858 réponses à ce sujet

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

At least with how magic works in DAI I think you'd very much see templars match a melee mage. Dispel breaks any mine-like mage ability and removes any barrier. That makes mages very vulnerable to "sword through the throat".

That's outside what I was saying, though. What I was saying was that magic would allow the Knight Enchanter or Arcane Warrior to destroy an equally skilled Templar, assuming the Templar didn't use Dispel or Silence or any of the myriad win buttons on his toolbar. (Which would probably only happen either in a spar or if the Templar was really dumb, I know.)

 

 

Warriors generally were pretty easy to turf compared to mages in DAO. It was actually pretty lore-breaking in that it's hard to see how any templar in DAO would be a threat.

Until the Templar cast Cleanse Area and you started wincing at your AW's Constitution score.

 

That's it. That right there. That is why the Templars are a threat to a mage. That is why Templars consume lyrium, even knowing what it does to them. They can't have more power or better power than the mages, so they need to have powers that fit into the right specific niche to match them.

[In Exile]

That's it. That right there. That is why the Templars are a threat to a mage. That is why Templars consume lyrium, even knowing what it does to them. They can't have more power than the mages, so they need to have the right powers.

Again, we're just playing with story and gameplay segregation here. Templars can't actually stop you from casting any and all of your damaging spells, and buffs are worthless in every DA game in comparison to pure and direct damage. DA:I is the first game were certain buffs actually outclass damage, like barrier. 

 

Lore wise, in DA:O, templars were supposed to be able to dispel all magic but blood magic, which made them incredibly fearsome when it came to mages - effectively mages couldn't win unless they cast blood magic, which templars then could not counter.

 

But that's neither here nor there. 

[Addai]

lol
 
Wynne was such a wreck when she came the Circle, as was Bethany, and Vivienne, and so on.  Many mages are perfectly fine to live in them, so you can stop with the "fear and despair" nonsense as if its universally applicable.

Bethany was terrified of the Circle. Because people reconcile themselves doesn't make it better. What you're saying is that Wynne found it preferable to starving and being burnt alive. That doesn't make the Circle a good place. And for every Wynne, there's a Keili.

I gathered that Addai meant Circle life in general

I was talking about the Harrowing in that instance, but it's all part and parcel. I mean, if high school graduation involved either passing, dying or becoming a husk, I think high school would acquire a certain aura of fear. Not to mention the general paranoia factor- the fact that the templars are always watching them- something that is brought up as a reason why the Fereldan Circle rebelled.

[Jouni S]

If mages were so weak that an average mid-career Templar could face a well-trained mage on equal terms, people wouldn't be so afraid of mages. After all, pretty much anybody can become a Templar, and the Chantry certainly trained lots of them.

Templars basically had two things over mages: numerical superiority and military training. They would face superior individual fighters in coordinated units, follow orders without question, and have actual combat tactics. In comparison, even combat-trained mages would fight as groups of individuals and be inefficient in combat due to the lack of coordination.

[Master Warder Z_]

And for every Wynne, there's a Keili.

Sweet Maker I wish.

The loyalist opinion needed more advocates.

[Xilizhra]

What happened to "I am not Clairvoyant" - ?

 

At the time Anders et el. forced mages into rebellion there was no telling what was going to come next, College or whatever. At one point, it looked like all the rebel mages were going to get slaughtered (and it is possible, since the Inquisitor can ignore Redcliffe in favor of Therinfal Redoubt). So after Anders went full-retard in Kirkwall, public opinion of mages plummeted and the Templars cracked down. Mages like Finn and Connor (and the general majority) got thrown under the bus by having to suffer that BS first, and then many of them likely perished in the ensuing war.

Since none of that has anything to do with any action undertaken by my characters, I'm not sure what your point is.

 

 

As to the College, there are mages who would make an argument for Templars -- like, Minaeve. You do not plan on bringing them back, so your College does not truly serve all mages, just the ones that support its leadership's political faction (also known as partisanism).

If the College needs military forces for some reason, I'm sure the Inquisition will be happy to lend it some (given that it would never have formed without the Inquisition's backing to begin with). In any case, letting Cullen break his lyrium addiction seems to spell the beginning of the end for southern templars even if you do Champions of the Just.

[Lumix19]

Sweet Maker I wish.

The loyalist opinion needed more advocates.

Shouldn't the fact that they don't tell you something?

[Master Warder Z_]

Shouldn't the fact that they don't tell you something?

Not anymore then any of the other fraternities.

I mean what five libertarians the entire series and it's the majority?

That's hardly a lock.

[Lumix19]

Not anymore then any of the other fraternities.

I mean what five libertarians the entire series and it's the majority?

That's hardly a lock.

The Aequitarians are the majority, the Libertarians are even smaller than the Loyalists, they're just up and coming is all.

[Xilizhra]

The Aequitarians are the majority, the Libertarians are even smaller than the Loyalists, they're just up and coming is all.

IIRC, the Libertarians are more numerous than the Loyalists.

[Lumix19]

IIRC, the Libertarians are more numerous than the Loyalists.

Are they? The vote in Asunder (where the Chantry was dissolved) seems to indicate that the Libertarians are smaller than the Loyalists, though admittedly that could be only counting those who were actually at Andoral's Reach.

 

Regardless I think all the fraternities got pretty fair representation:

 

Libertarians: Adrian, Fiona, Uldred

Loyalists: Vivienne, Keili

Aequitarians: Wynne, Rhys, Irving and a couple of others I'm sure.

Isolationists got Niall and the Lucrosians didn't even get anybody. Regardless it is pretty fair and somewhat accurately reflects the popularity of each fraternity.

 

Edit: This seems to indicate I'm wrong though, some nice set up (I thought)

 

So far, an alliance between the Loyalists and Aequitarians has prevented the Libertarians from gaining much headway, but there are signs that the Aequitarians may throw their support in with the Libertarians. If that happens, many mages predict it will come to civil war among the Circles.

—From The Circle of the Magi: A History, by First Enchanter Josephus.

[The Baconer]

Sweet Maker I wish.

The loyalist opinion needed more advocates.

 

Keili is a complete nutter, I wouldn't want her representing my fraternity. I'd take more Viviennes.

[PearsAndCherries]

I'd be a blood mage. Imagine the possibilities!

[Addai]

Sweet Maker I wish.

The loyalist opinion needed more advocates.

After the events of DAI, it'll be harder for the Chantry to produce self-hating mages.

 

But hey, there's always the Qun.

[QueenCrow]

I'd be a blood mage. Imagine the possibilities!

 

I don't know if I'd go so far as to be a blood mage.  Solas said using blood magic makes it harder to tap into the Fade.  But I'm all for being completely anti-Templar though.  Did you see those lunatics-in-plate in the Hinterlands, barking at the moon?  And the danger of succumbing to the lure of red lyrium is such that they should all be locked up and make into soldier slaves.  And make the good looking ones into sex slaves.  And if they fight, or show themselves to be too dangerous, lobotomize them.

 

sweet smile

[Boost32]

Again, we're just playing with story and gameplay segregation here. Templars can't actually stop you from casting any and all of your damaging spells, and buffs are worthless in every DA game in comparison to pure and direct damage. DA:I is the first game were certain buffs actually outclass damage, like barrier. 
 
Lore wise, in DA:O, templars were supposed to be able to dispel all magic but blood magic, which made them incredibly fearsome when it came to mages - effectively mages couldn't win unless they cast blood magic, which templars then could not counter.
 
But that's neither here nor there.

DA2 templars can, they were the perfect templars, unfortunately the DAI templars didnt get Silence spell =/

[Kantr]

If I had to be in a Circle I would choose the one the Inquisitor was in, that place was very lax.

[RoughTumble]

I don't know if I'd go so far as to be a blood mage.  Solas said using blood magic makes it harder to tap into the Fade.  But I'm all for being completely anti-Templar though.  Did you see those lunatics-in-plate in the Hinterlands, barking at the moon?  And the danger of succumbing to the lure of red lyrium is such that they should all be locked up and make into soldier slaves.  And make the good looking ones into sex slaves.  And if they fight, or show themselves to be too dangerous, lobotomize them.

 

sweet smile

*BOL*  Twisted biatch.

[QueenCrow]

*BOL*  Twisted biatch.

 

Welcome to the BSN

[Uccio]

I'd be a blood mage. Imagine the possibilities!

 

Since I would be on the run better to be best suited for it. Templar blood slaves!

 

[In Exile]

If mages were so weak that an average mid-career Templar could face a well-trained mage on equal terms, people wouldn't be so afraid of mages. After all, pretty much anybody can become a Templar, and the Chantry certainly trained lots of them.

Templars basically had two things over mages: numerical superiority and military training. They would face superior individual fighters in coordinated units, follow orders without question, and have actual combat tactics. In comparison, even combat-trained mages would fight as groups of individuals and be inefficient in combat due to the lack of coordination.

 

That doesn't follow at all. One, it's established in DA:O that templars are chosen primarily for their religious fervor and loyalty to the Chantry. Two, supporting a standing army is incredibly costly. It's one thing for the Chantry to maintain a sizeable number of templars that's more or less comparable to the number of mages (or somewhat greater). It's another thing to have an actual military force. 

 

DA:O's codex - which is really the only time we get to read about templar abilities as they're seen in the lore, not gameplay - make it sound like they're very adept at countering most non-blood magic, which is why hedge mages and apostates have to resort to it to stay free. 

[Uccio]

If mages were so weak that an average mid-career Templar could face a well-trained mage on equal terms, people wouldn't be so afraid of mages. After all, pretty much anybody can become a Templar, and the Chantry certainly trained lots of them.

Templars basically had two things over mages: numerical superiority and military training. They would face superior individual fighters in coordinated units, follow orders without question, and have actual combat tactics. In comparison, even combat-trained mages would fight as groups of individuals and be inefficient in combat due to the lack of coordination.

 

 

According to the lore no one should be afraid of the mages. I just came across this mage codex and it really baffled me. 

 

"A mage´s strike rarely hits with the force of a trained chevalier´s blade"

 

I don´t want to be nitpicking but does that mean a mage strikes with the force of a,

 

geriatric senior citizen?

 

or

 

10 years old kid?

 

So a mage does what now, dazzles his enemy and then kicks him in the balls? How could Tevinter Imperium ever conquer Thedas should their mages be so pitiful, is Bio deliberately turning mages into jesters? *sight* How I miss BG2 mages.

[In Exile]

According to the lore no one should be afraid of the mages. I just came across this mage codex and it really baffled me. 

 

"A mage´s strike rarely hits with the force of a trained chevalier´s blade"

 

I don´t want to be nitpicking but does that mean a mage strikes with the force of a,

 

geriatric senior citizen?

 

or

 

10 years old kid?

 

So a mage does what now, dazzles his enemy and then kicks him in the balls? How could Tevinter Imperium ever conquer Thedas should their mages be so pitiful, is Bio deliberately turning mages into jesters? *sight* How I miss BG2 mages.

 

I think that's just a lore way of saying those staff blasts do less damage than swords, which they do. 

[Boost32]

That doesn't follow at all. One, it's established in DA:O that templars are chosen primarily for their religious fervor and loyalty to the Chantry. Two, supporting a standing army is incredibly costly. It's one thing for the Chantry to maintain a sizeable number of templars that's more or less comparable to the number of mages (or somewhat greater). It's another thing to have an actual military force. 

It was a biased point of view, the writer clearly had a bias against the templars.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

According to the lore no one should be afraid of the mages. I just came across this mage codex and it really baffled me. 

 

"A mage´s strike rarely hits with the force of a trained chevalier´s blade"

 

I don´t want to be nitpicking but does that mean a mage strikes with the force of a,

 

geriatric senior citizen?

 

or

 

10 years old kid?

 

So a mage does what now, dazzles his enemy and then kicks him in the balls? How could Tevinter Imperium ever conquer Thedas should their mages be so pitiful, is Bio deliberately turning mages into jesters? *sight* How I miss BG2 mages.

You are aware that there's some degree of distance between "the force of a trained superknight's attacks" and "the force of a ten-year-old's wimpslap?"