710 réponses à ce sujet

[Reznore57]

Teagan is the bad cop and Orlais is the good cop .

It seems for Trespasser the devs didn't want to delve too much in politics and such so ...

[TheKomandorShepard]

That's not how evidence works, or how politics work. The point isn't about whether Teagan has good reasons to be suspicious. The point is that he has an angry episode based on nothing more than his suspicions and conviction, on the basis of his highly cynical view of an esteemed hero. That's exactly what he does with the Inquisition - it just that he happens to be wrong about the facts. 

In Loghain case perhaps, although considering that Loghain had an entire army (and people that survived battle) see him abandon king it is unlikely that people didn't talk, so most likely Teagan had good basis to supsect Loghain and he was correct.In Inquistitor case there was plenty of evidence that Inquistion posed a threat to Ferelden authority, seizing Ferelden land, disregarding Ferelden authorities, spying on Ferelden and keeping armed forces on their land despite there was no need to.

[fdrty]

I wonder how Teagan would feel about an Inquisitor who left Loghain in the Fade to (if Loghain is lucky) die?

 

I don't imagine what occurred in the fade is well known - and if it is, it might not be believed by everyone.

 

All Teagan likely knows is that the Inquisition and a Grey Warden went west, and not everyone came back.

[fdrty]

Teagan is the bad cop and Orlais is the good cop .

It seems for Trespasser the devs didn't want to delve too much in politics and such so ...

 

 

People react badly because any good character either immediately loves the Inquisitor, or comes around to in s short amount of time.

 

To see a character who isn't a villain, yet who dislikes the Inquisitor and doesn't come around, is kind of an important thing to have to balance how much the game worships the player.

[Dai Grepher]

None of that is actual proof of Loghain doing wrong, though. Battle plans can fail despite the one who made them desiring otherwise, people who are under stress can get a bit aggressive, and coincidences can happen.

It is enough evidence to implicate him, and more than enough to reject his commands. This is the Bannorn after all. Loghain gets the King killed, and now he shows up unscathed by battle to demand the banns' fealty? At the very least he should have resigned because of his failure, but instead he demands to be elevated. Of course Teagan and many other banns will reject him.

It's also possible that Teagan heard of Jowan's poisoning of Eamon, and Jowan may have already confessed that it was Loghain who hired him. So that could have been playing on Teagan's mind, though he had no solid proof to convict Loghain of the crime. Reasonable suspicion is all Teagan needed.

That's not how evidence works, or how politics work.

That's exactly how politics operates.

The point isn't about whether Teagan has good reasons to be suspicious. The point is that he has an angry episode based on nothing more than his suspicions and conviction, on the basis of his highly cynical view of an esteemed hero.

You just contradicted yourself, dude. So the point isn't about whether Teagan had good reasons, it's that he was angry based on nothing? Do you even read what YOU write? If he had good reasons then it wasn't about it being based on nothing. In fact Teagan did have good reasons to suspect Loghain, and let's be clear; In Origins Teagan was simply uncooperative with Loghain's demand. That is far different from being actively aggressive against the Inquisition. So his attitude in Origins wasn't based on emotion, he had cause. He did not have cause in Inquisition, other than the self-interest in dismantling a force that Ferelden did not control. Now that's fine and all, but he gave no good reasons for seeing it dismantled.

That's exactly what he does with the Inquisition - it just that he happens to be wrong about the facts.

"That" being what? Origins? Where he was right about the facts? Yet you wrote he did it based on suspicions and conviction in that case too. Seriously dude.

And no, it's completely different. In Origins he simply refused to obey unreasonable demands for good reasons. In Inquisition he made unreasonable demands of someone else and provided no good reasons.

How dare you stick flags in the ground in the Hinterlands three years ago so you could save the people of Redcliffe after I was kicked out like a stray dog? You must disband!

You have Grey Wardens in your ranks! The same kind of Wardens who saved Ferelden from total destruction during the Fifth Blight! The kind like my nephew Alistair, who is also King of Ferelden and married to our Warden Queen Cousland of Ferelden! The very same kind of Wardens who saved Amaranthine and protected Ferelden from Darkspawn since! The same Wardens who disavowed Sophia Dryden when she tried to stage a coup against her cousin for the throne with Cousland support! You cannot be trusted!

The Qunari that have infiltrated most courts in Ferelden and the rest of the South have infiltrated YOUR organization as well! Disbandment is the only option for YOUR organization alone!

[fdrty]

And no, it's completely different. In Origins he simply refused to obey unreasonable demands for good reasons. In Inquisition he made unreasonable demands of someone else and provided no good reasons.

 

He has some very good reasons. The Inquisition is basically the biggest military power in southern Thedas. They account to nobody. All it would take is the Inquisitor to decide to take control of Fereldan, and there's nothing they could do to stop him. Given that they've taken Caer Bronach, t

 

The Inquisition was formed to restore order and seal the breach. Now that the breach is sealed, order is restored, the grey wardens are dealt with and Corypheus is dead, what reason do they have to still exist? To Teagan, Inquisition conquest of Fereldan doesn't just look like a possibility, it looks like the only possible business they have left. The Inquisition is a time bomb that has to be defused, and we get to see a possible future where the Inquisition does exactly that (if you recruit the templars).

 

Given that the wardens ended up being behind the death of the divine and the creation of the breach, then, yeah, you protect them and you're gonna make some enemies, even if they saved Fereldan a decade ago.

[DDJ]

He has some very good reasons. The Inquisition is basically the biggest military power in southern Thedas. They account to nobody. All it would take is the Inquisitor to decide to take control of Fereldan, and there's nothing they could do to stop him. Given that they've taken Caer Bronach, t

 

The Inquisition was formed to restore order and seal the breach. Now that the breach is sealed, order is restored, the grey wardens are dealt with and Corypheus is dead, what reason do they have to still exist? To Teagan, Inquisition conquest of Fereldan doesn't just look like a possibility, it looks like the only possible business they have left. The Inquisition is a time bomb that has to be defused, and we get to see a possible future where the Inquisition does exactly that (if you recruit the templars).

 

Given that the wardens ended up being behind the death of the divine and the creation of the breach, then, yeah, you protect them and you're gonna make some enemies, even if they saved Fereldan a decade ago.

 

These are valid points.  Ultimately however the real threat is the Inquisitor who has become a mythic religious figure.  Defusing the Inquisition does not really end the threat for anyone.  They may force I out of Skyhold, but the real threat is the Inquisitor and his / her popularity among the masses after aiding those who needed it, something Ferelden failed to do.  Even if the Divine's murder did not turn many in Thedas against the Wardens, very likely harnessing their unlimited power, I would surely think that the irrational summoning of a demon army would certainly do so.  Wardens are sworn to stop the Blight.  They are not sworn to stop demon armies obviously, and too many people know they were doing just that to keep it under wraps.  So now the Inquisitor becomes another threat to everyone - the chantry, the wardens, Ferelden and Orlais.     

[fdrty]

These are valid points.  Ultimately however the real threat is the Inquisitor who has become a mythic religious figure.  Defusing the Inquisition does not really end the threat for anyone.  They may force I out of Skyhold, but the real threat is the Inquisitor and his / her popularity among the masses after aiding those who needed it, something Ferelden failed to do.  Even if the Divine's murder did not turn many in Thedas against the Wardens, very likely harnessing their unlimited power, I would surely think that the irrational summoning of a demon army would certainly do so.  Wardens are sworn to stop the Blight.  They are not sworn to stop demon armies obviously, and too many people know they were doing just that to keep it under wraps.  So now the Inquisitor becomes another threat to everyone - the chantry, the wardens, Ferelden and Orlais.     

 

The Inquisitor is a potential threat, because he commands so much reverence and respect from the common people of Thedas. If he decides to turn that against nobles, then he is a huge problem.

 

But would you rather have a hostile yet popular power within your borders to have the largest military outside of Tevinter, or to not have any military at all?

 

If the Inquisitor is unwilling to relinquish his power, then that all but confirms Teagan's suspicions: the Inquisition is no longer about a mission, but about seeking power for its own end.

 

Fereldan failed because it had not fully recovered from the Blight. And because the King/Queen are incompetent.

[DDJ]

The Inquisitor is a potential threat, because he commands so much reverence and respect from the common people of Thedas. If he decides to turn that against nobles, then he is a huge problem.

 

But would you rather have a hostile yet popular power within your borders to have the largest military outside of Tevinter, or to not have any military at all?

 

If the Inquisitor is unwilling to relinquish his power, then that all but confirms Teagan's suspicions: the Inquisition is no longer about a mission, but about seeking power for its own end.

 

Fereldan failed because it had not fully recovered from the Blight. And because the King/Queen are incompetent.

 

Exactly.  The only real solution in the minds of Orlais, Ferelden, the Wardens and the Chantry, no matter who takes the Divine role, is to deal with the Inquisitor with extreme prejudice.  As long as he / she lives they are a threat.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

It is enough evidence to implicate him, and more than enough to reject his commands. This is the Bannorn after all. Loghain gets the King killed, and now he shows up unscathed by battle to demand the banns' fealty? At the very least he should have resigned because of his failure, but instead he demands to be elevated. Of course Teagan and many other banns will reject him.

It's also possible that Teagan heard of Jowan's poisoning of Eamon, and Jowan may have already confessed that it was Loghain who hired him. So that could have been playing on Teagan's mind, though he had no solid proof to convict Loghain of the crime. Reasonable suspicion is all Teagan needed.

He's rebelling against the closest thing the country has to legitimate authority (since everyone seems to be de facto acknowledging Anora as queen at the moment, and whether or not she wants a regent she's clearly going along with it for the time being.) Not only that, he's doing so with a large darkspawn incursion (at best) in the south. Whether or not he's right about Loghain deliberately killing Cailan, and that's a bit ambiguous due to the dev team apparently not really agreeing on it, the country needs unity right then. You think all he needs is suspicion to justify what he did?

 

 

You just contradicted yourself, dude. So the point isn't about whether Teagan had good reasons, it's that he was angry based on nothing? Do you even read what YOU write? If he had good reasons then it wasn't about it being based on nothing. In fact Teagan did have good reasons to suspect Loghain, and let's be clear; In Origins Teagan was simply uncooperative with Loghain's demand. That is far different from being actively aggressive against the Inquisition. So his attitude in Origins wasn't based on emotion, he had cause. He did not have cause in Inquisition, other than the self-interest in dismantling a force that Ferelden did not control. Now that's fine and all, but he gave no good reasons for seeing it dismantled.

I don't think he did, actually. What I am saying (and as I understand it, what In Exile is saying) is that Teagan had reasons to be suspicious of both Loghain and the Inquisitor but no actual proof they were malevolent, and jumped on them anyway.

 

 

"That" being what? Origins? Where he was right about the facts? Yet you wrote he did it based on suspicions and conviction in that case too. Seriously dude.

Whether or not Teagan was right (and that's a debate I am thoroughly tired of so if we could not) the fact remains that he jumped on Loghain without any real proof Loghain could have done other than he did. "Based on suspicions" sounds about right to me.

 

 

How dare you stick flags in the ground in the Hinterlands three years ago so you could save the people of Redcliffe after I was kicked out like a stray dog? You must disband!

I feel like a lot of the people getting on the Teagan and the Ferelden Crown for this are conveniently forgetting that the Ferelden army showed up just as the problem was solved during IHW. Unless you think they somehow timed it to arrive just as the problem was over, and Alexius's men either were wiped out to a man by the Inquisition or willingly let the the Ferelden army through, that seems like they had the problem mostly in hand.

[Beerfish]

His nagging sister in law drove him to drink and thus his change in attitude and appearance.

[Dai Grepher]

He has some very good reasons. The Inquisition is basically the biggest military power in southern Thedas. They account to nobody. All it would take is the Inquisitor to decide to take control of Fereldan, and there's nothing they could do to stop him. Given that they've taken Caer Bronach,

Which Ferelden has not asked to be returned to them in the two and a half years since the Inquisitor cleared out the bandits and saved the people of Crestwood. So no, those were all just fabricated concerns, and they could have been easily alleviated with troop reductions. The Inquisition is accountable to the Chantry, as always, and it is accountable to the nations of Thedas should it cross them.

The Inquisition was formed to restore order and seal the breach. Now that the breach is sealed, order is restored, the grey wardens are dealt with and Corypheus is dead, what reason do they have to still exist?

Many. None of which we were allowed to bring up in Trespasser thanks to BioWare's forced storyline. There were still rifts in certain areas, and there were still some Venatori stragglers. There were some red templars and red lyrium that needed cleaning up. Varric even mentions the rift in the bay that you sealed in the two year time span. There is also the fact that many places needed charitable aid. Giselle remarks on how the Inquisition is greatly helping the people of Emprise du Lion.

Beyond that there is the fact that the Inquisition protects the world in general. In Jaws of Hakkon the Inquisitor prevented a spirit possessed dragon from being unleashed that likely would have ravaged Ferelden and/or Orlais. In Descent, the Inquisitor stopped earthquakes that would have likely destroyed Highever and surrounding bannorns, as well as seriously hurt Orzammar's lyrium trade.

There is also all the historical knowledge and magical secrets that the Inquisition could discover through investigation and research. The true story of Ameridan and Drakon, the existence of the titans, and now some of the things revealed in Trepasser.

The Inquisition, or at least the one who led it for so long, is needed more than ever. In case you forgot, the world faces an even greater threat now.

To Teagan, Inquisition conquest of Fereldan doesn't just look like a possibility, it looks like the only possible business they have left. The Inquisition is a time bomb that has to be defused, and we get to see a possible future where the Inquisition does exactly that (if you recruit the templars).

And yet the Inquisition is allowed to merge with a even more influential and powerful force called the Chantry, under a Divine the Inquisitor may have helped elect. How is that better, and why does Teagan accept this?

Teagan is unreasonable to think that the Inquisition would try to conquer Ferelden if the Inquisition saved many of the Fereldan people and their assets in various circumstances. The Hinterlands, Crestwood, the ground beneath Crestwood and the Storm Coast including Highever, Redcliffe/Therinfal, and possibly even Denerim. Then there's the fact that the Inquisitor helps defend the monarch(s) against Venatori assassins.

Given that the wardens ended up being behind the death of the divine and the creation of the breach, then, yeah, you protect them and you're gonna make some enemies, even if they saved Fereldan a decade ago.

But they weren't behind the death of the Divine. Corypheus was.

These are valid points.  Ultimately however the real threat is the Inquisitor who has become a mythic religious figure.  Defusing the Inquisition does not really end the threat for anyone.  They may force I out of Skyhold, but the real threat is the Inquisitor and his / her popularity among the masses after aiding those who needed it, something Ferelden failed to do.  Even if the Divine's murder did not turn many in Thedas against the Wardens, very likely harnessing their unlimited power, I would surely think that the irrational summoning of a demon army would certainly do so.  Wardens are sworn to stop the Blight.  They are not sworn to stop demon armies obviously, and too many people know they were doing just that to keep it under wraps.  So now the Inquisitor becomes another threat to everyone - the chantry, the wardens, Ferelden and Orlais.

No. And even if that were true, the choice to merge with the Chantry is not protested, even though that clearly makes the Inquisition even more of a force to be reckoned with.

The Wardens were manipulated by Corypheus and a powerful Nightmare demon. If recruited, they make up for their mistakes, especially if you use them properly on the chore table.

The Inquisitor is a potential threat, because he commands so much reverence and respect from the common people of Thedas. If he decides to turn that against nobles, then he is a huge problem.

There is no reason to think he would, unless you played an Inquisitor who acted in this way.

But would you rather have a hostile yet popular power within your borders to have the largest military outside of Tevinter, or to not have any military at all?

If the organization is an ally, it should be fine. Having a large force would be a concern, but that is solved with troop reductions. America has troops stationed in countries all around the world. Those countries don't mind.

It could also be argued that having the Inquisition on the border between Orlais and Ferelden will prevent Orlais from attacking Ferelden. Josephine can negotiate a new peace treaty between the two countries after all. A violation of that agreement would force the Inquisition to support the ally that kept to the treaty.

If the Inquisitor is unwilling to relinquish his power, then that all but confirms Teagan's suspicions: the Inquisition is no longer about a mission, but about seeking power for its own end.

That's an unreasonable demand. If the only thing that makes the Inquisition worthy of continuation is its immediate end, then there is no way for the Inquisition to continue in Teagan's opinion.

A reduction in troops is a reasonable request from Teagan, and I think the Inquisitor would have been happy to oblige, as is indicated in a dialogue choice with Teagan before the council is called to order. But Teagan's demands during the council were without factual basis or merit. The meeting was supposed to be a logical discussion about the Inquisition's purpose and future, but Teagan made no effort to discuss the situation in good faith.

Fereldan failed because it had not fully recovered from the Blight. And because the King/Queen are incompetent.

I think it had recovered from the blight, there are some codices about it. The incompetence with the mages was mainly Teagan's however. He was the one in charge of Redcliffe, and he failed his people. The monarch(s) should not have placed all the mages in Redcliffe however. The mages should have been split up into smaller groups and moved around to different locations every few weeks.

Exactly.  The only real solution in the minds of Orlais, Ferelden, the Wardens and the Chantry, no matter who takes the Divine role, is to deal with the Inquisitor with extreme prejudice.  As long as he / she lives they are a threat.

Yet they accept it if the Inquisitor merges with the Chantry.

[Dai Grepher]

He's rebelling against the closest thing the country has to legitimate authority (since everyone seems to be de facto acknowledging Anora as queen at the moment, and whether or not she wants a regent she's clearly going along with it for the time being.)

In Ferelden, the authority is the collective of banns. Anora was a consort, not a regnant. The proper thing to do in that situation was to call a Landsmeet and find a new ruler. Anora might be able to run for election, but she would have to make her case to the banns. Loghain was outright trying to seize power through intimidation while ignoring the questions regarding his withdrawal from Ostagar.
 

Not only that, he's doing so with a large darkspawn incursion (at best) in the south. Whether or not he's right about Loghain deliberately killing Cailan, and that's a bit ambiguous due to the dev team apparently not really agreeing on it, the country needs unity right then. You think all he needs is suspicion to justify what he did?

Yes, because the darkspawn incursion was Loghain's fault. He was supposed to defeat the blight at Ostagar. Instead he got the King killed while he retreated without even fighting. At least Loghain had failed his responsibilities. He was unworthy of leadership on this basis alone. Ferelden needed unity, but it needed a proper leader to unite them. Loghain was not that leader, and Teagan knew it as did many other banns.
 

I don't think he did, actually. What I am saying (and as I understand it, what In Exile is saying) is that while Teagan had reasons to be suspicious of both Loghain and the Inquisitor but no actual proof they were malevolent, and jumped on them anyway.

No, In Exile was claiming that Teagan had no good reasons for either one, and jumped on them both anyway because of some emotional reaction he has in those situations, or because of some paranoia he has.
 

Whether or not Teagan was right (and that's a debate I am thoroughly tired of so if we could not) the fact remains that he jumped on Loghain without any real proof Loghain could have done other than he did. "Based on suspicions" sounds about right to me.

Well that's the crux of the issue, was Teagan's reaction justified or baseless? If you don't want to have the debate, fine, but that's what's at the heart of this. Even if you want to call his reasons in Origins suspicions, at least they were based on Loghain's actual reckless/incompetent actions. In Trespasser, the objections he raises make no sense, or outright contradict his own possible monarch as well as Ferelden's history.

"Your withdrawal was most... fortuitous" is a true statement against Loghain's actions at Ostagar. "You established an armed presence in the Hinterlands outside Redcliffe" is a deceptive statement that only attests to the Inquisition's achievement of protecting the people from the mages and templars. The Inquisition was authorized to handle that situation. And it isn't like those troops stayed there. So why is Teagan mad about troops that were there three years ago and did nothing but defend the people?

Loghain lost a battle. Loghain lost a King. The Inquisition saved people.
 

I feel like a lot of the people getting on the Teagan and the Ferelden Crown for this are conveniently forgetting that the Ferelden army showed up just as the problem was solved during IHW. Unless you think they somehow timed it to arrive just as the problem was over, and Alexius's men either were wiped out to a man by the Inquisition or willingly let the the Ferelden army through, that seems like they had the problem mostly in hand.

I don't think that has anything to do with it. The issue is what Teagan is complaining about. He is mad that you stationed a dozen troops on a hill near the crossroads three years ago so that you could help Mother Giselle and also prevent some Fereldans from getting killed. It would be like complaining to the Hero of Ferelden that he saved the country from the blight after Loghain banned the Grey Warden Order.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

In Ferelden, the authority is the collective of banns. Anora was a consort, not a regnant. The proper thing to do in that situation was to call a Landsmeet and find a new ruler. Anora might be able to run for election, but she would have to make her case to the banns. Loghain was outright trying to seize power through intimidation while ignoring the questions regarding his withdrawal from Ostagar.

Most of the banns in the Gnawed Noble seemed to assume that Anora was worthy, and seemed mystified that Eamon seemed to be trying to dispute her credentials. Teagan calls her "your majesty" as he leaves the probably-Landsmeet where he speaks against Loghain. There are dissenters, but apparently not enough given that from the gossiper dialogues and the scenes with Loghain, Anora and Howe the actual "Civil War" where people are trying to outright kill him is pretty much over by the time Eamon tries to take Loghain down his way. It honestly looks like most of the country wanted Anora. Speaking pragmatically, that means that one who didn't want Anora (either on her own merits or because she was bowing to her father) would have been wiser to go with Loghain's rule anyway until the fire is out unless there was a very good reason not to. And when Teagan first refused to work with Loghain all he had was suspicion. No proof, no actual reasons the Wardens were necessary. Only defiance.

 

 

Yes, because the darkspawn incursion was Loghain's fault. He was supposed to defeat the blight at Ostagar. Instead he got the King killed while he retreated without even fighting. At least Loghain had failed his responsibilities. He was unworthy of leadership on this basis alone. Ferelden needed unity, but it needed a proper leader to unite them. Loghain was not that leader, and Teagan knew it as did many other banns.

Did they know of a better alternative? Eamon was sick, and while that's Loghain's fault Teagan gives no real sign he knew that. The Wardens were dead so far as anyone knew, and not really "leading" anyway up until then. Whoever's fault it was, Cailan was dead. Barring either a much better leader (which Teagan doesn't have at the time he first rebels) or a much better reason to think Loghain wasn't fit than one lost battle (that Teagan doesn't know could have been won) Teagan should have gone with Loghain. Now, this would ultimately have been a very bad move, but only because of the Archdemon's immortality trick that Teagan doesn't know it has. Therefore the Archdemon's immortality isn't relevant to whether or not Teagan had sufficient reason to rebel against Loghain.

 

 

No, In Exile was claiming that Teagan had no good reasons for either one, and jumped on them both anyway because of some emotional reaction he has in those situations, or because of some paranoia he has.

He was claiming Teagan's reasons were not strong enough to do what he did. He didn't cover whether or not Teagan had enough basis for a mere suspicion (in fact I think he tacitly admitted that point, and I'm not disputing it either) but instead focused on whether Teagan and the rebel banns had a real cassus belli for rebellion. You say that they were justified even without proof. I don't think that's true. I think In Exile is disputing that too.

 

Well that's the crux of the issue, was Teagan's reaction justified or baseless? If you don't want to have the debate, fine, but that's what's at the heart of this. Even if you want to call his reasons in Origins suspicions, at least they were based on Loghain's actual reckless/incompetent actions. In Trespasser, the objections he raises make no sense, or outright contradict his own possible monarch as well as Ferelden's history.

"Your withdrawal was most... fortuitous" is a true statement against Loghain's actions at Ostagar. "You established an armed presence in the Hinterlands outside Redcliffe" is a deceptive statement that only attests to the Inquisition's achievement of protecting the people from the mages and templars. The Inquisition was authorized to handle that situation. And it isn't like those troops stayed there. So why is Teagan mad about troops that were there three years ago and did nothing but defend the people?

Loghain lost a battle. Loghain lost a King. The Inquisition saved people.

That debate I don't want to have isn't one that's central to my point. Otherwise I'd bite the bullet and go look for the threads on which I argued (for years on end) that Ostagar was borked before the soldiers drew their weapons. But I don't have to, because whether or not the battle was winnable isn't the same question as whether or not Teagan has enough reason to believe it was winnable that he was justified in going after Loghain for regicide for failing to try to save the king.

 

The relevant question here is whether or not Teagan had enough evidence to really go after Loghain. I don't think he did. He wasn't at the battle, and doesn't cite any Ostagar survivors who tell him that Loghain could have saved Cailan, much less explain how he thinks Loghain could have done it. Teagan seems to have jumped to conclusions, and if he did in Origins why do you expect differently in Trespasser?

 

 

I don't think that has anything to do with it. The issue is what Teagan is complaining about. He is mad that you stationed a dozen troops on a hill near the crossroads three years ago so that you could help Mother Giselle and also prevent some Fereldans from getting killed. It would be like complaining to the Hero of Ferelden that he saved the country from the blight after Loghain banned the Grey Warden Order.

I'd been under the impression that he was somewhat more indignant about the fact that there were still Inquisition soldiers stationed in Ferelden. Such a complaint would be more akin to complaining that the Warden built an army to go after the Blight without permission and then not only didn't disband it after its job was done but continued to billet it in Fort Drakon after killing the Archdemon.

[TheKomandorShepard]

Which Ferelden has not asked to be returned to them in the two and a half years since the Inquisitor cleared out the bandits and saved the people of Crestwood. So no, those were all just fabricated concerns, and they could have been easily alleviated with troop reductions. The Inquisition is accountable to the Chantry, as always, and it is accountable to the nations of Thedas should it cross them.


Many. None of which we were allowed to bring up in Trespasser thanks to BioWare's forced storyline. There were still rifts in certain areas, and there were still some Venatori stragglers. There were some red templars and red lyrium that needed cleaning up. Varric even mentions the rift in the bay that you sealed in the two year time span. There is also the fact that many places needed charitable aid. Giselle remarks on how the Inquisition is greatly helping the people of Emprise du Lion.

Beyond that there is the fact that the Inquisition protects the world in general. In Jaws of Hakkon the Inquisitor prevented a spirit possessed dragon from being unleashed that likely would have ravaged Ferelden and/or Orlais. In Descent, the Inquisitor stopped earthquakes that would have likely destroyed Highever and surrounding bannorns, as well as seriously hurt Orzammar's lyrium trade.

There is also all the historical knowledge and magical secrets that the Inquisition could discover through investigation and research. The true story of Ameridan and Drakon, the existence of the titans, and now some of the things revealed in Trepasser.

The Inquisition, or at least the one who led it for so long, is needed more than ever. In case you forgot, the world faces an even greater threat now.


And yet the Inquisition is allowed to merge with a even more influential and powerful force called the Chantry, under a Divine the Inquisitor may have helped elect. How is that better, and why does Teagan accept this?

Teagan is unreasonable to think that the Inquisition would try to conquer Ferelden if the Inquisition saved many of the Fereldan people and their assets in various circumstances. The Hinterlands, Crestwood, the ground beneath Crestwood and the Storm Coast including Highever, Redcliffe/Therinfal, and possibly even Denerim. Then there's the fact that the Inquisitor helps defend the monarch(s) against Venatori assassins.


But they weren't behind the death of the Divine. Corypheus was.


No. And even if that were true, the choice to merge with the Chantry is not protested, even though that clearly makes the Inquisition even more of a force to be reckoned with.

The Wardens were manipulated by Corypheus and a powerful Nightmare demon. If recruited, they make up for their mistakes, especially if you use them properly on the chore table.


There is no reason to think he would, unless you played an Inquisitor who acted in this way.


If the organization is an ally, it should be fine. Having a large force would be a concern, but that is solved with troop reductions. America has troops stationed in countries all around the world. Those countries don't mind.

It could also be argued that having the Inquisition on the border between Orlais and Ferelden will prevent Orlais from attacking Ferelden. Josephine can negotiate a new peace treaty between the two countries after all. A violation of that agreement would force the Inquisition to support the ally that kept to the treaty.


That's an unreasonable demand. If the only thing that makes the Inquisition worthy of continuation is its immediate end, then there is no way for the Inquisition to continue in Teagan's opinion.

A reduction in troops is a reasonable request from Teagan, and I think the Inquisitor would have been happy to oblige, as is indicated in a dialogue choice with Teagan before the council is called to order. But Teagan's demands during the council were without factual basis or merit. The meeting was supposed to be a logical discussion about the Inquisition's purpose and future, but Teagan made no effort to discuss the situation in good faith.


I think it had recovered from the blight, there are some codices about it. The incompetence with the mages was mainly Teagan's however. He was the one in charge of Redcliffe, and he failed his people. The monarch(s) should not have placed all the mages in Redcliffe however. The mages should have been split up into smaller groups and moved around to different locations every few weeks.


Yet they accept it if the Inquisitor merges with the Chantry.

 

1.How do you know they didn't ask?I think i already had this argument with you in the past.As far we know Ferelden could ask off-screen, not to mention Divine was 2 years delaying council.Second matter, it hardly matters Inquistion still seized Ferelden land without permission, what would be more than enough to start a war.Third why they would want reduce number of inquisition troops as first of all Inquistion was redundant as it no longer had purpose and then even with reduction Orlais would still exploit Inquistion.Chantry was biased strongly in favor of Inquistion as divine was delaying council, plus Ferelden would be completly unable to defend itself on military ground against Inquistion if it was used against them.

 

2.Inquistion isn't required to fix rifts only Inquistor, while Red Templars and Venatori forces were most likely almost completely destroyed as Corypheus was forced to fight Inquistion alone.Charity is Chantry domain.While rest of the threats isn't anything that group of skillful and competent mercenaries/adventures wouldn't be able to solve.Aside from that Inquistion pretty much allowed Solas to escape by not gathering enough information about him until it was too late , plus Inquistion was infested with Qunari and Solas spies.

 

3.Grey wardens were also protecting Ferelden people, didn't stop them from trying to overthrow King in the past in fact for very reason of protecting people.Another matter is that Inquistion showed to be perfectly fine to not only disregard Ferelden authority but also seize their land.Fact that Orlais was trying to take over the Inquistion wasn't helping. You are seriously naive enough to think that treaty would stop Orlais (we are talking here about Orlais) from invading Ferelden, especially if Orlais controlled Inquistion?Sorry pal, but i would hardly compromise my country safety on basis of trust in honor of Orlais and Inquistion organisation that showed it is prefectly with disregarding Ferelden authorities.

 

4.Who said he fine with it is doubtful he would be to do anything anyway, vast reduction of the Inquisition and placing it under banner of the chantry is better than Orlais controling it at full power but even now Orlais is more likely use Inquistion in the future than Ferelden.That is why disbaning Inquistion was best outcome Ferelden could hope for.  

[Andromelek]

Oh, hell. I've been waiting for this; TKS vs Dai.

[TheKomandorShepard]

Oh, hell. I've been waiting for this; TKS vs Dai.

You wasted your time then , I have argued at least couple of times with him before.

[Andromelek]

You wasted your time then , I have argued at least couple of times with him before.

Really? And who had the last word? No offense but you two are really, really stubborn with your arguments.

[TheKomandorShepard]

Really? And who had the last word? No offense but you two are really, really stubborn with your arguments.

Considering that i have argued with vast majority of DaI forum at one point or another this shouldn't be a suprise.

Most likely me, as i rarely yeild unless person has certain number of resonable arguments or have outright proof im wrong.Fortunately for me im almost always right.

[fdrty]

@ Dai Grepher

 

I think you're making a few assumptions. The biggest being that the nobles of Thedas are aware of everything the Inquisition does, even though there is nothing done to suggest that they share knowledge of Solas or the Titans with anyone - and, by the time the Exalted Council is called, the Inquisition has no idea what Solas' plans are, where he is, what he is capable of etc. Selling one apostate as a threat to Thedas big enough to justify the Inquisition isn't going to be convincing.

 

Many of the things you stated don't actually require an Inquisition to be solved. Many could have been solved through different organisations, or, at least more accountable ones. The Inquisition's purpose was not to right every single wrong in Thedas: it was to restore order (done) kill corypheus (done) and seal the breach (done).

 

Teagan's suspicions are certainly warranted. To him, the nation-state is sovereign. It is an affront to have a huge military power, unaccountable to the state (and how accountable are they to the chantry, really? This is a Chantry which couldn't stop the Mages or Templars rebelling, they have no effective power over a military which dwarfs them both, and a chantry whose head was decided by the Inquisition itself) stationed in his country.

 

Teagan isn't mad that the Inquisition saved Redcliffe. He's probably quite grateful. He's mad that Redcliffe is saved, yet the Inquisition is still there, and now, they are the threat to Redcliffe.

 

Also Anora is Queen because she won the Landsmeet in Origins.

[Dai Grepher]

Most of the banns in the Gnawed Noble seemed to assume that Anora was worthy, and seemed mystified that Eamon seemed to be trying to dispute her credentials.

Well... the argument between deposing Anora and instituting Alistair is a separate issue. The issue at hand is stopping Loghain. The nobles were perplexed by Eamon trying to elect a young and untested bastard to the throne when the real concern was stopping Loghain. The thing is, Eamon saw (or at least claimed that) instituting Alistair to be the only way to stop Loghain.

So the nobles had no problem with the idea of stopping Loghain (Alfstanna was under the mistaken impression that Anora would lead and Loghain would advise her), they just questioned Eamon's plan. Beyond that, the nobles would have to make a choice eventually. If the Warden and Eamon are unable to stop Loghain by exposing his crimes, then their only option is to join him and hope for the best. The alternative is to let the blight claim all of Ferelden.
 

Teagan calls her "your majesty" as he leaves the probably-Landsmeet where he speaks against Loghain. There are dissenters, but apparently not enough given that from the gossiper dialogues and the scenes with Loghain, Anora and Howe the actual "Civil War" where people are trying to outright kill him is pretty much over by the time Eamon tries to take Loghain down his way.

So what? Teagan showing courtesy to a queen consort (powerless figurehead) means nothing. Teagan was okay with Anora. It was Loghain he had a problem with.

There were more than enough dissenters to reject Loghain and prevent him from being recognized. Zevran's intro scene confirms it, as Rendon tells Loghain it will be civil war after all.

The civil war is only halted because of the Landsmeet being called. The Landsmeet is a way of resolving the conflict.
 

It honestly looks like most of the country wanted Anora. Speaking pragmatically, that means that one who didn't want Anora (either on her own merits or because she was bowing to her father) would have been wiser to go with Loghain's rule anyway until the fire is out unless there was a very good reason not to.

But that's Anora. Not Loghain. I'm sure Teagan would be content with Anora provided her father had no influence at court. But Loghain wasn't pushing for Anora to be elected by the Landsmeet, he was pushing to have himself recognized as regent, and eventually king according to a few sources. That was Teagan's gripe.
 

And when Teagan first refused to work with Loghain all he had was suspicion. No proof, no actual reasons the Wardens were necessary. Only defiance.

He did have a basis. Loghain was in charge of the battle. He lost the battle, and he lost Ferelden's king.

These are the same reasons Anora questioned her father after a while. The conversation between Erlina, Eamon, and the Warden shows her saying this... "The queen, she is in a difficult position. She loved her husband, no? And trusted her father to protect him. When he returns with no king and only dark rumors, what is she to think? She worries, no? But when she tries to speak with him, he does not answer. He tells her 'not to trouble herself.' So she goes to Howe. A visit from the queen to the new arl of Denerim is only a matter of courtesy. And she demands answers."

She questioned her father and he told her not to trouble herself, so then she went to Howe, and that's when he locked her up. So the lost battle and the rumors were reasons enough for Teagan and other banns to deny Loghain's unreasonable demands for more power.

And that's the point here. In Origins Teagan was simply refusing to obey unreasonable demands, which he had the authority to do. In Inquisition he was making unreasonable demands of another group without any kind of authoritative power over that group. Sure he had the full support of the Ferelden monarch(s), but no actual power over the Inquisition or the Chantry.

So, if he wants the Inquisition to do something for Ferelden then wouldn't it behoove him to actually have his facts right and make reasonable requests?
 

Did they know of a better alternative? Eamon was sick, and while that's Loghain's fault Teagan gives no real sign he knew that. The Wardens were dead so far as anyone knew, and not really "leading" anyway up until then. Whoever's fault it was, Cailan was dead. Barring either a much better leader (which Teagan doesn't have at the time he first rebels) or a much better reason to think Loghain wasn't fit than one lost battle (that Teagan doesn't know could have been won) Teagan should have gone with Loghain.

I disagree, and I think Teagan reasoned that virtually anyone would have been better than Loghain at that point. Even if Anora handled the situation while Loghain resigned his commission, he probably would have gone along with that.

The main problem here is that Loghain is making unreasonable demands. Teagan is simply rejecting those demands. And like I wrote before, suspicion is a good reason. If Loghain did get Cailan killed on purpose, it means Loghain would be detrimental to Ferelden if he were to lead it. This would also mean rewarding corruption, treason, and regicide. Loghain's moral character was in doubt. It would have been foolish to elevate him under those circumstances.

Now, you might disagree with his rationale but the fact remains that this was his rationale. His defiance wasn't based on nothing, or on emotion. Anora questioning Loghain was based on the same rationale, he returned with no king and only dark rumors.

To your mention of the archdemon's revival ability, I agree that it's irrelevant to this discussion.
 

He was claiming Teagan's reasons were not strong enough to do what he did.

No I think In Exile was claiming that Teagan had no reasons at all. The complaint was that he had no logical reasons or arguments in Trespasser, then In Exile argued that it was the same case when he opposed Loghain in Origins.
 

He didn't cover whether or not Teagan had enough basis for a mere suspicion (in fact I think he tacitly admitted that point, and I'm not disputing it either) but instead focused on whether Teagan and the rebel banns had a real cassus belli for rebellion. You say that they were justified even without proof. I don't think that's true. I think In Exile is disputing that too.

Well the banns do have legal right to refuse to follow a teyrn, for any reason or no reason. This isn't actually an act of rebellion. It's simply being uncooperative. The onus is on the teyrn to unite the banns to war with force, diplomacy, and grace in equal measure. So that's a separate issue.

As for reasons, if In Exile admits that Teagan had rumors to go on, then he admits he was incorrect in his original claim. Furthermore, Teagan had the fact that Loghain lost the battle, and this alone makes him unworthy of being promoted to regent.

"Did he also do what was best for [Cailan]?" If he got Cailan killed, what's to say he won't get everyone killed?
 

That debate I don't want to have isn't one that's central to my point. Otherwise I'd bite the bullet and go look for the threads on which I argued (for years on end) that Ostagar was borked before the soldiers drew their weapons.

I agree, because Loghain threw it before it began. Ishal was selected as his signal because he knew it would get overrun quickly, thus preventing the signal from being lit and giving him an excuse as to why he didn't charge.
 

But I don't have to, because whether or not the battle was winnable isn't the same question as whether or not Teagan has enough reason to believe it was winnable that he was justified in going after Loghain for regicide for failing to try to save the king.

I think the rumors and the fact that Loghain did nothing to help Cailan were reasons enough, but even without that, Loghain lost the battle and the king. That is enough to deem him too incompetent to rule.
 

The relevant question here is whether or not Teagan had enough evidence to really go after Loghain. I don't think he did. He wasn't at the battle, and doesn't cite any Ostagar survivors who tell him that Loghain could have saved Cailan, much less explain how he thinks Loghain could have done it.

He didn't have enough hard evidence to go after Loghain, but as we see Teagan didn't attempt to go after him. He didn't demand Loghain be put in irons, he simply refused to follow him. In response, Loghain waged a civil war against his dissenters.

[Dai Grepher]

Teagan seems to have jumped to conclusions, and if he did in Origins why do you expect differently in Trespasser?

Even if we assume that Teagan jumped to conclusions for no reason in Origins, it should still be different in Trespasser because the situation in Trespasser is completely different from Origins. Arl Teagan is going before a group that he has no authority over to present concerns and make requests. This is entirely different from Bann Teagan using his authority to refuse to support Loghain in his selfish demands.
 

I'd been under the impression that he was somewhat more indignant about the fact that there were still Inquisition soldiers stationed in Ferelden. Such a complaint would be more akin to complaining that the Warden built an army to go after the Blight without permission and then not only didn't disband it after its job was done but continued to billet it in Fort Drakon after killing the Archdemon.

Or Vigil's Keep. Which Teagan seems to have forgotten about.

I highly doubt there are troops still stationed on that hill after two years. I mean, there's just no reason for it. As for Caer Bronach, that is much more likely to remain occupied since it served multiple functions. However, Ferelden's crown could have simply asked that it be returned to Crestwood, in which case I see no reason why the Inquisition would deny the request, or at least negotiate some kind of trade off. Then again, I can't see Ferelden requesting it back either, especially if Leliana is in charge of it and she was a veteran of the Fifth Blight. So I don't know, maybe Weekes made our Inquisitions bent on conquest when we weren't looking.
 

1.How do you know they didn't ask?

Because they didn't get it back yet. Logically, if they asked, the Inquisition would have honored the request, unless BioWare wants to turn our Inquisitions into organizations that encroach on sovereign nations.

Or maybe we had given it back and Teagan was just mad we seized it at all, like he seems to be with No-Name Hill in the Hinterlands. If this is the case then his complaint is even more unreasonable because we seized it from bandits who seized it from Ferelden. We were then allowed to use it for the purpose of stopping Corypheus.
 

I think i already had this argument with you in the past.As far we know Ferelden could ask off-screen, not to mention Divine was 2 years delaying council.

I don't remember what we debated, but I don't think it was this. The 2 year delay is kind of a plot hole on BioWare's part. It would mean Ferelden immediately began to protest the Inquisition's existence even though there were still rifts and remnants of Corypheus' army.
 

Second matter, it hardly matters Inquistion still seized Ferelden land without permission, what would be more than enough to start a war.

It's been a while since I played the quest, but I think the mayor may have requested aid in evicting the bandits (I'll have to check later). That would count as permission, since guarding the fort would be required to keep the bandits away. I do know that Charter confirms that the people of Crestwood appreciate the Inquisition's presence at the fort. Also, the game guides you into claiming Caer Bronach in order to get to the dam. Of course, it is possible to kill all the bandits and then jump over the wall, basically going out of bounds to reach the dam, but the game is designed so that you are supposed to claim the keep so that the doors leading to the dam unlock. And of course making use of the dam is the only way to seal the rift in the lake and stop the undead from attacking the village.
 

Third why they would want reduce number of inquisition troops as first of all Inquistion was redundant as it no longer had purpose and then even with reduction Orlais would still exploit Inquistion.

Okay, well this involves the faulty reasoning of Trespasser more than anything else.

Wanting troop reductions is fine, as I have written previously. The problem is how Teagan went about it. He could have simply requested troop reductions and presented evidence that Ferelden forces could secure stability in the region. He also could have raised concerns about Ferelden citizens inside the Inquisition who want to come home. That would have been legitimate. He also could have drawn up agreements for Ferelden troops to help the Inquisition in certain matters. But he did none of this.

As for Orlais, if Teagan wanted the Inquisition to remain separate from Orlais, was it really wise to antagonize the Inquisition? That will do nothing but encourage the Inquisition to ally with Orlais, which will treat it much better. So Teagan's methods were crap. And make no mistake about it, I blame BioWare for this poor storyline, not the Teagan character in general.
 

Chantry was biased strongly in favor of Inquistion as divine was delaying council, plus Ferelden would be completly unable to defend itself on military ground against Inquistion if it was used against them.

That's debatable. There were many Fereldans in the Inquisition. They wouldn't have supported an Inquisition that needlessly waged war on their homeland. Orlais wouldn't work with such an organization either as it couldn't be trusted. The Inquisition's existence was based mainly on volunteers and donations. If it gets out of line, all that will dry up, making conquest impossible.
 

2.Inquistion isn't required to fix rifts only Inquistor, while Red Templars and Venatori forces were most likely almost completely destroyed as Corypheus was forced to fight Inquistion alone.

But the Inquisitor needs an organization to cover the map and search for the rifts. He needs people to prepare the camps, cook the food, tend to the horses, protect the area, guard him while he sleeps, etc. He can't just set out on his own and wander aimlessly looking for rifts.

Corypheus attacked by himself because he was impatient (and BioWare was lazy). There were Venatori and Red Templars leftover. If you side with the Qunari then Hissrad's Last Two Years report confirms Venatori agents in Ansburg.
 

Charity is Chantry domain.

Charity is everyone's domain, the Chantry would argue.
 

While rest of the threats isn't anything that group of skillful and competent mercenaries/adventures wouldn't be able to solve.

No group is better equipped or more knowledgeable to deal with those threats than the Inquisition. The Ben-Hassrath confirm this as well, favoring the Inquisition even over their own agents.

[Dai Grepher]

Aside from that Inquistion pretty much allowed Solas to escape by not gathering enough information about him until it was too late , plus Inquistion was infested with Qunari and Solas spies.

They didn't LET Solas escape, but they didn't gather enough info on him. Spies did infiltrate, and these are points against the Inquisition true, but the same points can be made against Ferelden and Orlais. So it's moot.

3.Grey wardens were also protecting Ferelden people, didn't stop them from trying to overthrow King in the past in fact for very reason of protecting people.

Invalid argument. That small faction of Wardens was led by Sophia Dryden, a relative of the Theirin bloodline and former arlessa of Ferleden. If Teagan is angry about a few Wardens helping her, even though the Order itself opposed her, then Teagan should be mad at his own countrymen for supporting her, most of all the Couslands.

Another matter is that Inquistion showed to be perfectly fine to not only disregard Ferelden authority but also seize their land.

Didn't you write this already? I addressed it above. The Inquisition did not disregard Ferelden sovereignty, but Ferelden honestly had no authority over the Inquisition, which was established by divine mandate.

Fact that Orlais was trying to take over the Inquistion wasn't helping. You are seriously naive enough to think that treaty would stop Orlais (we are talking here about Orlais) from invading Ferelden, especially if Orlais controlled Inquistion?

That is only an argument against the Inquisition joining Orlais, not an argument for disbandment. And yes, the treaty would have prevented Orlais from invading, as the ruler of Orlais calls the shots. Even Gaspard would not invade, not with his nation in shambles. And Celene won't break her word. This is because any violation of the treaty would show the offending party as untrustworthy. Neither side will let that happen, and an Inquisition that violated such a treaty would be seen as corrupt.

Sorry pal, but i would hardly compromise my country safety on basis of trust in honor of Orlais and Inquistion organisation that showed it is prefectly with disregarding Ferelden authorities.

Well, you're mistaken and that's just your opinion. The facts of the game indicate a completely different situation.

4.Who said he fine with it is doubtful he would be to do anything anyway, vast reduction of the Inquisition and placing it under banner of the chantry is better than Orlais controling it at full power but even now Orlais is more likely use Inquistion in the future than Ferelden.That is why disbaning Inquistion was best outcome Ferelden could hope for.

He's probably not fine with it, yet there's nothing he can do about it. The fact that this is a possible outcome proves he has no influence over the Inquisition. The merger with the Chantry is worse than the Inquisition remaining independent and simply reducing its forces. Merging with the Chantry actually increases the Inquisition's reach and funding. Now Inquisition forces can go to any Chantry in Ferelden and conduct business, where as before they were limited by agreements with Ferelden's governing officials. It's also funded by the faithful, and protected by them. Any move against the Inquisition might be seen by the people as an offense against the Chantry. Does Teagan really want this to be the situation?

I don't think disbanding helped anyone. Ferelden would have been better off strengthening ties with the Inquisition and the Inquisitor specifically so the nation could benefit from their services. Meanwhile, politely appeal for sensible concessions and build your own forces up just in case.

Teagan should have been arguing to keep the Inquisition independent, and separate from any nationality or other organization. Also for the Inquisition to have formal non-aggression pacts, and agree to hold council with the monarchs of Orlais and Ferelden to hear any concerns.

Realistically, disbandment should have only been argued by Chantry folk and I would say some Orlesians as well, since they would be afraid of the Inquisition discovering their dirty secrets.

Really? And who had the last word? No offense but you two are really, really stubborn with your arguments.

I don't remember the topic of discussion, but it could have had something to do with the M!Cousland being a king or a consort. I don't think he was in the argument about Dragon's Breath being unauthorized. Maybe it was the debate about whether the Inquisition could have remained independent and fended off any possible attacks by Ferelden and Orlais. Or it may have had something to do with the taint vs. the calling, and which the Hero is on a quest to cure.

The last debate I saw him in I actually agreed with his opinion. Don't remember the topic of that either though.

I don't know who posted last, but most likely he posted, then I replied, and he simply didn't reply because he found something else to do or he forgot about it. I usually reply until all those on the other side drop out, or if I forget about the thread, or if there's no new points from the other side. Like in the Viddasala thread, someone asked for proof that the Arigena branch makes the gaatlok. My point being that Viddasala violated the Qun by having non-Arigena workers make the gaatlok in secret. I had made the point before but someone demanded a source, which I didn't have on me at the time. I looked it up in the game's codices and found it under groups. The card for the The Qunari, number 28, includes info about the Arigena branch producing everything that the Qunari require. But I haven't replied to the topic because I don't want to dredge it back up just to post evidence that won't even be acknowledged by the other side anyway.

I think you're making a few assumptions. The biggest being that the nobles of Thedas are aware of everything the Inquisition does, even though there is nothing done to suggest that they share knowledge of Solas or the Titans with anyone - and, by the time the Exalted Council is called, the Inquisition has no idea what Solas' plans are, where he is, what he is capable of etc. Selling one apostate as a threat to Thedas big enough to justify the Inquisition isn't going to be convincing.

My point here was in reply to the claim that the Inquisition was no longer needed. I gave reasons why the Inquisition was still needed. That we can't defend ourselves in Trespasser is BioWare's fault, not ours.

Many of the things you stated don't actually require an Inquisition to be solved. Many could have been solved through different organisations, or, at least more accountable ones. The Inquisition's purpose was not to right every single wrong in Thedas: it was to restore order (done) kill corypheus (done) and seal the breach (done).

It doesn't have to right every single wrong. It just has to right the wrongs pertaining to Corypheus and the rifts. Only the Inquisition was equipped to deal with the rifts in a quick and efficient manner. Only the Inquisition had the knowledge to combat the Venatori on a global scale. Only the Inquisition had alliances and access to multiple nations so that Venatori operatives could be hunted down wherever they were plotting. Also, the Inquisition's mission was to close the Breach (and by extension the rifts), find those responsible, and restore order, with or without anyone's approval. As far as we know, we got all the rifts and we fixed the mage/templar conflict, but we have yet to find all those responsible. The main agent in causing the Breach is still loose in the world, and he's plotting to do something a thousand times worse.

Teagan's suspicions are certainly warranted. To him, the nation-state is sovereign. It is an affront to have a huge military power, unaccountable to the state (and how accountable are they to the chantry, really? This is a Chantry which couldn't stop the Mages or Templars rebelling, they have no effective power over a military which dwarfs them both, and a chantry whose head was decided by the Inquisition itself) stationed in his country.

The Chantry granted the Inquisition the authority in the first place. Of course the Inquisition is independent and only first joined the Chantry willingly, but if the Chantry were to revoke Divine Justinia V's mandate and declare the Inquisition in violation of the rule of law, then the people of Thedas would turn against it. Many within the Inquisition would leave. Funds would be cut off. The main reason why the Inquisition was so untouchable is because it was needed to stop a world-ending threat that everyone knew was real.

As for your point about the Divine possibly being chosen with help from the Inquisitor, merging with the Chantry wouldn't be an acceptable option in that case. If people are unhappy with an independent Inquisition because they think the Chantry can't control it, then how does turning it over to the Chantry solve anything? If the Inquisition is corrupt, then merging with the Chantry will only increase its power as well as corrupt the Chantry in the process.

[Dai Grepher]

Teagan isn't mad that the Inquisition saved Redcliffe. He's probably quite grateful. He's mad that Redcliffe is saved, yet the Inquisition is still there, and now, they are the threat to Redcliffe.

Well he sounds pretty mad you saved Redcliffe if you didn't capture Caer Bronach. He's mad you established the military presence in the Hinterlands outside Redcliffe. So then how would the Inquisition save Redcliffe had it not established a military presence outside of it?

Also Anora is Queen because she won the Landsmeet in Origins.

Not sure what this has to do with anything, but no, Anora could be Queen only because the Warden can choose her to be Queen.

[Illegitimus]

I would take Redcliffe from him.

 

.-.

 

In fact I'd basically declare war on Fereldan there, force Orlais to back me and completely sever ties with the Chantry all in one sweep.

 

Hm.   OK.  Don't really see how I can dislike Teagan.  He's right.  The Inquisition is a threat.  Shutting it down is indeed the best thing for Ferelden.