601 réponses à ce sujet

[Master Warder Z_]

I'm giving you a like for commitment.

It was pretty good

[andy6915]

Well Cory did wear the heels in the relationship

...True.

[TK514]

I love that he has striped stockings.  Like the Wicked Witch of the East.

[andy6915]

I love that he has striped stockings.  Like the Wicked Witch of the East.

Next time I play DA2, I'm going to try to look closely enough to tell if he's wearing the same shoes in Legacy.

[Andromelek]

And The Architect's shoes?

[andy6915]

And The Architect's shoes?

Funny... I'm playing Awakening right now actually. I could try to see his feet too when I fight him. And that's not in question, I ALWAYS fight him.

[Andromelek]

Funny... I'm playing Awakening right now actually. I could try to see his feet too when I fight him. And that's not in question, I ALWAYS fight him.

I rather prefer to forgive him, but anyway, if you fight him try to get a pic please.

[MisterJB]

 

The Architect doesn't wear them, someone on Tumblr checked.

And what the hell was Bioware thinking when they put that there. Is it a placehold for characters whose legs are not visible but still need to be animated?
Did they not want us to take their villain seriously?

[Andromelek]

The Architect doesn't wear them, someone on Tumblr checked.

And what the hell was Bioware thinking when they put that there. Is it a placehold for characters whose legs are not visible but still need to be animated?
Did they not want us to take their villain seriously?

They wanted us to take him seriously, I assure you, that's the reason of why on the whole game everything wrong done by people ends attached to Corypheus somehow, don't get me wrong, the game is good, but the "all out in war" argument turned into "everything is Corypheus' fault" is too disappointing for what I was expecting.

[MisterJB]

 

I can't tell what you were expecting but the game's theme was never "Corypheus is to blame for everything". He had an impressive reach and intricate plans but DAI never tells us how he manipulated the mage and Templars or Celene and Gaspard into war. He just took advantage of it. If anything, out of all the main conflicts, the only one he orchestrated from the very beginning was the Grey Warden's.

[Dai Grepher]

I'll reply to Deztyn later, but quickly I just was to state that Sifr was right. The original claim by MisterJB was that the templars won't attack a sovereign nation, hence the standstill, and Sifr's retort of pointing out the templar attacks in the Hinterlands is proof that the templars don't care about Ferelden's sovereignty.

 

When we first go to the Hinterlands, Redcliffe Village is closed off. For gameplay reasons sure, but there is also a storyline reason given, which is that they can't let anyone in because of the conflict.

 

So really, the only reason why the templars were not attacking the village and going after all who harbored the rebel mages (as various notes and orders demand) is because of how fortified the village and castle were. Moreover, the templars occupied Ferelden lands, most notably, Fort Connor.

[TK514]

Rogue Templars.  And Rogue Mages.

 

You might as well be claiming Bandits are at fault.  It amounts to the same thing.

[Dai Grepher]

But the question was if the templars respected Ferelden sovereignty. Even if those are rogue templars, they are still members of the order. They are still occupiers, and the main forces of the order do nothing about them. Even the ones led by Lucius come and go as they please, and hold up in Therinfal Redoubt, which is in Ferelden lands. And yes, I know it belonged to the Seekers, but they abandoned it in 8:99.

[Boost32]

But the question was if the templars respected Ferelden sovereignty. Even if those are rogue templars, they are still members of the order. They are still occupiers, and the main forces of the order do nothing about them. Even the ones led by Lucius come and go as they please, and hold up in Therinfal Redoubt, which is in Ferelden lands. And yes, I know it belonged to the Seekers, but they abandoned it in 8:99.

They are deserters, they aren't members of the Order anymore.
The templars werent banished from Ferelden, so what the problem with them gathering there?

[TK514]

But the question was if the templars respected Ferelden sovereignty. Even if those are rogue templars, they are still members of the order.

 

No, they aren't still members of the Order.  That's the point.  If they were, they wouldn't be rogue.

[Dean_the_Young]

I'm giving you a like for commitment.

 

It's because you give so little that you don't have the heart of the most wonderful woman in the world.

 

Don't worry, Dez! I'm giving you all my love!

[Sifr]

So you admited that was your headcanon? Good, its at least a start.

 

Err, no... the complete opposite.

 

Everything I posted was actual information from the game itself, whereas JB's rebuttal was all speculation on his part for why the Templars had a clear presence in the Hinterlands long before they splintered into the loyalists (who returned to Val Royeaux) and rogue factions (who stayed behind).

 

Anyone else getting the sense that the two factions in this thread operate under Bizarro World rules from each other?

 

 

OMG, still going?  Just realize that none of you are going to give a micrometer in your opinions and just move on!  lol

 

Actually, my position has always been that the brainwashing theory solves numerous plot-holes regarding the mage's sudden face-heel-turn to become the Venatori and fits the established pattern of behaviour for Corypheus and how he gained control over all the other factions (manipulate-usurp-control).

 

That the other side repeatedly dismiss the theory while failing to present any decent or plausible explanations for the events that transpired, is part of the reason that this thread so irritates me, as the counter-argument often seems to lack or gloss over those details.

 

Why did the mages suddenly undergo a face-heel-turn as if they'd had their switches flipped to evil, and how did a rebellion of mages who hated the alliance with Tevinter all became die-hard Venatori overnight?

 

Then we have the actual suggestion from some that the Rebellion were knowing, complicit or even involved in the near-eradication of the Tranquil in Redcliffe, despite Clemence the Tranquil clearly telling us that Alexius had made it obvious he wanted non-magicals out of town, thus providing the Venatori a good cover story to explain their disappearances while they quietly picked them off.

 

Instead the focus often seems to be to blame Fiona as a convenient scapegoat for everything that went wrong with the rebellion... perhaps because she's not only an already unpopular character (even before Inquisition), but one of the sad victims of how the writing wasn't up to snuff when it came to both her goals, as well as how the Mage-Templar arc ultimately resolved.

 

TL;DR, my view has always been that I could be completely wrong in the brainwashing theory... it'd just be nice that the Fiona-bashers might acknowledge the same when it comes to "they went evil because Fiona sucks" school of thought?

[Boost32]

Sigh... And here I thought we were mading progress, well lets go back to headcanon then.

Just for you to know, you are wrong.

[Sifr]

Sigh... And here I thought we were mading progress, well lets go back to headcanon then.

Just for you to know, you are wrong.

 

Really, because until we get an answer from the devs, then both sides are equally as right or wrong as each other?

 

At least I'm willing to provide evidence for my position and accept that it might be wrong, rather than offer very little and declare that the other side is wrong based solely on, "because I said so".

[Boost32]

Your evidences aren't real evidences.

And in the end, even if I showed you evidence you would try to spin it and wouldn't accept it. So I'm not in the mood to been dragged in that kind of discussion anymore.

Still, the Templar Order never attacked Hinterlands, only the deserters, thats plain and simple.

[Master Warder Z_]

Theories are theories and nothing more

[Sifr]

Your evidences aren't real evidences.

And in the end, even if I showed you evidence you would try to spin it and wouldn't accept it. So I'm not in the mood to been dragged in that kind of discussion anymore.

Still, the Templar Order never attacked Hinterlands, only the deserters, thats plain and simple.

 

Yes, because that's totally different from ignoring and dismissing anything you can't explain either as not "real" evidence?

 

And again no... we are told that the deserters are currently fighting in the Hinterlands. It was never stated or proven that the Templars had not been engaged in any kind of activity against the mages, both those holed up in Redcliffe or the apostates in the hills, before the recall order was given.

 

Just admit that you could be wrong as well, it's not that hard to do... and honestly, it would make the debate tolerable as we'd at least have the slim chance that something we could put forth to make our case might sway each of us to the other's side?

[Boost32]

Just for you to know, Fiona says that the first attack came after the Conclave, at the time the order to go to Val Royaux had already been given.

Thats the last thing I will say on the subject.

[Sifr]

Just for you to know, Fiona says that the first attack came after the Conclave, at the time the order to go to Val Royaux had already been given.

Thats the last thing I will say on the subject.

 

Fiona says that the Templars were gearing up for an attack when Alexius showed up, two days after the destruction of the Conclave. She never said that such an attack wasn't the first, nor that the order for the Templars to be recalled had already been given at that time.

 

Indeed, based on Corporal Vale's comments that the loyal Templars have only just pulled out of the Hinterlands and headed to Val Royeaux shortly before we arrived in that region, meaning there was a several day long span of time where any engagement in that region could have taken place.

 

We can establish that it's probably about a week since the destruction of the Conclave, based on the "Patient Observations" note that lists three days in which we were unconscious after the attempted sealing of the Breach and the indeterminate amount of time between which the Inquisition was declared and we travelled to the Hinterlands.

 

(And again, seriously, how hard is it to acknowledge that we can both be wrong here?)

[Master Warder Z_]

Your the only one asserting theory Boyo.