Please man, do you at least know what you are talking about ?
And the ending:
As the Inquisition forces returned to civilian life, its mages pushed for independence from the Circle. Divine Victoria, secure on her Sunburst Throne - and with a rebuilt Chantry Circle at her disposal - chose to be magnanimous. She grudgingly allowed them to remain as the College of Enchanters, as a mark of her regard for the Inquisition. For the next few years, the College and the Circle coexisted peacefully, if barely.
There is no rebellion at the end and she united the Chantry. The Circle didnt break away, the mages of the Inquisition didnt go back to the Circle and formed the College. She let them be, she could have easily crushed them if she wanted.
It takes a certain kind of willful denial to refuse to lead between the lines. Just what exactly do you think "pushed for independence from the Circle" means? The last "push for independence" was the mage-templar war. Notwithstanding the doey eye rhetoric ("choose to be magnanimous") the very next line shows how little choice she had in the matter ("grudgingly allowed them to remain as the College of Enchanters"). And then look at the very next line ("the College and the Circle coexisted peacefully, if barely).
That's an open rebellion on her hands. But it wasn't the Trespasser epilogue to which I refer, but rather the DA:I epilogue where the Inquisitor and Viviene have a poor rapport.
The mages broke away, to avoid open war Viviene saved face by creating a parallel and notionally free organization (the College) and the College and Circle were on the brink of war with each other (and, by necessary implication, the Chantry).
Whatever mental fantasy you want to build about her "crushing them easily" is just your own fantasy. She didn't crush them, she didn't have much apparent choice in allowing the to leave, and the end result of all of it was boderline rebellion.





Retour en haut





