If a Templar was at Therinfal in the first place, they were aware that the Lord Seeker advocated abandoning the common people and establishing the Order as an independent power, and decided they were okay with that.
actually they weren't, Ser Barris makes it clear that the rank and file have no idea what's going on with their leadership
actually they weren't, Ser Barris makes it clear that the rank and file have no idea what's going on with their leadership
actually they weren't, Ser Barris makes it clear that the rank and file have no idea what's going on with their leadership
I'm referring to announcements that Envy/Lucius made in public, in Barris' presence no less.
If a Templar was at Therinfal in the first place, they were aware that the Lord Seeker advocated abandoning the common people and establishing the Order as an independent power, and decided they were okay with that.
But then you have Ser Barris and similar Templars not being okay with that, fighting with the Inquisition to get rid of the corrupting Red Templars, or fighting anyway if the Inquisition doesn't intervene. There's no sequence with Fiona and her Mages fighting with you to push the Venatori out of Redcliff Castle or Mages fighting back if the Inquisition doesn't take their mission.
I'm referring to announcements that Envy/Lucius made in public, in Barris' presence no less.
again, he doesn't know what he plans, and throw in that Lucius is actively deceiving the rank and file on numerous topics such as red lyrium and the corruption it brings as well as the fact that the Lord Seeker is in fact not actually present and is in the employ of a an ancient darkspawn magister.
The situation in Redcliff goes to show that when given a a choice mages will always choose supremacy over non-mages
again, he doesn't know what he plans, and throw in that Lucius is actively deceiving the rank and file on numerous topics such as red lyrium and the corruption it brings as well as the fact that the Lord Seeker is in fact not actually present and is in the employ of a an ancient darkspawn magister.
Yes, he does not know the ultimate goal of Envy, but leaving the people to whatever fate awaits them and establishing an independent power is already an abandonment of their Templar duties, which is the choice they made knowingly.
and they aren't happy about it as is made clear through dialogue with Barris as well as ambient dialogue in TherinfalYes, he does not know the ultimate goal of Envy, but leaving the people to whatever fate awaits them and establishing an independent power is already an abandonment of their Templar duties, which is the choice they made knowingly.
and they aren't happy about it as is made clear through dialogue with Barris as well as ambient dialogue in Therinfal
Yes, just as there are mages who are unhappy with the alliance with Tevinter.
Without the Inquisition's intervention, by the time they take action it is too late.
All factions in Thedas were played by Corypheus and his Agents of Chaos in one way or another.
neither side comes out looking good, the mages are morons and half of the templar order worked for the bad guy
Maybe this just comes down to personal opinions and values of the Templars and Mages. You and many other people in the forums like/support the Templars so you are more likely to help them and excuse their actions while I am more sympathetic to the Mages so I excuse their actions, or at least offer them a second chance, while you can't.
Yes, he does not know the ultimate goal of Envy, but leaving the people to whatever fate awaits them and establishing an independent power is already an abandonment of their Templar duties, which is the choice they made knowingly.
"I will make the templar order a power that stands alone against the void..."
That part of what Lord Seeker Envy says in Val Royeaux, I always interpreted that as him saying that he will continue to have the templar order protect Thedas against magical dangers. And if you pick dialog where the inquisitor urges for an alliance to help close the breach, he denounces the inquisiton's ability to deal with it but still regonizes it as a threat.
So yeah, he does makes it clear that he intends to make the templars an independent power, but that the templars will continue upholding the spirit of their original charge by "standing against the void".
Just my interpretation.
well its true I find it easier to excuse people who were tricked by those in command as opposed to those who willingly entered their situationMaybe this just comes down to personal opinions and values of the Templars and Mages. You and many other people in the forums like/support the Templars so you are more likely to help them and excuse their actions while I am more sympathetic to the Mages so I excuse their actions, or at least offer them a second chance, while you can't.
So this is what we've come to. Bad writing for the mages, and templars are innocent victims.
Maker forbid that both sides deserve destruction, or that both are victims.
Of course they would. But it wouldn't be a heated discussion as no one will go out of their way to find lame excuses to defend their actions.
The pro-templar acknowledge there are assholes in the Order, and ok people, while the pro-mages see nothing but victims of oppression, no matter how much of a douche X mage is. And if there are a few mages who make decent people and are ok with the Circle system, then those guys are something something Chantry propaganda and templars something. Those are the sort of people you shouldn't talk to because they're a bad influence.
But you've failed to explain how she's senile or suffering from dementia?
Just because you're the nominal leader of a group, doesn't mean that you always make the decisions? The entire rebellion voted on leaving the Circles and we're told that she had those in the rebellion whispering of an alliance with Tevinter, which Fiona's dislike of the entire thing makes it seem like it's still a democracy that's forced her hand in this situation?
The fact that everyone in Redcliffe says that this was her decision lends me to believing it was her decision. Though, if you wan more stupid mages throwing their lot in Tevinter, that's fine with me.
Frankly, I think people are too quick to jump on the hate bandwagon, because simply going #ThanksFiona makes it far easier when you can have her as the scapegoat for the entire rebellion, rather than it being a clusterfrack all around? Not only do we have various parties getting involved such as Alexius and Arl Wulff, but also the use of time travel to further complicate matters?
Nope. I only give credit when it's due, and a leader, an actual leader, would know what's best for her people and not just join the first group of people that enslaved her when she thinks the situation looks bleak enough. And if a few of the higher ups complain, she'd still do what is right and not join in with those people who clamor against her. Like show even an ounce of opposition, which she doesn't. Especially when the only thing so far that is bleak is her strategy. Of course, the dangers of being behind one of the most fortified castles in Thedas can be daunting. I can see why the mages were so afraid of Templars who were weeks away and nowhere near them.
First declared a war she couldn't win, invited Tevinter into Ferelden soil and did nothing when Alexius kicked the arl, if she isn't saved from her mistakes she follow Corypheus, if she is saved she cant see how she f*cked up. She is sufferig from dementia imo.But you've failed to explain how she's senile or suffering from dementia?
Just because you're the nominal leader of a group, doesn't mean that you always make the decisions? The entire rebellion voted on leaving the Circles and we're told that she had those in the rebellion whispering of an alliance with Tevinter, which Fiona's dislike of the entire thing makes it seem like it's still a democracy that's forced her hand in this situation?
Frankly, I think people are too quick to jump on the hate bandwagon, because simply going #ThanksFiona makes it far easier when you can have her as the scapegoat for the entire rebellion, rather than it being a clusterfrack all around? Not only do we have various parties getting involved such as Alexius and Arl Wulff, but also the use of time travel to further complicate matters?
First declared a war she couldn't win, invited Tevinter into Ferelden soil and did nothing when Alexius kicked the arl, if she isn't saved from her mistakes she follow Corypheus, if she is saved she cant see how she f*cked up. She is sufferig from dementia imo.
Its was not the entire rebellion, only one vote of difference, and the idea to sell the rebellion to Tevinter was hers, the others mages werent consulted.
The others have fault too, but Fiona is the worst of them, she led the mages to rebellion, she led them to Tevinter and if not saved from her own mistakes she led the rebellion against the Inquisition
The best thing that can be said about Fiona's leadership of the mage rebellion is that the mages left behind their own Grand Enchanter behind when the Divine called all the adults together for serious business at the Conclave.
All the mages in Redcliffe seem to place the blame/credit for the decision specifically on Fiona. "I can't believe the Grand Enchanter would do this!" is usually the response when they are asked for their perspective on the subject.
The fact that everyone in Redcliffe says that this was her decision lends me to believing it was her decision. Though, if you wan more stupid mages throwing their lot in Tevinter, that's fine with me.
Yeah, because we all know that when most people screw up, their first action is to own up to it fully, rather than laying the blame on someone else?
Nope. I only give credit when it's due, and a leader, an actual leader, would know what's best for her people and not just join the first group of people that enslaved her when she thinks the situation looks bleak enough. And if a few of the higher ups complain, she'd still do what is right and not join in with those people who clamor against her. Like show even an ounce of opposition, which she doesn't. Especially when the only thing so far that is bleak is her strategy. Of course, the dangers of being behind one of the most fortified castles in Thedas can be daunting. I can see why the mages were so afraid of Templars who were weeks away and nowhere near them.
But her leadership over the Mage Rebellion was tenuous at best, since even she later admits that her title of Grand Enchanter means little since they left the Circle? The only reason was was "in charge" was because everyone wanted her to be, so she could have been replaced at any time? The fact that Alexius was so easily able to depose her and take over with little opposition kinda suggests that her leadership wasn't backed up with anything save public opinion and she had no way to actually hold onto her power if challenge?
After all, if it was so easy to oppose the Venatori and the alliance, why didn't any of the rebels rise up against them and tell them that the deal was off? Perhaps they did in one timeline, but with his ability to go back in time, any potential dissenter is probably dealt with swiftly, before any uprising is able to get much traction? The mages couldn't pull a fast one on the Venatori when they can Ctrl-Z at will?
You also realise that the Mages aren't behind the castle walls, they're in the village which was where they were allowed to stay, as was the original agreement with the ruler of Ferelden? The only reason the castle was taken was when Alexius threw out Arl Teagan... but even then, the Venatori control the castle, not the Rebellion? If the Templars invaded, the Venatori would be safe, the Rebellion would be crushed?
You also realise that the Mages aren't behind the castle walls, they're in the village which was where they were allowed to stay, as was the original agreement with the ruler of Ferelden? The only reason the castle was taken was when Alexius threw out Arl Teagan... but even then, the Venatori control the castle, not the Rebellion? If the Templars invaded, the Venatori would be safe, the Rebellion would be crushed?
Yeah, because we all know that when most people screw up, their first action is to own up to it fully, rather than laying the blame on someone else?
The lengths you go through to defend Fiona are matched only by the lengths you go through to condemn someone like Meredith. I don't see the gifs flying out to defend her asinine decisions, and I don't see he walls of, "It's not her fault," to make her choices acceptable. Perhaps one needs to be a magical, female elf to be excuse for being inane.
But her leadership over the Mage Rebellion was tenuous at best, since even she later admits that her title of Grand Enchanter means little since they left the Circle? The only reason was was "in charge" was because everyone wanted her to be, so she could have been replaced at any time? The fact that Alexius was so easily able to depose her and take over with little opposition kinda suggests that her leadership wasn't backed up with anything save public opinion and she had no way to actually hold onto her power if challenge?
Alexius didn't "depose" her. He offered to protect all the mages and said that a Templar attack was imminent. Fiona, the sly fox she is, pounced on that offer as if it were a mouse. The reason she was able to do that? Because she was the de facto leader of the Mage Rebellion. She isn't some figurehead for the public.
After all, if it was so easy to oppose the Venatori and the alliance, why didn't any of the rebels rise up against them and tell them that the deal was off? Perhaps they did in one timeline, but with his ability to go back in time, any potential dissenter is probably dealt with swiftly, before any uprising is able to get much traction? The mages couldn't pull a fast one on the Venatori when they can Ctrl-Z at will?
Because they can't "undo" on a whim until it works. That doesn't make any sense. Fact is, it's not easy to oppose the Venatori. Especially after you let them INSIDE the fortified castle. That kind of makes the fortifications pointless. Before that? They were virtually no thread, especially with the rebel mages backing the arl's troops. Of course this goes back to the hoop jumping I mentioned earlier, so it's not surprising to be seen here.
You also realise that the Mages aren't behind the castle walls, they're in the village which was where they were allowed to stay, as was the original agreement with the ruler of Ferelden? The only reason the castle was taken was when Alexius threw out Arl Teagan... but even then, the Venatori control the castle, not the Rebellion? If the Templars invaded, the Venatori would be safe, the Rebellion would be crushed?
What are you talking about? You do realize what a castle is, yes? Redcliffe Castle, as in the location, is a keep. Redcliffe Village is a proper walled castle/city, complete with fortifications, groveling peasants, and tactical advantages. This of course all on top of the save harbor of all of Ferelden. There is literally no excuse for the stupidity shown by the rebellion, and Fiona, here.
Wouldn't she rather die than help Corypheus remake/destroy the world? It doesn't make any sense to me!!! My mind is figuratively breaking trying to connect her reactions during In Hushed Whispers with her actions during In Your Heart Shall Burn.
Corypheus typically promises his allies will live as gods in his remade world.
Fiona was amenable to slavery in Tevinter with the murky promise of freedom after several years to save herself from Temlars that did not exist. Now, the Inquisition -- something largely believed to be a branch of the Chantry -- has allied with the Templars. That can easily be seen as a response to her mage rebellion -- the Chantry coming to finish them once and for all (not unlike the original Inquisition). Do you really think it is that much of a stretch for the same person to like the idea of remaking the world into old Tevinter's image (where mages lived free) in the face of an imminent Templar threat?
To your original post as to why Fiona stays with Alexius if you recruit the Templars: Alexius is actually nowhere to be found after "Champions of the Just." It is quite possible (even likely) that there was some off-screen confrontation between Alexius and Corypheus, and Corypheus killed him, or Alexius fled.
Dorian says that Alexius was killed by Corypheus, because of his failure.
To your original post as to why Fiona stays with Alexius if you recruit the Templars: Alexius is actually nowhere to be found after "Champions of the Just." It is quite possible (even likely) that there was some off-screen confrontation between Alexius and Corypheus, and Corypheus killed him, or Alexius fled.
Retour en haut