those two around Hinterlands a bunch at the start and I only remember feeling like "Dang, Vivi. Wtf was that all about" with their first interaction. That would make a ton of sense for them not getting along, though.

[Akkos]

Btw... Am I the only one who got the Blackwall and Vivienne banter early in the game where he lashes out at Vivienne and the nobles for hiding behind the castle walls while everyone does their bidding? I think that was the start of their hostilities. I didn't see the dialog on the wiki but I remember getting it on my second playthrough.

 

I got that too in my first playthrough. Blackwall started the conversation that way, then tries to offer her silk handchief to wipe the mud in her greave and she replies are you mocking me or something?... 

 

He also said how is it like leaving your mansion behind. Then later, got the "you took a blow in the last fight".

That's where Vivienne started being rude to him after she noticed he is trying too much to be civil while having a conversation but failing..  She was like "You keep hitting things" 

I got the banter in that order.

[Sarielle]

I got that too in my first playthrough. Blackwall started the conversation that way, then tries to offer her silk handchief to wipe the mud in her greave and she replies are you mocking me or something?... 

 

He also said how is it like leaving your mansion behind. Then later, got the "you took a blow in the last fight".

That's where Vivienne started being rude to him after she noticed he is trying too much to be civil while having a conversation but failing..  She was like "You keep hitting things" 

I got the banter in that order.

 

Hmm, I have a memory of Vivienne starting it, but I could be wrong. Next playthrough I start I'll focus on those two from the outset, see what I get.

[sillymonkboy]

I will admit that I think Mary really dropped the ball with that particular quest.  If Vivienne can attend with you, she should be able to play a more significant role.  I understand that they wanted to make the companions interchangeable, but it just felt like a huge missed opportunity. 

I was really disappointed with that as well. That would have been the absolute perfect time for her to shine. I also would have liked to see Leliana do more gaming as well.

[Boost32]

I was really disappointed with that as well. That would have been the absolute perfect time for her to shine. I also would have liked to see Leliana do more gaming as well.

Have we seem Leliana playing The Game? Everyone says she its good at it, but we never see her doing anything

[sillymonkboy]

Have we seem Leliana playing The Game? Everyone says she its good at it, but we never see her doing anything

That's exactly my point. We are told that Vivienne and Leliana are both exceptional players of the Grand Game, but all we get to see is Leliana using inductive reasoning to demonstrate a potential sociopolitical weakness in one minor noble and virtually nothing at all from Vivienne.

[Boost32]

That's exactly my point. We are told that Vivienne and Leliana are both exceptional players of the Grand Game, but all we get to see is Leliana using inductive reasoning to demonstrate a potential sociopolitical weakness in one minor noble and virtually nothing at all from Vivienne.

We have seem Vivienne, the marquis at her ball ( she manipulated him to make a move on the Inquisitor, because he offended her and Bastien). She either humiliated him our killed and could gain the trust of the Herald.
She used the death of Bastien to gain more trust of his family.
She os a mage who became a Divine candidate, and she can be elected.

But what Leliana did?