1041 réponses à ce sujet

[Boost32]

The ones you kill regardless of which side you're on?

Great allies those were.

[Hazegurl]

I find it funny how Viscount's Hawke's disappearance is considered a blessing ( ) when he was welcomed back into Kirkwall with open arms just like Mage supporting Hawke. Selective memory is selective.

[Shadow Quickpaw]

Here's the thing I have noticed about Templars: They always go on about how much destruction an Abomination can cause, and cite this for the necessity of their order (and the circles). But how often are stories told of how many Templars an abomination kills? Quite a bit. The Templars claim they are the best defense against demons and blood magic, yet their "anti-magic" abilities are usually ineffective against same. That's because Templars don't train to fight demons, blood mages, maleficarum and abominations; they train to kill mages who are very new to such abilities, innocent (or defenseless) or not.

 

This is not helped by the fact that all these creatures have been used as fodder enemies in all three games, to the point where a pc will go: "Oh look, ANOTHER demon. Haven't seen one of THOSE before."

[The Baconer]

I find it funny how Viscount's Hawke's disappearance is considered a blessing ( ) when he was welcomed back into Kirkwall with open arms just like Mage supporting Hawke. Selective memory is selective.

 

That was the opinion of those participating in the Mage-Templar War and the Conclave, not the people of Kirkwall. I can quote the codex if you want. 

[The Hierophant]

Here's the thing I have noticed about Templars: They always go on about how much destruction an Abomination can cause, and cite this for the necessity of their order (and the circles). But how often are stories told of how many Templars an abomination kills? Quite a bit. The Templars claim they are the best defense against demons and blood magic, yet their "anti-magic" abilities are usually ineffective against same. That's because Templars don't train to fight demons, blood mages, maleficarum and abominations; they train to kill mages who are very new to such abilities, innocent (or defenseless) or not.

 

This is not helped by the fact that all these creatures have been used as fodder enemies in all three games, to the point where a pc will go: "Oh look, ANOTHER demon. Haven't seen one of THOSE before."

Gameplay and story segregation. Demons usually get fodderized too.

[Hazegurl]

That was the opinion of those participating in the Mage-Templar War and the Conclave, not the people of Kirkwall. I can quote the codex if you want. 

No need, I got the codex myself. And it isn't as you claim it to be. If you side with the Mages then the Knight Commander speaks in defense of Hawke's actions to Templars who blame Hawke for the war.  If you side with the Templars the Senior Enchanter speaks in defense of Hawke's actions to the Mages who blame Hawke for the war.

 

Neither side considers Hawke's disappearance a blessing, but that his/her role is done and there is no point looking for him/her.

 

In short Hawke is always the one getting the blame no matter who you side with. Makes me wish even more for a "Let them kill each other" option.

 

If Hawke sided with the templars...

I cannot tell you with any certainty if the Champion of Kirkwall will be present at the Divine Conclave.

 

Although Hawke is the current Viscount of the city, he/she left Kirkwall some time ago, leaving the running of the city to the Guard-Captain and the Seneschal.

 

I understand the need some of you feel to have Hawke present.

 

Many of you believe we would not be at war if not for his/her actions.

 

Thedas has always feared us, but the destruction of Kirkwall's Chantry awoke all to the realization that some mages would go to any lengths to achieve freedom. And in the aftermath, Hawke's support of the templars' systematic slaughter of all of Kirkwall's mages showed that no mercy should be spared in restoring peace.

 

What Hawke did in Kirkwall sparked something in the Templar Order. This was the champion who beat the Qunari invasion of Kirkwall,

 

If Hawke fought the Arishok...

who killed their Arishok.

He/She was powerful, influential. His/Her word counted for much.

Templars believed the mages had gone too far, and Hawke agreed. It was Vindication.

 

If Hawke is a Mage...

Hawke was one of us -- a mage. If the Champion could turn against us, surely we were beyond redemption.

When the Circles began to rebel, the Templars did what they saw as their duty — as Hawke did in Kirkwall. They put us down. They restored order. Not even the Chantry could control them, because they had right on their side.

So here we stand, on the eve of the Divine Conclave, hoping this end before we are all dead. But ask yourselves: why look for Hawke? What good would the Champion's presence be?

His/Her part in this is done.

This peace depends entirely on us and the templars. We just need to decide how much we're willing to sacrifice for it.

—Senior Enchanter Lorace of Cumberland, speaking to mages attending the Divine Conclave

 

[Bleachrude]

Gameplay and story segregation. Demons usually get fodderized too.

 

Not just demons but abominations as well. Remember, abominations are supposed to be able to cast magic like their mage self could. Take Orsino for example, he's supposed to be the First Enchanter and ths be able to cast some high level spells yet does he cast ANY spell.

[thesuperdarkone2]

No need, I got the codex myself. And it isn't as you claim it to be. If you side with the Mages then the Knight Commander speaks in defense of Hawke's actions to Templars who blame Hawke for the war.  If you side with the Templars the Senior Enchanter speaks in defense of Hawke's actions to the Mages who blame Hawke for the war.

 

Neither side considers Hawke's disappearance a blessing, but that his/her role is done and there is no point looking for him/her.

 

In short Hawke is always the one getting the blame no matter who you side with. Makes me wish even more for a "Let them kill each other" option.

Actually it says the opposite. The templar supporter version actually says that it's Hawke's fault that the templars became so self-righteous enough to start the war since Hawke supported the annulment so the templars thought they always knew what was best. It doesn't actually say that what the templars did was a good thing

 

Also, why are you surprised that Hawke is blamed? Did you think siding with one side would mean the other side would be ok with you? The codexes make it clear that Hawke's actions are responsible for either the mages being bolder in their attempts at freedom or encouraged the templars to be harsher in how they dealt with mages.

[Hazegurl]

Actually it says the opposite. The templar supporter version actually says that it's Hawke's fault that the templars became so self-righteous enough to start the war since Hawke supported the annulment so the templars thought they always knew what was best. It doesn't actually say that what the templars did was a good thing

 

Also, why are you surprised that Hawke is blamed? Did you think siding with one side would mean the other side would be ok with you? The codexes make it clear that Hawke's actions are responsible for either the mages being bolder in their attempts at freedom or encouraged the templars to be harsher in how they dealt with mages.

Reread the codex dude and take off your bias rose colored glasses.

 

Here's the start of the Mage Support Speech:
 

If Hawke sided with the mages...
I've heard the name "Hawke" on several lips this week. Many of us blame the Champion for the events in Kirkwall, which sparked a war and hurled all Thedas into chaos. But can we truly fault Hawke for what she/he did?

 

 

The Senior Enchanter was defending Hawke's decision just as the Knight Commander was defending Hawke's decision.  The general consensus among the Templars and Mages is that Hawke is responsible for their predicament no matter which side you choose.

 

I'm hardly surprised Hawke was blamed.  He was blamed for everything else that happened in Kirkwall so why not get the blame for a war he was cornered into? This actually makes me glad Cory blew up the Conclave because aside from the Senior Enchanter and Knight Commander, it was filled with Templars and Mages who refused to take responsibility for their own actions or see the long standing problems they had which started their war.

 

Both sides blame Hawke's choice for starting their war, not that Mages would become bolder or Templars harsher.  But that his actions started it. Which is ridiculous.

[thesuperdarkone2]

Reread the codex dude and take off your bias rose colored glasses.

 

Here's the start of the Mage Support Speech:
 

The Senior Enchanter was defending Hawke's decision just as the Knight Commander was defending Hawke's decision.  The general consensus among the Templars and Mages is that Hawke is responsible for their predicament no matter which side you choose.

 

I'm hardly surprised Hawke was blamed.  He was blamed for everything else that happened in Kirkwall so why not get the blame for a war he was cornered into? This actually makes me glad Cory blew up the Conclave because aside from the Senior Enchanter and Knight Commander, it was filled with Templars and Mages who refused to take responsibility for their own actions or see the long standing problems they had which started their war.

 

Both sides blame Hawke's choice for starting their war, not that Mages would become bolder or Templars harsher.  But that his actions started it. Which is ridiculous.

Where are you getting that both sides blame Hawke regardless of what happens? The pro-mage codex never makes any mention of the mages hating Hawke and the pro-templar one never makes any mention of the templars hating Hawke. Show me EXACTLY in either codex where it says BOTH sides hate Hawke.

 

 

Maybe you should stop acting so biased and just accept reality: only the side Hawke fought against hates Hawke, or did you forget Cass' "A wo/man the mages would listen to" and "A wo/man the templars respect" in DA2?

[The Baconer]

No need, I got the codex myself. And it isn't as you claim it to be. If you side with the Mages then the Knight Commander speaks in defense of Hawke's actions to Templars who blame Hawke for the war.  If you side with the Templars the Senior Enchanter speaks in defense of Hawke's actions to the Mages who blame Hawke for the war.

 

"Hawke was one of us -- a mage. If the Champion could turn against us, surely we were beyond redemption."

 

"They put us down. They restored order. Not even the Chantry could control them, because they had right on their side."

 

Context. Neither of those quotes mean what you think they mean. It is referring to the perspective of the Templars, feeling to be vindicated by Hawke's actions, moving to purge the mages with unstoppable furor. That is not a positive connotation, as is demonstrated:

 

"But ask yourselves: why look for Hawke? What good would the Champion's presence be?"

[Hazegurl]

"Hawke was one of us -- a mage. If the Champion could turn against us, surely we were beyond redemption."

 

"They put us down. They restored order. Not even the Chantry could control them, because they had right on their side."

 

Context. Neither of those quotes mean what you think they mean. It is referring to the perspective of the Templars, feeling to be vindicated by Hawke's actions, moving to purge the mages with unstoppable furor. That is not a positive connotation, as is demonstrated:

 

"But ask yourselves: why look for Hawke? What good would the Champion's presence be?"

That's your interpretation which is biased.  Both the Knight Commander and the Senior Enchanter's speeches are more neutral concerning Hawke than anything.  They state what happened and what could have been going through Hawke's mind which caused him to make the choice he made and both sides agree with whichever side you picked.  You just can't handle it because you need the Templar supporter side to be protrayed as wrong.  You just can't deal with the fact that Gaider pretty much squashed most of the debate about the DA2 ending by essentially saying "you're both right."

 

And the quote of what good would the Champion's presence be, is not a relief at his disappearance but that his part is done, as the Mages she/he was addressing wanted Hawke at the conclave to use as a scapegoat.

[The Baconer]

That's your interpretation which is biased.  Both the Knight Commander and the Senior Enchanter's speeches are more neutral concerning Hawke than anything.  They state what happened and what could have been going through Hawke's mind which caused him to make the choice he made and both sides agree with whichever side you picked.  You just can't handle it because you need the Templar supporter side to be protrayed as wrong.  You just can't deal with the fact that Gaider pretty much squashed most of the debate about the DA2 ending by essentially saying "you're both right."

 

Thedas has always feared us, but the destruction of Kirkwall's Chantry awoke all to the realization that some mages would go to any lengths to achieve freedom. And in the aftermath, Hawke's support of the templars' systematic slaughter of all of Kirkwall's mages showed that no mercy should be spared in restoring peace.

 

What Hawke did in Kirkwall sparked something in the Templar Order.

 

Ah, yes, the inherent neutrality of systemic slaughter and no mercy. 

 

And the quote of what good would the Champion's presence be, is not a relief at his disappearance but that his part is done, as the Mages she/he was addressing wanted Hawke at the conclave to use as a scapegoat.

 

It's both. 

[Hazegurl]

Ah, yes, the inherent neutrality of systemic slaughter and no mercy. 

 

 

It's both. 

Okay this is my last reply to you about this because I see that you are determined to claim that the game only supports your choice.  When it clearly does not. It supports both choices.  Just as the ending Divine choices supports everyone's choices as the DA writers are not going claim that one side is right while the other is wrong. Keep thinking that they will, they won't.

 

And the Senior Enchanter is saying that mercy shouldn't be given when it comes to restoring peace.   That pretty much goes for any type of conflict which disrupts order not just a Mage rebellion.

 

I understand the need some of you feel to have Hawke present. ....

 

His/Her part in this is done.

This peace depends entirely on us and the templars. We just need to decide how much we're willing to sacrifice for it.

 

The Mages wanted Hawke at the conclave and the Senior Enchanter is telling them that there is no point, that it's up to the Mages and Templars to focus on peace.  Where is this blessing about Viscount Hawke's disappearance you keep trying to sell?

 

Besides, I don't even know why this has to be debated as this is the opinion of one Knight Commander and one Senior Enchanter.  Meanwhile, if you're a Mage supporter, all the Templars hate Hawke, and if you're a Templar supporter all the Mages hate Hawke. And you can just think that whichever salty side doesn't like you can go (blank) themselves and call it a day.

 

But anyway, done with this topic and this thread if Vivienne isn't even the main topic anymore.

[The Baconer]

Okay this is my last reply to you about this because I see that you are determined to claim that the game only supports your choice. When it clearly does not. It supports both choices. Just as the ending Divine choices supports everyone's choices as the DA writers are not going claim that one side is right while the other is wrong.

Of course both choices are "supported". One just more correct (vindicated) than the other.

And the Senior Enchanter is saying that mercy shouldn't be given when it comes to restoring peace. That pretty much goes for any type of conflict which disrupts order not just a Mage rebellion.

That is not the implication at all. It's contextualizing Templar perspective (from the view of this mage at least) as believing that no mercy should be spared in restoring the old Circle system, which was emphatically a bad thing when it came to the execution of the Mage/Templar war.

The Mages wanted Hawke at the conclave and the Senior Enchanter is telling them that there is no point, that it's up to the Mages and Templars to focus on peace. Where is this blessing about Viscount Hawke's disappearance you keep trying to sell?

That Hawke, in their absence, will not be able to help facilitate a total mage defeat in being the Templar poster boy.

[Rekkampum]

 

What a cruel world we live in.

 

That's exactly how I felt, especially since I have family members about her complexion who also have short hair.

[introverted_assassin]

Here's the thing I have noticed about Templars: They always go on about how much destruction an Abomination can cause, and cite this for the necessity of their order (and the circles). But how often are stories told of how many Templars an abomination kills? Quite a bit. The Templars claim they are the best defense against demons and blood magic, yet their "anti-magic" abilities are usually ineffective against same. That's because Templars don't train to fight demons, blood mages, maleficarum and abominations; they train to kill mages who are very new to such abilities, innocent (or defenseless) or not.

This is not helped by the fact that all these creatures have been used as fodder enemies in all three games, to the point where a pc will go: "Oh look, ANOTHER demon. Haven't seen one of THOSE before."

i think this is a good point.

[Iakus]

That's exactly how I felt, especially since I have family members about her complexion who also have short hair.

I admit, I have wished that I could turn helmets back on just for her.  Not because of her short hair.  But because she has awesome taste in hats 

[Lumix19]

I admit, I have wished that I could turn helmets back on just for her. Not because of her short hair. But because she has awesome taste in hats

Absolutely. I keep that Orlesian Henin (or whatever it's called) on her even though I turn helmets off (for RP reasons) but she would look so much better if she had it on. Horns are really her style.

[Dean_the_Young]

Gameplay and story segregation. Demons usually get fodderized too.

 

I remember laughing when the tutorial boss of Inquisition happened to be one of the greatest classes of demons, of the 'world-endangering' Pride variety.

 

 

[Xilizhra]

I remember laughing when the tutorial boss of Inquisition happened to be one of the greatest classes of demons, of the 'world-endangering' Pride variety.

To be fair, you also have Leliana and a whole bunch of soldiers fighting with you, and it's invulnerable without your mark being able to disrupt the rift.

[thesuperdarkone2]

I remember laughing when the tutorial boss of Inquisition happened to be one of the greatest classes of demons, of the 'world-endangering' Pride variety.

Seems you also forgot how the mage origin in DAO had you face a rage, sloth, and PRIDE demon. Don't know why the pride demon just let you go without a fight.

[Iakus]

I remember laughing when the tutorial boss of Inquisition happened to be one of the greatest classes of demons, of the 'world-endangering' Pride variety.

I remember a sinking feeling when I realized that these top-of-the-food-chain Pride Demons were going to be nothing more than high-ranking canon fodder in this game 

[Dean_the_Young]

Seems you also forgot how the mage origin in DAO had you face a rage, sloth, and PRIDE demon. Don't know why the pride demon just let you go without a fight.

 

What makes you think I forgot?

 

Other than you wanting to jump to an assumption that casts me as ignorant?

[Dean_the_Young]

To be fair, you also have Leliana and a whole bunch of soldiers fighting with you, and it's invulnerable without your mark being able to disrupt the rift.

 

And we can also point out that the Breach supposedly weakens the demons that come from it.

 

Still a tutorial boss fight. About the only way it could get weaker is if it were the first tutorial fight in the game.