And why almost half of the Circle didn't want to rebel? They were forced into a war they didn't wanted, some were killed by those who wanted to fight. Why their opinion shouldnt count?
Adrian didn't make Lambert tyrannical, she just gave him a reason to arrest Rhys. He chose to try and crush the mage rebellion, to refuse to allow the mages to investigate the murder and to go against the direct order of the Divine and interfere with the Conclave. As much as Adrian is at fault, she was trying to get a reaction from Lambert to convince Wynne, and she got it. And do you really believe that if Adrian hadn't framed Rhys Lambert wouldn't have interfered anyway? It seems clear that he was unwilling to let the vote go ahead irrespective of the Rhys situation.
FIrst the conclave wasn't supposed to be voting on that in the first place. That wasn't what it was for. Fiona was hijacking the conclave, and Adrian was helping her.
Second no, Lambert wouldn't have let the vote go through (because see above) but he would have had the backing of Wynne and her followers. FIona and Adrian would have been shut down before things got out of hand.
Adrian didn't make Lambert tyrannical, she just gave him a reason to arrest Rhys. He chose to try and crush the mage rebellion, to refuse to allow the mages to investigate the murder and to go against the direct order of the Divine and interfere with the Conclave. As much as Adrian is at fault, she was trying to get a reaction from Lambert to convince Wynne, and she got it. And do you really believe that if Adrian hadn't framed Rhys Lambert wouldn't have interfered anyway? It seems clear that he was unwilling to let the vote go ahead irrespective of the Rhys situation.
But she knew she can manipulate him. He was a dog ready to bite. She did what she did knowing full well he would done what he did. They are both wrong. If she was willing to go that far to start a war then she would of done anything she could of done form the shadows to start one.
Adrian was helping her.
No she was not.
Hello lumix.I see the usual gang is here, hi Boost. First: was it half? I was under the impression it was less than that. For example Vivienne is the only First Enchanter who remained a loyalist. Second: who said their opinion shouldn't count? Of course it should.
The mages were allowed to talk about anything at the conclave. But you're right about Wynne, she would've talked the mages out of voting. But Fiona and Adrian had clearly lost faith in Wynne's promises and I can't blame them for that, Adrian is far from faultless though.FIrst the conclave wasn't supposed to be voting on that in the first place. That wasn't what it was for. Fiona was hijacking the conclave, and Adrian was helping her.
Second no, Lambert wouldn't have let the vote go through (because see above) but he would have had the backing of Wynne and her followers. FIona and Adrian would have been shut down before things got out of hand.
“I accept responsibility for my actions," she said, "but not for the templars'. I never thought it would go that far. Even so, I would do it again. Pharamond wanted to die. He begged me.”But she knew she can manipulate him. He was a dog ready to bite. She did what she did knowing full well he would done what he did. They are both wrong. If she was willing to go that far to start a war then she would of done anything she could of done form the shadows to start one.
“He delivered a short speech in a quavering voice, calling on the mages to submit. There was no hope in fighting the templars, he said. The people of Thedas would never accept free mages, and as in Andraste's time they would rise up as one and cast them down. The Circle was their only hope.”Hello lumix.
The vote to go to war was almost 50-50, only Rhys vote made them go to war. Only the loyalist followed Vivienne, the others went with the rebels (like the mage at the travern and Connor).
In their opinions the Circle were good, but people forget about them and only post opinions of pro "freedom" mages.
I'm well aware that not every Circle has Kirkwall or White Spire conditions. But I think your missing the point that Vivienne isn't taking into account the events of the Conclave. Lambert pushed Mages into rebellion through his tyranny, I'm sure if he hasn't interfered the vote would have failed and Wynne would have gotten her way. As for intolerable conditions and management, I think that's best answered by this codex entry: http://dragonage.wik..._Circle_of_Magi
Those who killed fellow Mages were fringe groups, attempting to incite loyalists into joining the rebellion. Not justifiable certainly but I don't blame entire groups for the actions of individuals. All I was saying was that was the nature of the vote, loyalists made their choice and were outvoted. Also what dialogue between Cole and Vivienne? Finally what point are you trying to make about the Hinterlands?
You claim they were fringe, but offer no proof.
The loyalists chose not to rebel. They may have been outvoted, but slaughtering them was the mage's response.
The dialogue is between Cole and Vivienne. Feel free to look it up on Youtube (she mentions it when Cole is talking about Vivienne's memory of entering a Circle and seeing a friend murdered by her fellow mages). "Any who did not want to rebel were "freed" by fire and lightning!"
Look at the codexes of the mages in the Hinterlands. It's clear they want the power to bully others and take what they want.
You also offer no proof that it was systematic. And I see no evidence of slaughtering either. Also you might need to provide me a link, I went to the wiki but I didn't see anything, admittedly it's not comprehensive.You claim they were fringe, but offer no proof.
The loyalists chose not to rebel. They may have been outvoted, but slaughtering them was the mage's response.
The dialogue is between Cole and Vivienne. Feel free to look it up on Youtube (she mentions it when Cole is talking about Vivienne's memory of entering a Circle and seeing a friend murdered by her fellow mages). "Any who did not want to rebel were "freed" by fire and lightning!"
Look at the codexes of the mages in the Hinterlands. It's clear they want the power to bully others and take what they want.
You also offer no proof that it was systematic. And I see no evidence of slaughtering either. Also you might need to provide me a link, I went to the wiki but I didn't see anything, admittedly it's not comprehensive.
And I never said the Hinterlands Mages weren't bullies but I'm still failing to grasp your point.
Edit: I found the conversation between Cole and Vivienne that you mentioned.
Preponderance sides with me, friend. I've provided more than ample evidence that shows the mages slaughtered the compatriots who didn't want to rebel. We also saw what they did to the Tranquil (if they did not do the slaughter themselves, than they handed them over to be slaughtered). The onus of evidence is now on you, and you have provided nothing.
The Hinterlands mages prove exactly what Vivienne was talking about: The mages who gained their freedom did nothing with it but terrorize the innocent.
Preponderance sides with me, friend. I've provided more than ample evidence that shows the mages slaughtered the compatriots who didn't want to rebel. We also saw what they did to the Tranquil (if they did not do the slaughter themselves, than they handed them over to be slaughtered). The onus of evidence is now on you, and you have provided nothing.
The Hinterlands mages prove exactly what Vivienne was talking about: The mages who gained their freedom did nothing with it but terrorize the innocent.
“I accept responsibility for my actions," she said, "but not for the templars'. I never thought it would go that far. Even so, I would do it again. Pharamond wanted to die. He begged me.”
I don't think she knew how far it would go but they were both definitely to blame.
BS. Yes she did know it would go that far. That's the only reason she did it. There is no way around this argument.
You also offer no proof that it was systematic. And I see no evidence of slaughtering either. Also you might need to provide me a link, I went to the wiki but I didn't see anything, admittedly it's not comprehensive.
And I never said the Hinterlands Mages weren't bullies but I'm still failing to grasp your point.
Edit: I found the conversation between Cole and Vivienne that you mentioned.
If you ignore the witness you have no proof. But the witness is valid twice over so it can't be ignored.
Your main piece of evidence seems to be Vivienne's memory of the Circle incident. Certainly tragic but hardly indicative of a wider or systematic slaughter of the loyalists by libertarians. The tranquil deaths were perpetuated by the Venatori and hardly seem relevant to this discussion. And the Hinterland Mages were a tiny fragment of the main rebel group, a group which went on to condemn said Mages and welcome the aid of others in dealing with such apostates.
Regardless there is no evidence that the Libertarians did not systematically slaughter the Loyalists save for the fact that it is never mentioned, there is no battle seen between the loyalists and libertarians and there are a number of loyalists still around. So yes, you are right there is no evidence. But I can hardly imagine people like Fiona or even Adrian condoning such a thing.
I would also point out that the loyalists are by rights obligated to aid the rebellion. Not saying those who refused deserved to die, just pointing it out.
He never said there was a systematic slaughter and his point was not that. It that mages in the rebelion lost control and their leaders did nothing to control them or police them
Uldred's plan was to gain independence, he became an abomination by accident when he summoned a demon he couldn't control. Rebellion indicates dissatisfaction and that's the reason why it doesn't work, if even the most lenient Circle incites rebellion what hope is there for the others? So yes such an instance of rebellion is important to take into consideration because it's symptomatic of the problem, it's easy to brush Uldred and his followers off as crazy blood mages but that's not what they were at first, it's just that they went to extreme measures that got out of control.
This codex entry shows the dissent in Kinloch Hold: http://dragonage.wik...omises_of_Pride
If you are looking for a system that satisfies 100% of the population, you won't find it. Why assume the problem is with the system rather than with the population?
Corypheus is dissatisfied with the state of the world and he has many followers. Let's hear their opinion and change based on it.
Your main piece of evidence seems to be Vivienne's memory of the Circle incident. Certainly tragic but hardly indicative of a wider or systematic slaughter of the loyalists by libertarians.
There a Templar war table mission where they confront a group of apostates. When offered the chance to surrender, a few try. The others nearly kill them.
And the Hinterland Mages were a tiny fragment of the main rebel group, a group which went on to condemn said Mages and welcome the aid of others in dealing with such apostates.
It would be more accurate to say they washed their hands off the problem proving the Templars right when they claimed the mages could not be trusted to police themselves.
I would also point out that the loyalists are by rights obligated to aid the rebellion. Not saying those who refused deserved to die, just pointing it out.
They were dissatisfied with it, I thought that meant the vote was wrong by default.
That's a direct quote from Asunder. I'm not sure where the confusion is.BS. Yes she did know it would go that far. That's the only reason she did it. There is no way around this argument.
That's not what I got out of what they were saying but whatever. But yes there were out of control Mages, but when you're fighting a war it's difficult to manage everybody. It was a time of chaos. Besides what do you expect Fiona to do? March from Andoral's Reach to punish these sorts of people? Condemn such apostates and renegades, but don't blame the rebels for something they had no part in.He never said there was a systematic slaughter and his point was not that. It that mages in the rebelion lost control and their leaders did nothing to control them or police them
The problem was both. With the abuses of the system and the fact that the mages were no longer happy remaining in the Circle. But should we ignore their opinions and force them back into their Circles against their will? A population can't be managed like that. Lambert tried and all it resulted in was chaos. Compromise, not tyranny will keep the peace.If you are looking for a system that satisfies 100% of the population, you won't find it. Why assume the problem is with the system rather than with the population?
Corypheus is dissatisfied with the state of the world and he has many followers. Let's hear their opinion and change based on it.
Your main piece of evidence seems to be Vivienne's memory of the Circle incident. Certainly tragic but hardly indicative of a wider or systematic slaughter of the loyalists by libertarians. The tranquil deaths were perpetuated by the Venatori and hardly seem relevant to this discussion. And the Hinterland Mages were a tiny fragment of the main rebel group, a group which went on to condemn said Mages and welcome the aid of others in dealing with such apostates.
Regardless there is no evidence that the Libertarians did not systematically slaughter the Loyalists save for the fact that it is never mentioned, there is no battle seen between the loyalists and libertarians and there are a number of loyalists still around. So yes, you are right there is no evidence. But I can hardly imagine people like Fiona or even Adrian condoning such a thing.
I would also point out that the loyalists are by rights obligated to aid the rebellion. Not saying those who refused deserved to die, just pointing it out.
You are aware that what I have proven is "preponderance" right. That is most of the evidence. Considering that Vivienne's memory is not the only incident out there (There's the conversation she has about the Ostwick Circle with a human mage; and the apostates) shows far more ample evidence in that event than it does with everything else (The couple of war table missions you get when the templars are allied with)
Adrian was fully willing to slaughter a mage just to make the rebellion happen. While it's true Fiona never forced anyone to rebel, that just shows her ineffectiveness as a leader.
The Tranquil skulls exist before the Venatori show up. Remember, the first time you go to Val Royeaux, the time travel plot hadn't happened yet. So Alexius had not made his deal with Fiona.
The Loyalists were not obliged to go out and slaughter innocent people as Adrian and Anders did.
The Tranquil skulls exist before the Venatori show up. Remember, the first time you go to Val Royeaux, the time travel plot hadn't happened yet. So Alexius had not made his deal with Fiona.
You can't even enter Redcliffe before the time travel has already happened, so you are literally lying right here.
But you can encounter the oculara before going to Redcliff.You can't even enter Redcliffe before the time travel has already happened, so you are literally lying right here.
But you can encounter the oculara before going to Redcliff.
And you can encounter Venatori in Bull's mission before the time travel.
Regardless, the Oculara are a Venatori project. Beyond Fiona's arrangement with Alexius, the rebels have nothing to do with their creation.
The oculara were made with the tranquils who followed the rebels, if there was a time travel, you could only find it after encountering Fiona in Val Royeaux.And you can encounter Venatori in Bull's mission before the time travel.
Regardless, the Oculara are a Venatori project. Beyond Fiona's arrangement with Alexius, the rebels have nothing to do with their creation.
The oculara were made with the tranquils who followed the rebels, if there was a time travel, you could only find it after encountering Fiona in Val Royeaux.
Most of the tranquil were abandoned after the rebellion, and these are the individuals that were used to make the Oculara. The ones who followed the rebels were not killed until Alexius' arrival.
That's a direct quote from Asunder. I'm not sure where the confusion is.
She murdered Pharamond and framed Rhys for knowing Lambert would arrest him for it, and that Wynne would fight to defend him.
You can't knock over blocks and say you are not responsible for them falling.
But before the Alexius' arrival there would not be any oculara if he used the time travel spell.Most of the tranquil were abandoned after the rebellion, and these are the individuals that were used to make the Oculara. The ones who followed the rebels were not killed until Alexius' arrival.
But before the Alexius' arrival there would not be any oculara if he used the time travel spell.
This is too confusing, I hate the time travel plot.
It's very hard to do a time travel story well. Internal consistency is typically the first to go.
Retour en haut