715 réponses à ce sujet

[DDJ]

Exactly!!! Teagan should've been trying to support the IQ, had all the bad feelings come from a Nevarran or a Kirkwaller, none of what was said to disband the Inquisition would've bothered me, but it came from Teagan! WTF??!!! That is a serious flaw right there!  

 

I agree that it is flawed.  A third party would have been better.  As to Blackwall - he does not creep me out, but his single minded obsession bothers me at times.  I am not a big fan of the Wardens as a whole although Stroud and HoF seem to rise above them.  I won't go into it here - see why wouldn't you exile the Wardens if you're interested.  They are from my view a dark society, and having read a ton of history, dark societies never do or end up well.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

#1- The tone of his voice came across as snotty and condescending, he sounded more like a snooty noble than he did a diplomat. There was no one point, it was how his character was played. Every other scene he was in in the series he was always soft spoken, patient and proper. In Trespasser he sounded more like Loghain or Howe than Teagan and that made him appear untrustworthy. 

He's not much less polite when negotiating during the Council than he is when openly defying Teryn Loghain and not-subtly implying Loghain is guilty of regicide, which is the only scene you can make an apples to apples comparison to since he seems to consider you a potential threat the same way he did Loghain. I see a difference, and more of one than I remembered, but not enough of one to find suspicious. I also think he comes off as more polite than you're giving him credit for when he lets you get away with interrupting his conversation with the Divine.

 

 

#2- To hell with Blackwall, I don't follow his storyline the guy creeps me out. I'm always relieved when he disappears from the stables. I know his story, the Orlesians can have him.

In that case, Teagan has less reason to be scared of any of your Inquisitors than he does any of mine.

 

 

#3- I find it bewildering that Teagan never approached the Inquision about taking Caer Bronach back! What happened to his diplomacy skills?? It's not the Inquisitions fault that the option was never granted at the war table, I'd have gladly tossed him the keys to the place. You're also ignoring the fact that most of the Inquisition troops in Ferelden ARE FERELDENS. They joined to protect there country not over take it and IF there were any orders they felt were harmful to the nation there would've been many soldiers leaving the Inquisiton not joining it. I find it difficult to believe that a skilled diplomat would not know which way the leader of the Inquisitions leans when it comes to Ferelden vs Orlais, I know my Inquisitor would've been working more on the Ferelden side because up to that point all my decisions and actions supported the Ferelden objectives and key people on my team viewed the Orlais lifestyle with disdain. HELL even my commander felt it necessary to rescue a Ferelden mabari from the Orlesian capitol. Any misunderstandings would be Teagan's fault and that's why I find it suspicious.

 

#4- A good diplomat KNOWING it's rival was trying to take over an armed NGO on it's border would have MORE of a reason to ally with the NGO and not antagonize it. He SHOULD know everything there is to know about the people running it and take advantage of their common goals, not doing so gives the appearance that their goals are not aligned and makes one wonder then, what ARE Teagans goals? Why is he not getting better acquainted with the Inqusition and using them as a buffer against a possible threat? I know my side is more than willing to workout agreements and deals, why not his? Why is so secretive all of a sudden? What happened to the ever patient always diplomatic man Fereldens have grown to love and trust? You're only looking at it from the dark side, I'm looking at it from the POV that my team would've been working hard to cement freindlt ties with Ferelden(a country they are fond of) and was rejected by Teagan.

My understanding (and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) is that the Exalted Council that was meant to rectify Ferelden's concerns (this being one of the big ones) was delayed by the Divine... formerly one of your subordinates, and acting in what she perceives as your best interests. While that's not necessarily your Inquisitor's fault it's not going to help Teagan's mood or his trust for you. And I think you're overestimating how likely governments are to work with armed NGOs. I think those tend to be looked askance at in real life; the UN is an exception, but it's controlled by the international community, and I'd be remiss if I didn't point out it's been accused of some shady stuff. And while the Templars and the Wardens are tolerated in-setting, lets not skate over the fact that they've done some shady stuff too. Especially during Inquisition. The Templars and Wardens basically have to be forgiven and accorded some trust because they serve essential functions, but the Inquisition is just an armed group that doesn't really have a purpose anymore.

 

And while the group does have a lot of Ferelden followers, lets not skate over the fact that not everyone in it is Ferelden, and that they view their leader as divinely appointed. If the Inquisitor decided to attack Ferelden, there would be desertions, but more would stay than if some bandit king sent his forces after Ferelden.

 

Besides, even if Teagan did jump to conclusions it wouldn't be his first time. He didn't have any actual proof of wrongdoing with Loghain coming back from the battle and Cailan not doing so, did he?

[Asha'bellanar]

Well put.  Teagan does come off snooty and out of character, and if I had to guess, the actor was not familiar with DAO, or the writer, possibly both.

Same actor who has always played Teagan. I blame the writing staff for this one.

[DDJ]

Same actor who has always played Teagan. I blame the writing staff for this one.

 

I concede the point readily and thank you for your insight.  

 

Perhaps they should have the writers actually play the games before they start writing the next one if they don't already.

[VivainaDX]

He's not much less polite when negotiating during the Council than he is when openly defying Teryn Loghain and not-subtly implying Loghain is guilty of regicide, which is the only scene you can make an apples to apples comparison to since he seems to consider you a potential threat the same way he did Loghain. I see a difference, and more of one than I remembered, but not enough of one to find suspicious. I also think he comes off as more polite than you're giving him credit for when he lets you get away with interrupting his conversation with the Divine.

 

 

In that case, Teagan has less reason to be scared of any of your Inquisitors than he does any of mine.

 

 

My understanding (and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) is that the Exalted Council that was meant to rectify Ferelden's concerns (this being one of the big ones) was delayed by the Divine... formerly one of your subordinates, and acting in what she perceives as your best interests. While that's not necessarily your Inquisitor's fault it's not going to help Teagan's mood or his trust for you. And I think you're overestimating how likely governments are to work with armed NGOs. I think those tend to be looked askance at in real life; the UN is an exception, but it's controlled by the international community, and it's been accused of some shady stuff. And while the Templars and the Wardens are tolerated in-setting, lets not skate over the fact that they've done some shady stuff too. Especially during Inquisition. The Templars and Wardens basically have to be forgiven and accorded some trust because they serve essential functions, but the Inquisition is just an armed group that doesn't really have a purpose anymore.

 

Besides, even if Teagan did jump to conclusions it wouldn't be his first time. He didn't have any actual proof of wrongdoing with Loghain coming back from the battle and Cailan not doing so, did he?

Whatever, I'm not going to argue about a poorly scripted DLC, since the issues that came up are not issues I was allowed to have control over and never had the option to deal with. Why you even mention a modern institution like the UN, when you should be referencing politics from the midieval-type eras, is beyond me. Thedas isn't technologically advanced to have the kind of "international community' you're talking about. You'd be better off comparing it's politics to the ones in Game of  Thrones where leaders make alliances where ever they can.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Whatever, I'm not going to argue about a poorly scripted DLC, since the issues that came up are not issues I was allowed to have control over and never had the option to deal with. Why you even mention a modern institution like the UN, when you should be referencing politics from the midieval-type eras, is beyond me. Thedas isn't technologically advanced to have the kind of "international community' you're talking about. You'd be better off comparing it's politics to the ones in Game of  Thrones where leaders make alliances where ever they can.

I did mention that tolerating the Wardens and the Templars came back to bite Southern Thedas pretty hard, and that those organizations are probably only tolerated afterwards because they are perceived as serving necessary roles. Is that a valid comparison?

 

I will concede that it would be somewhat fairer on Bioware's part to have given you the ability to give Caer Bronach back sooner. But it's not like the "armed NGOs" thing isn't already giving Ferelden cause for concern anyway. The term NGO isn't in use in Thedas, but that's not to say that they don't get that large groups of armed men and women are dangerous.

 

Oh, and yes, there is an international community in Thedas. They all pitch in to the Chantry and Wardens, and have all united against the Qunari in the past. The Exalted Council even sticks around after the Inquisition either disbands or submits to oversight. And a lot of the ruling families are related through the royal line of Antiva.

[VivainaDX]

The Wardens and Templars have leadership issues and rely a great deal on secrecy and putting on airs, had there been an option in the game to properly deal with Teagan's concerns and my actions had caused his reactions then I would accept it, but since I was given no opportunity work through any issues I reject any blame directed at the inquisition and reflect it back to the one with the issues, since there was a choice made in how the character would be written and presented,There was no thought given to the player here and there were better ways to get the IQ to dissolve the Inquisition if that was what the game was going for. It was handled poorly. Any other arguments are moot.

[Dean_the_Young]

While it's worth considering, the idea of "don't make warfare too easy by preserving all of your people" strikes me as placing an abstraction over people's lives.

 

Except the 'abstractions' are the lives of the people massacred in the name of your conquest machine to establish [insert crusade here] in order to further your ability to conquer and crusade. The only people's lives being saved are your own- everyone else is dying as much or more.

 

Unless we deny that the lives of other people have value- which, to be fair, you have pursued on more than one occasional over the years in your various supports of mass oppression and genocide in favor of your favored causes- then there is absolutely a moral case to be made against war, even if the only people who die aren't your own. Especially if it makes you more likely to be willing to engage in them. Practices that encourage these 'cheap' wars, which are anything but cheap to the people being massacred and re-raised by your undead legions, are directly encouraging a greater loss of life by both frequency and potential scale of conflict.

 

 

 

It just needs to be leashed with the proper philosophy, which is, I assume, why Nevarra hasn't already conquered everything in sight with armies of the dead.

 

 

Or, alternatively, necromancers got crushed and everyone else instituted a taboo on what was considered acceptable warfare.

 

Which happens quite often, and is why we don't go around slinging WMDs against each other in the name of saving our own soldiers lives. The nasty thing about 'advantages' isn't that the first one wins everything, but that the promise of easy and clean victory tends to disappear when others copy your strategy. A necromatic army is only an exclusive advantage until everyone else starts raising their own- at which point, everyone's advantage is everyone's increased suffering.

 

A war of the resurrected armies isn't a bloodless affair- it's a mob brawl with a constant need for bodies to supplement, and then become, your necromatic hoarde. No 'proper philosophy' is going to restrain everyone in a time of desperate war- they'll look for whatever bodies they can, wherever they can. Your own armies. Your enemy's armies. Your enemies people. Even your own. Criminals and deathrow inmates at first, of course. But then, going by what you've posted in the past, dissidents and ideological enemies of your favored classes will soon follow, followed by who knows what else.

 

Normalizing necro-wars would be a great thing for Thedas, so long as you think that making genocide an actual logical strategic advantage is a good thing. Is that village beyond the veil strategically insignificant, or your next much-needed battalion of skeleton archers?

[Xilizhra]

Or, alternatively, necromancers got crushed and everyone else instituted a taboo on what was considered acceptable warfare.

https://youtu.be/tlSriwxoipQ?t=55

"But when enemies threaten the living, we turn death into a weapon of war, instead of merely the result."

 

So it would appear that Nevarra does not ban the use of necromancy in warfare, at least against hostis humani generis, which is really the only kind of enemy the Inquisition pursues anyway. And Nevarra has not become a murderhappy engine of endless warfare, despite the Mortalitasi dating back to an advisor of Caspar Pentaghast, who came to the throne in 2:46 Glory. That's 697 years of having necromancy and not using it for the purposes you describe. This leads me to conclude that either Thedosian necromancy simply isn't powerful enough to affect warfare on such a wide scale, or that its practitioners are perfectly capable of enough restraint to avoid this sort of scenario.

[VivainaDX]

I did mention that tolerating the Wardens and the Templars came back to bite Southern Thedas pretty hard, and that those organizations are probably only tolerated afterwards because they are perceived as serving necessary roles. Is that a valid comparison?

 

I will concede that it would be somewhat fairer on Bioware's part to have given you the ability to give Caer Bronach back sooner. But it's not like the "armed NGOs" thing isn't already giving Ferelden cause for concern anyway. The term NGO isn't in use in Thedas, but that's not to say that they don't get that large groups of armed men and women are dangerous.

 

Oh, and yes, there is an international community in Thedas. They all pitch in to the Chantry and Wardens, and have all united against the Qunari in the past. The Exalted Council even sticks around after the Inquisition either disbands or submits to oversight. And a lot of the ruling families are related through the royal line of Antiva.

It's not just the Caer Bronach thing was the only issue that could've been rectified , since I was given no choice on the issue of Teagans concern about the soldiers then it should be assumed that I had done everything in my power to work with him and he rejected the help. The game prides itself on the results stemming from the choices you make, but if the game forces you into a situation you had no control over then it is the game that should take the blame. There are a lot of options that could've been taken to ease Teagan's mind had they of been written in, but they were neglected, so the player should be given the benefit of doubt.

 

I honestly see this as an opportunity to to expand on an intriguing plotline if the writers choose to take it, A whole "what happened to Teagan' thing, it would be cool but if not then fine, Teagan's a dick because he rejected every solution I could come up with had I have been given the option. 

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

The Wardens and Templars have leadership issues and rely a great deal on secrecy and putting on airs, had there been an option in the game to properly deal with Teagan's concerns and my actions had caused his reactions then I would accept it, but since I was given no opportunity work through any issues I reject any blame directed at the inquisition and reflect it back to the one with the issues, since there was a choice made in how the character would be written and presented,There was no thought given to the player here and there were better ways to get the IQ to dissolve the Inquisition if that was what the game was going for. It was handled poorly. Any other arguments are moot.

I've found a video of Trespasser's plot, and I'm starting to agree with you that this wasn't written well. As for your assertion that the Inquisition should get the benefit of the doubt? I don't know if there's any doubt for them to get the benefit of. We know the Divine has been keeping politicians away from the Inquisition and that the Inner Circle did not object. That doesn't fit well with your interpretation that the Inquisition was trying to cooperate with Ferelden and address their concerns. Not to mention the fact that the Inquisition basically takes control of the Winter Palace and hides the Qunari body, and that even the nice answer when Teagan calls you out on all of that doesn't really include an apology for things that are pretty big failures of diplomacy. The Inquisition did all of that on the assumption that they were the ones best suited to handle the problem, and it turned out they were possibly the worst.

 

I really don't think we're meant to conclude that the Inquisition is in the right here. Or if we are, then it's really poorly written.

[DDJ]

With respect to all opinions, I suspect that the Inquisition had to end.  A peace keeping force under Orlais based on Ferelden's border would have been perceived as a threat, particularly with a hero like the Herald of Andraste.  Keeping in mind that the Orlaisians did abandon the first Inquisitor - an elf - and seize land granted to them whatever the justification shows the reality of loyalty to Orlais.  The real threat here is the Inquisitor.  His / her troops are not going to abandon that loyalty, and ultimately peacekeeper or not, they are a threat.  There are factions within every society and group, such as Sister Patrice in DA2, who will continue to view the Inquisitor as such, and no matter how well scripted the happy ending is, threats to ones own personal power will be dealt with.  If your HoF survived and is hunting a cure independent of the Wardens, they are a threat since they know Warden secrets.  The only one who apparently gets away unscathed is Hawke.  The rest will remain targets.

 

Yes, I know it is a dark world view, but the world is a dark place.

[VivainaDX]

I've found a video of Trespasser's plot, and I'm starting to agree with you that this wasn't written well. As for your assertion that the Inquisition should get the benefit of the doubt? I don't know if there's any doubt for them to get the benefit of. We know the Divine has been keeping politicians away from the Inquisition and that the Inner Circle did not object. That doesn't fit well with your interpretation that the Inquisition was trying to cooperate with Ferelden and address their concerns. Not to mention the fact that the Inquisition basically takes control of the Winter Palace and hides the Qunari body, and that even the nice answer when Teagan calls you out on all of that doesn't really include an apology for things that are pretty big failures of diplomacy. The Inquisition did all of that on the assumption that they were the ones best suited to handle the problem, and it turned out they were possibly the worst.

 

I really don't think we're meant to conclude that the Inquisition is in the right here. Or if we are, then it's really poorly written.

Consider the time span, in the two years after the the breach and before the Conclave, had I have had the option I could've scaled back my troops, offered Ferelden a partnership in the Inquisition, freely shared information, basically worked out a number of scenarios that would've benefited BOTH Ferelden and the Inquisition and ones that I would've gladly stuck to, to keep peace with Ferelden. So why didn't it happen? It's not like I wasn't willing, it must have come from Fereldens side. Had Ferelden made the effort, they would've seen what my Inquisition was all about and the Conclave may not have been needed. Since no attempt was made on their part to address any concerns and yet they come to the conclave with a list of complaints, I have every right to question their motives. It's clear that the Inquisition was deliberately put into a no win situation and Teagan was the ring leader.

 

And yes, I agree we're to think the Inquisition is in the wrong, but the way it's forced on the player is a real dirty move. I can handle the break-up but Teagan ticked me off.

[DDJ]

Consider the time span, in the two years after the the breach and before the Conclave, had I have had the option I could've scaled back my troops, offered Ferelden a partnership in the Inquisition, freely shared information, basically worked out a number of scenarios that would've benefited BOTH Ferelden and the Inquisition and ones that I would've gladly stuck to, to keep peace with Ferelden. So why didn't it happen? It's not like I wasn't willing, it must have come from Fereldens side. Had Ferelden made the effort, they would've seen what my Inquisition was all about and the Conclave may not have been needed. Since no attempt was made on their part to address any concerns and yet they come to the conclave with a list of complaints, I have every right to question their motives. It's clear that the Inquisition was deliberately put into a no win situation and Teagan was the ring leader.

 

And yes, I agree we're to think the Inquisition is in the wrong, but the way it's forced on the player is a real dirty move.

 

Well put.  So here is my heretical question for all - only the Inquisitor can seal tears in the veil, and the game wants us to believe that has been accomplished.  So what if it has not been completed.  The world is very big, and theoretically rifts could occur anywhere, particularly isolated areas such as the Arbor Wilds.  Neither Orlais nor Ferelden are thinking this through.  A herald who does not want to be controlled (Orlais) or whom is viewed as a threat after all they did to save the world (Ferelden) is very unlikely to want to aid either country knowing that.  And if they rejoined the Dalish it would be a major blow against not only the Chantry but against human domination.  The same with other non-human races.  No matter how much the Inquisitor aided them, HoA remains the real threat to them.

 

I agree that it was a dirty ploy by the way. 

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Consider the time span, in the two years after the the breach and before the Conclave, had I have had the option I could've scaled back my troops, offered Ferelden a partnership in the Inquisition, freely shared information, basically worked out a number of scenarios that would've benefited BOTH Ferelden and the Inquisition and ones that I would've gladly stuck to, to keep peace with Ferelden. So why didn't it happen? It's not like I wasn't willing, it must have come from Fereldens side. Had Ferelden made the effort, they would've seen what my Inquisition was all about and the Conclave may not have been needed. Since no attempt was made on their part to address any concerns and yet they come to the conclave with a list of complaints, I have every right to question their motives. It's clear that the Inquisition was deliberately put into a no win situation and Teagan was the ring leader.

There's a whole lot of things the player character could have been doing that might have prevented this. But I don't think the player gets to assume the player character was doing them just because the player controlled the character before and after the timeskip. Furthermore I think it's clear, if you actually look at how the Inquisition acted during Trespasser, that the Inquisition was choosing not to do the things that might have appeased Ferelden or even find out what they were. You don't even have the option to start freely sharing information until near the end, and it's made clear within the first minute that you spent the last two years deflecting politicians rather than meeting with them. It's only stated that they deflected Orlesian politicians, but since Josephine is more concerned by Ferelden's I can't imagine she was more generous with her time towards them. You the player might have chosen otherwise, but that doesn't seem to matter to the player character.

 

I agree that that's poorly done on Bioware's part, but that's not my main point. My main point is that the Inquisition absolutely does things that should distress Arl Teagan, and seems to have done a lot more such things off-screen, and that Teagan and those he answers to have every right to be irritated by this.

 

Well put.  So here is my heretical question for all - only the Inquisitor can seal tears in the veil, and the game wants us to believe that has been accomplished.  So what if it has not been completed.  The world is very big, and theoretically rifts could occur anywhere, particularly isolated areas such as the Arbor Wilds.  Neither Orlais nor Ferelden are thinking this through.  A herald who does not want to be controlled (Orlais) or whom is viewed as a threat after all they did to save the world (Ferelden) is very unlikely to want to aid either country knowing that.  And if they rejoined the Dalish it would be a major blow against not only the Chantry but against human domination.  The same with other non-human races.  No matter how much the Inquisitor aided them, HoA remains the real threat to them.

Maybe? I know there are those in Orlais that would want to do this, because that's the nature of the beast. But I don't think that's where this is going. I think the Inquisitor's going to play an important (not necessarily large) part in the next game, and might die in the course of that part either optionally or canonically. (Then they might be assassinated after the game if the death during the game is optional and the player elects for them to survive. Or if they just canonically survive the game.)

[VivainaDX]

There's a whole lot of things the player character could have been doing that might have prevented this. But I don't think the player gets to assume the player character was doing them just because the player controlled the character before and after the timeskip. Furthermore I think it's clear, if you actually look at how the Inquisition acted during Trespasser, that the Inquisition was choosing not to do the things that might have appeased Ferelden or even find out what they were. You don't even have the option to start freely sharing information until near the end, and it's made clear within the first minute that you spent the last two years deflecting politicians rather than meeting with them. It's only stated that they deflected Orlesian politicians, but since Josephine is more concerned by Ferelden's I can't imagine she was more generous with her time towards them. You the player might have chosen otherwise, but that doesn't seem to matter to the player character.

 

I agree that that's poorly done on Bioware's part, but that's not my main point. My main point is that the Inquisition absolutely does things that should distress Arl Teagan, and seems to have done a lot more such things off-screen, and that Teagan and those he answers to have every right to be irritated by this.

 

Look, I understand what you're saying, but just because I understand, it doesn't mean I have to accept it without a protest. Had my character gone the 'evil Inqusisitor' route, Teagan's reaction would have had me laughing maniacally, but I didn't. I am within my rights to take out my anger on Teagan and curse Bioware's tyrannical senario, I paid good money for that slap in the face. It's an oversight on their part that shouldn't have happened. There were no concessions made for those who didn't want to play the bad guy and since there weren't, I call shinanigans on Teagan. I have a whole list of names I called him when I started the DLC, but I won't post them, and I appreciate you're trying to play devil's advocate here, but I'm very firm on this.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

I am within my rights to take out my anger on Teagan and curse Bioware's tyrannical senario, I paid good money for that slap in the face. It's an oversight on their part that shouldn't have happened. There were no concessions made for those who didn't want to play the bad guy and since there weren't, I call shinanigans on Teagan.

Maybe I'm missing something, but didn't I just demonstrate that Bioware's railroading isn't Teagan's fault? You'd be more justified in blaming Leiliana or Cullen, since they're the ones doing a lot of the things Teagan objects to. Teagan's just reacting to it, and not altogether unreasonably. If he spends a lot of time with his voice raised, that's because Bioware kinda did turn your Inner Circle into jerks.

[VivainaDX]

Well put.  So here is my heretical question for all - only the Inquisitor can seal tears in the veil, and the game wants us to believe that has been accomplished.  So what if it has not been completed.  The world is very big, and theoretically rifts could occur anywhere, particularly isolated areas such as the Arbor Wilds.  Neither Orlais nor Ferelden are thinking this through.  A herald who does not want to be controlled (Orlais) or whom is viewed as a threat after all they did to save the world (Ferelden) is very unlikely to want to aid either country knowing that.  And if they rejoined the Dalish it would be a major blow against not only the Chantry but against human domination.  The same with other non-human races.  No matter how much the Inquisitor aided them, HoA remains the real threat to them.

 

I agree that it was a dirty ploy by the way. 

There are a lot of repercussions about disbanding the Inquisitions at this point, like you said, possible unseen fade rifts & undiscovered Venatori, not to mention The Inquisition is a major employer at this time and dissolving it without a safety net for it's people will cause chaos. Can Ferelden and Orlais afford to employ all of these people? Or will many of them have to turn to thievery and murder to support their families? The way I see it, The Inquisition is taking the brunt of the responsibility of taking care of the people and maintaining order while they are assisting Ferelden and Orlais' crowns to get their sht together, make repairs and strengthen their defenses and anyone at this time, who tries to hinder this process is either looking to keep both sides on the ground or are greedy, power hungry tools who want to undo the good things the Inquisition has accomplished. So having Teagan up there berating the Inquisition, to me, is highly suspicious.

[Aren]

 If your HoF survived and is hunting a cure independent of the Wardens, they are a threat since they know Warden secrets.  The only one who apparently gets away unscathed is Hawke.  The rest will remain targets.

 

Yes, I know it is a dark world view, but the world is a dark place.

The warden is allowed to know the GW secrets since they are high rank wardens  not sure why they should be considered a threat for something like that?

[VivainaDX]

Maybe I'm missing something, but didn't I just demonstrate that Bioware's railroading isn't Teagan's fault? You'd be more justified in blaming Leiliana or Cullen, since they're the ones doing a lot of the things Teagan objects to. Teagan's just reacting to it, and not altogether unreasonably. If he spends a lot of time with his voice raised, that's because Bioware kinda did turn your Inner Circle into jerks.

Here is what you're missing, without more information, I am not going to go against my people. There is two years unaccounted for that I have no idea what's been going on or have had a say in the outcome. I don't know why they have been doing what they're doing and I have no indication that Teagan had even tried to come to me to address any concerns. As far as I'm concerned Teagan set my people up, approved their moves and gave no indication of disapproving anything the Inquisition doing just so he could come out as the heavy and tear down the Inquisition. I've worked side by side with these people, witnessed their dedication to the cause, gotten to know them and I'm not going to turn on them without more proof.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Here is what you're missing, without more information, I am not going to go against my people. There is two years unaccounted for that I have no idea what's been going on or have had a say in the outcome. I don't know why they have been doing what they're doing and I have no indication that Teagan had even tried to come to me to address any concerns. As far as I'm concerned Teagan set my people up, approved their moves and gave no indication of disapproving anything the Inquisition doing just so he could come out as the heavy and tear down the Inquisition. I've worked side by side with these people, witnessed their dedication to the cause, gotten to know them and I'm not going to turn on them without more proof.

If there was no evidence either way I'd concede this point, but to the extent that there is evidence on what's been happening over the timeskip it seems to point towards the Inquisition dodging any such concerns with the help of the Divine. Now that I've finally looked at it for myself and really assessed it the evidence is weaker than I'd like to make a definitive conclusion based on, but on the other hand you seem to have made a definitive conclusion that contradicts what evidence we have. (Unless I'm missing something else.)

[VivainaDX]

If there was no evidence either way I'd concede this point, but to the extent that there is evidence on what's been happening over the timeskip it seems to point towards the Inquisition dodging any such concerns with the help of the Divine. Now that I've finally looked at it for myself the evidence is weaker than I'd like to make a definitive conclusion based on, but on the other hand you seem to have made a definitive conclusion that contradicts what evidence we have. (Unless I'm missing something else.)

I need more to go on, than the Inquisition's acting dodgy, go with it.     Not being able to consult with all involved properly, leaves it me in the position of having to trust where I left my IQ and it's people at the end of  DAI, thus making me have to trust their word over Teagan's, regardless of what evidence is given to the contrary. I'm just stubborn that way. 

[DDJ]

The warden is allowed to know the GW secrets since they are high rank wardens  not sure why they should be considered a threat for something like that?

 

As a Warden, under their control, yes.  If they are trying to break free, they would be a target.

[DDJ]

I need more to go on, than the Inquisition's acting dodgy, go with it.     Not being able to consult with all involved properly, leaves it me in the position of having to trust where I left my IQ and it's people at the end of  DAI, thus making me have to trust their word over Teagan's, regardless of what evidence is given to the contrary. I'm just stubborn that way. 

Well put.  There is too little information on those two years, and for all we know this whole thing was contrived to get rid of a rival / threat.

[Aren]

As a Warden, under their control, yes.  If they are trying to break free, they would be a target.

Under the control of who the headquarters of the Anderfels?

GW commanders and GW in general are left with great autonomy by the first warden they can do whatever they want and there are plenty of characters who are well aware of GW secrets but are not hunted by  the order:(Anders,Avernus,drunk Alistair,all the missing  GW of DAA)