Dragon Age 3: The Thread Nobody was Expecting

[Zevox]

This thread for discussion of the Dragon Age franchise of games by Bioware. Origins, Awakening, 2, the upcoming Inquisition, whatever, it's all fair game. Expect much arguing, since opinions on the second game in particular are sharply divided, but keep it civil and board-appropriate.

Continuing the conversation from the last thread:


Anyhoo, I think the Tevinter Chantry is onto something. The key difference is one of heterodoxy; the Tevinter Divine interprets "Magic is to serve man, not rule over him" as "magic is to serve the common good" and so magecraft and study are encouraged and rewarded. I'm not thrilled about blood magic being an open secret there - too much potential for subversion of government - but the philosophy itself I find admirable enough.

Oh, I agree - it's the philosophy I like, not so much their implementation of it.
I would agree with that. Though on Blood Magic, I do think it ought to be allowed, albeit more tightly controlled than regular magic. There's clearly merit to its study I'd say, and I don't think its demonization is really all that warranted - while it can be abused, that's true of all magic, and in an extreme case a mage could learn to use it but only do so to use their blood to fuel their spells instead of mana, its most basic function, which wouldn't actually be more dangerous than regular magic. But of course it also opens up worse possible abuses than regular magic, so requiring a mage wanting to learn it to submit to stronger restrictions on their actions would be reasonable, and would help ensure that those learning it are doing so out of a serious commitment to scholarly pursuit of it, not simply for power.

[Dienekes]

So I have a random question to pose for the folks here. In a pretty informal survey (of the 5 people who bothered responding) I asked which side everyone chose at the end, templar or mage. The response was overwhelmingly mage.

Now to me, it seems clear that Bioware was at least trying to make this decision a difficult moral conundrum. Everything we find out about mages in DA2 seems to point that they cannot be trusted, are idiots, turn to demons at a moments notice, kills those that are trying to help them, and everything they touch turns to crap. Worse it turns out Meredith's fears about blood magic being used and abused at the highest level of the Circle turns out to be completely correct. Yet we all still support them anyway.

So my question to you folk, is how would you have changed the ending to actually make the decision difficult, while still keeping the fundamental relationship of mages as being subjugated by the templars?

[Zevox]

So I have a random question to pose for the folks here. In a pretty informal survey (of the 5 people who bothered responding) I asked which side everyone chose at the end, templar or mage. The response was overwhelmingly mage.

Now to me, it seems clear that Bioware was at least trying to make this decision a difficult moral conundrum. Everything we find out about mages in DA2 seems to point that they cannot be trusted, are idiots, turn to demons at a moments notice, kills those that are trying to help them, and everything they touch turns to crap. Worse it turns out Meredith's fears about blood magic being used and abused at the highest level of the Circle turns out to be completely correct. Yet we all still support them anyway.

So my question to you folk, is how would you have changed the ending to actually make the decision difficult, while still keeping the fundamental relationship of mages as being subjugated by the templars?
For me personally, I don't believe that you could make it a difficult decision. Any attempt to portray mages in a bad light is only going to reflect on those particular mages, because the group is unified by only one thing, being born with magical talent. So the group will inherently be a diverse one, and showing examples of bad mages won't ever change my opinion of how the group as a whole should be treated. Which has very little in common with how they're actually treated by the Chantry even under better circumstances, much less how they were treated in Kirkwall under Meredith.

[darksolitaire]

Another mage supporter calling in!

In the end, mages versus templars was easy choice. After Anders blows up the chantry, Meredith blames all mages instead of the guilty one standing right before him. If they had wanted me to sympathize with the templars, they should have given mages, or atleast Orsino, more power. If mages had been more organized under Orsino and he had been more confrontational, that would have made sides more symmetric. And not making Meredith a raging looney that demands death of every single mage residing in a circle.

[Choyrt]

Yeah, make that six for mage. The writing was so one-sided for mage it was fairly disappointing.

I hope three is much more akin to Origins... yet with the vastly improved Qunrai.

[The Rose Dragon]

While templars might have a point on keeping the mages in check, I draw the line at murder and lobotomy. If I am to sympathize with the templars, they need to stop considering the Right of Annulment as a solution to anything, or even as an option, as well as non-voluntary Rite of Tranquility.

[Kish]

So my question to you folk, is how would you have changed the ending to actually make the decision difficult, while still keeping the fundamental relationship of mages as being subjugated by the templars?
Unlike you, I don't believe they were trying to. Nor do I believe they could have done so within your strictures. They would have needed to fundamentally change what mages are (make them no longer people).

[Joran]

For me personally, I don't believe that you could make it a difficult decision. Any attempt to portray mages in a bad light is only going to reflect on those particular mages, because the group is unified by only one thing, being born with magical talent. So the group will inherently be a diverse one, and showing examples of bad mages won't ever change my opinion of how the group as a whole should be treated. Which has very little in common with how they're actually treated by the Chantry even under better circumstances, much less how they were treated in Kirkwall under Meredith.

Another mage supporter here. I fought for Bethany's memory and I romanced Merill (and am the self-designated defender of her), so there wasn't much option in which side to pick.

I agree with Zevox; it's going to be really hard to make a Western audience agree in limiting individual freedoms based on a group characteristic, even if it's a really dangerous characteristic. How many comic readers side with mutant registration in the X-Men universe?

That said, there was a difficult choice in Awakening. I expect there's more divergence in people's choices in whether to spare or kill the Architect. (I killed him on the idea that there's only one, maybe two Blights left and it was far better to eradicate the Darkspawn than to allow them to become sentient).

[Beowulf DW]

In any instance in which a group is oppressed and hated due to an accident of birth, I will always side with the oppressed (so long as what they're doing isn't reprehensible). It was no-contest at the end, really. When Meredith's final solution is to kill everything that has magic and a pulse, damn straight I'm going to do my best to fry to the bitch.

[Zevox]

That said, there was a difficult choice in Awakening. I expect there's more divergence in people's choices in whether to spare or kill the Architect. (I killed him on the idea that there's only one, maybe two Blights left and it was far better to eradicate the Darkspawn than to allow them to become sentient).
Not a difficult choice for me at all - spare him. He represents a hope for freeing the Darkspawn from whatever has them enslaved, which will always be a far better alternative than killing them.

And honestly, it's one that I really wish hadn't been a choice at all. Because now any future story arc that Bioware tries to work the Architect into has to take into account the possibility that a player chose to kill him, which makes it far more difficult to give his story potential the kind of treatment it deserves (as a major part of a game, if not the centerpiece of one). Unless they outright retcon it so that he lives either way, which will definitely tick off people who wanted to kill him, and goes against their MO.


When Meredith's final solution is to kill everything that has magic and a pulse, damn straight I'm going to do my best to fry to the bitch.
That hits upon what I think does it for people who weren't already strongly inclined to side with the Mages in such a conflict anyway: in order to make siding with the Templars seem like a reasonable choice, the Templars needed to seem reasonable, to at least some degree. With Meredith clearly going off the deep end by the time the decision point comes up, they don't.

Either that, or the Mages needed to seem unreasonable to a degree comparable to Meredith. But Orsino still seems like a perfectly decent guy at that point, and the rest are just bystanders. So again, no dice.

[Dienekes]

Unlike you, I don't believe they were trying to. Nor do I believe they could have done so within your strictures. They would have needed to fundamentally change what mages are (make them no longer people).

Why else would they show Meredith's suspicions being correct if they didn't want at least some ambiguity in the decision?

Also, here's one I've been thinking about looking at your comments.

1) Meredith cannot be crazy, nor want to murder all the mages
2) The mages that you're fighting against have to be a specific group and not all mages everywhere
3) Rite of Tranquility cannot be the go-to tool of the Templars.

So, what if Meredith is instead portrayed as a mage sympathizer who is new to the office. Possibly the second Knight Commander of the game, to allow the first one to do some of the horrible anti-mage acts earlier. Not the hard headed crazy lady she was in the game.
Anders does his little terrorist attack and flees to the Circle.
Templars come in demanding they give Anders for trial, Orsino refuses and calls for the mages to rise up and fight.
Meredith says she has to get Anders but allows any mage who wants to stay out of the coming bloodshed to leave the circle under protection until the mess is finished, and then leads the attack to capture Anders.

Would that have made the decision more difficult, or is it still a shoe in for mages?

Also as a random note on mutant registration. That one has always confused me. There's a guy who can control everyone's mind, of course he should be on a list as having that ability. In fact, he already is. Nick Fury has it, everyone accepts it as necessary and intelligent because it's with SHIELD. But once it gets brought up in the X-Men comics it's somehow terrible, even though it already exists? Consistency, please apply some.

[Divayth Fyr]

Unless they outright retcon it so that he lives either way, which will definitely tick off people who wanted to kill him, and goes against their MO.
Seeing how they retconned Leliana, Wynne and Anders (and if you count the comics, Sten and Alistair), I doubt it would be a problem...

[Zevox]

Why else would they show Meredith's suspicions being correct if they didn't want at least some ambiguity in the decision?

Also, here's one I've been thinking about looking at your comments.

1) Meredith cannot be crazy, nor want to murder all the mages
2) The mages that you're fighting against have to be a specific group and not all mages everywhere
3) Rite of Tranquility cannot be the go-to tool of the Templars.

So, what if Meredith is instead portrayed as a mage sympathizer who is new to the office. Possibly the second Knight Commander of the game, to allow the first one to do some of the horrible anti-mage acts earlier. Not the hard headed crazy lady she was in the game.
Anders does his little terrorist attack and flees to the Circle.
Templars come in demanding they give Anders for trial, Orsino refuses and calls for the mages to rise up and fight.
Meredith says she has to get Anders but allows any mage who wants to stay out of the coming bloodshed to leave the circle under protection until the mess is finished, and then leads the attack to capture Anders.

Would that have made the decision more difficult, or is it still a shoe in for mages?
Best guess: that would lead to far more people siding with the Templars, because the situation is completely reversed. Orsino is acting unreasonably by harboring Anders just after he committed an atrocious crime, while the Templars are acting extremely reasonably. It becomes a situation where you would only side with the mages in order to fan the flames of rebellion and start a Mage/Templar war, while siding with the Templar would be seen as a way to avert such a thing.

Which is likely the very reason it wasn't what they went with. I think it's pretty clear that Bioware wanted the Mage/Templar war to break out no matter what at the end of DA2, so they can do something further with it in future games. Whatever failings it may have, DA2's ending certainly provides a good reason for that to happen regardless of Hawke's actions. You could perhaps come up with reasons for the war to happen even if you help the Templars in the scenario you described, but I'd bet it would come across as rather more contrived than what we got. It was Meredith's extreme reaction that Anders was counting on to spark the war after his bombing, after all. If the Templars had been going out of their way not to harm any mage save Anders and those who tried to keep him from justice, that would be a vastly less explosive scenario for those who heard about it.

[Fargazer]

I know this was a while ago on the old thread, but I'd still like to respond to it.


*Points to the tenth iteration of the Mass Effect 3 thread*

That is a good point, but Mass Effect seemed to have a different sort of controversy. It was bad, or good enough depending on your point of view, to spawn that discussion that continuously went on for such a long time.

The Dragon Age thread has had numerous breaks where no one posted. I know there are people who very much liked it, and people who very much disliked it, but they never seemed to have much passion to continuously argue, or otherwise decided that the differences of opinion were irreconcilable or understandable.

I really enjoyed Dragon Age 2, but I hadn't played the first one when I first got DA2, so I didn't really notice the blatant lower quality. I also thought that if played the story in a very specific way, you would barely notice the flaws until the very end. It was only on subsequent playthroughs that I really saw the story's weaknesses. For all the fun I've had playing it, I can certainly understand why a number of people would hate the game.

[Dienekes]

Best guess: that would lead to far more people siding with the Templars, because the situation is completely reversed. Orsino is acting unreasonably by harboring Anders just after he committed an atrocious crime, while the Templars are acting extremely reasonably. It becomes a situation where you would only side with the mages in order to fan the flames of rebellion and start a Mage/Templar war, while siding with the Templar would be seen as a way to avert such a thing.

Which is likely the very reason it wasn't what they went with. I think it's pretty clear that Bioware wanted the Mage/Templar war to break out no matter what at the end of DA2, so they can do something further with it in future games. Whatever failings it may have, DA2's ending certainly provides a good reason for that to happen regardless of Hawke's actions. You could perhaps come up with reasons for the war to happen even if you help the Templars in the scenario you described, but I'd bet it would come across as rather more contrived than what we got. It was Meredith's extreme reaction that Anders was counting on to spark the war after his bombing, after all. If the Templars had been going out of their way not to harm any mage save Anders and those who tried to keep him from justice, that would be a vastly less explosive scenario for those who heard about it.

Oh, I agree. But I am just looking at the scenario of this game and not thinking of effecting further games. Though I do think the actions in my scenario could still start a war, it would take more explaining, possibly as a conspiracy that the bombing was supposed to start an uprising with the destroy the Circle faction in each of the circles.

I just think that it makes for a more interesting question. Short term peace with the hope of creating fairer mage treatment vs a direct mage revolution. There are pros and cons to both sides, and I for one would actually have to think about it before I made a decision.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

I've sort of wondered about the hypocrisy of a mage Hawke siding with the Templars. While I'm aware that Hawke's Champion status means the Order regards him/her as different from the average apostate, I'm more interested in how Hawke justifies the action to himself/herself. Most of the early part of the game is Hawke living in fear of the Templars' shadow and witnesses their abuses to the mages in Kirkwall plenty of times. Wouldn't a mage like Hawke show some kind of sympathy, even if they think Anders did something unforgivably wrong.

[Avilan the Grey]

So I have a random question to pose for the folks here. In a pretty informal survey (of the 5 people who bothered responding) I asked which side everyone chose at the end, templar or mage. The response was overwhelmingly mage.

"Neither" would be my preferred option, since I am 110% convinced that my Hawke would have returned to Ferelden by the end of act I. But due to railroading Hawke is not allowed to have common sense nor to actually stay in character.

[D_Man_7733]

While templars might have a point on keeping the mages in check, I draw the line at murder and lobotomy. If I am to sympathize with the templars, they need to stop considering the Right of Annulment as a solution to anything, or even as an option, as well as non-voluntary Rite of Tranquility.

Templars don't consider the Right of Annulment as a solution to anything... ONE. INSANE. KNIGHT-COMMANDER did, and only succeeded because Anders had murdered the Grand Cleric... the only person who can actually GIVE the order, and with her gone Anders basically doomed the mages.


Why else would they show Meredith's suspicions being correct if they didn't want at least some ambiguity in the decision?

Also, here's one I've been thinking about looking at your comments.

1) Meredith cannot be crazy, nor want to murder all the mages
2) The mages that you're fighting against have to be a specific group and not all mages everywhere
3) Rite of Tranquility cannot be the go-to tool of the Templars.

So, what if Meredith is instead portrayed as a mage sympathizer who is new to the office. Possibly the second Knight Commander of the game, to allow the first one to do some of the horrible anti-mage acts earlier. Not the hard headed crazy lady she was in the game.
Anders does his little terrorist attack and flees to the Circle.
Templars come in demanding they give Anders for trial, Orsino refuses and calls for the mages to rise up and fight.
Meredith says she has to get Anders but allows any mage who wants to stay out of the coming bloodshed to leave the circle under protection until the mess is finished, and then leads the attack to capture Anders.

Would that have made the decision more difficult, or is it still a shoe in for mages?

Avid mage supporter here, and as someone has said, this reverses the position between mage and templar... NOW if Anders was perfectly JUSTIFIED in bombing the chantry (Abominations were running wile/darkspawn) and the innocents, Elthina & Templars were killed as byproducts, that would make it harder, because the Templars are seeking just retribution for the killing of the grand cleric, innocents and thinning the templar ranks, but Orsino would have reasons to protect him.

And it sets up the ending with a (more) justified fighting both bosses too, because in order to get justice (which, by law, Meredith would be entitled too for the death of innocents) she calls upon the lyrium idol to the ground to break open and poor Orsino and alot of mages into a dungeon underground. After this your party wakes to hear screams from above and finds a tome of blood magic near Orsino, who wakes up and goes blood mage evil. After defeating him you escape the dungeons (Varric mentions that you need to get to Meredith before she goes crazy like Bartrand), meeting at least one mage/templar combination who are fighting shades or whatever and talking about how Meredith went mad, cue the Meredith boss fight, which instead ends in most of the people bar Hawke's group dead and them being the only ones who know that the Mage/Templar war wasn't started the way everyone thinks it did.

[Morty]

As someone who believes the Mage/Templar conflict is the closest BioWare has ever got to moral ambiguity... I think it comes down to Meredith, really. Making her an insane oppressor skews the issue in the mages' favour no matter how you look at it. It extends to other Templars, too - if there were more like Thrask, siding with the Templars would look like a more tempting choice. The game is already filled with examples of how mages can wreak havoc, but I think they could use to be a little more diverse instead of it being one crazy blood mage after another. There should be more mages who abuse their power without turning to blood magic.

[Avilan the Grey]

As someone who believes the Mage/Templar conflict is the closest BioWare has ever got to moral ambiguity...

The Geth vs Quarian one is better, IMHO.

Btw someone summed up my feelings about the DA franchise so far very well:

Dragon Age Origins was a traditional RPG done almost perfect.
Dragon Age 2 was a groundbreaking, experimental RPG done very poorly.

I have said all along that I applaud Bioware for TRYING what they did in DA2 (story and setting wise) but I simply feel they are not talented enough as writers to pull it off. Plus the whole 1½ year of dev time, from scratch doesn't help.

Oh and I must urge everyone to do the survey linked in the last thread:

Something relevant I discovered mere minutes ago: Bioware launched a survey collecting information on gameplay preferences among it's fans.

Link is here (https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/DAIcombatgameplay)

So if you want to make your voice heard to the series developers, this is a great chance to do so.

[The Rose Dragon]

Templars don't consider the Right of Annulment as a solution to anything... ONE. INSANE. KNIGHT-COMMANDER did, and only succeeded because Anders had murdered the Grand Cleric... the only person who can actually GIVE the order, and with her gone Anders basically doomed the mages.

The fact that the Templars of the Circle of Ferelden called for the Right of Annulment, and that the Right of Annulment has been performed 17 times suggests otherwise.

[Morty]

The Geth vs Quarian one is better, IMHO.


Was it? It seemed thoroughly skewed in the favour of the Geth, honestly. It started out as ambiguous, but as the game passed, the Quarians came off more and more as crazy warmongers.


Dragon Age Origins was a traditional RPG done almost perfect.
Dragon Age 2 was a groundbreaking, experimental RPG done very poorly.

I have said all along that I applaud Bioware for TRYING what they did in DA2 (story and setting wise) but I simply feel they are not talented enough as writers to pull it off. Plus the whole 1½ year of dev time, from scratch doesn't help.

That's not a bad way of putting it, although I don't think they did it very poorly - just that they could have done it a lot better.

[Avilan the Grey]

The fact that the Templars of the Circle of Ferelden called for the Right of Annulment, and that the Right of Annulment has been performed 17 times suggests otherwise.

The other 17 times, maybe, but not the Ferelden one.

The reason is very simple: The Templars had tried, and failed, to take back the tower. From the look of it, they have lost at least two thirds of their men, who are either dead or possessed. They really tried.
There WERE no other options at that point; remember the Templars let you enter the tower but think you are nuts. They have absolutely no faith in you succeeding, let alone survive!

The decision to call in annulment of the Ferelden circle is actually the CORRECT one. It is not a pleasant one, or a "Paragon" one, but it is exactly the correct thing to do in that situation.

[Morty]

For all the controversy about the Templars in Dragon Age 2, at least they're not as hilariously inept at their jobs as they were in Dragon Age: Origins.

[The Rose Dragon]

Was it? It seemed thoroughly skewed in the favour of the Geth, honestly. It started out as ambiguous, but as the game passed, the Quarians came off more and more as crazy warmongers.

It was actually overwhelmingly skewed towards saving both, since it gave you the most war assets, wasn't at all difficult to pull off, and ended up with the quarians alive (the geth are irrelevant if you choose Destroy or Control at the end game). The only reason you wouldn't save them both is if you were deliberately being inefficient, or didn't play the first two games, in which case why are you even playing the third game in a continuity-based trilogy? :smalltongue:

[Avilan the Grey]

For all the controversy about the Templars in Dragon Age 2, at least they're not as hilariously inept at their jobs as they were in Dragon Age: Origins.

I feel that is story and gameplay segregation; the Templars are supposed to be a true "threat" to mages; their skills and abilities are supposed to make them the perfect mage hunters (although a mage with mana clash beats them at hunting other mages like a nuclear weapon beats a stick) but it seems like Bioware almost nerfed them.

Also, of course, Ulred is possessed but an EXTREMELY powerful pride demon who knows EXACTLY what he is doing.


It was actually overwhelmingly skewed towards saving both, since it gave you the most war assets, wasn't at all difficult to pull off.

Actually, if you went through all three games blind, it is very likely you fail.


If you fail to get Tali's loyalty, you fail by default or lose 2 points, don't remember which.
If Tali is DEAD you fail by default.
If you choose to reprogram the Geth (the paragon option) you lose 2 points on the scale.
If you choose to save the crew instead of the admiral? You lose another 2 points on the scale.
If you do things out of order on Rannoch you lose at least 1 more point.


But just like the suicide mission in ME2, if you have played through the game ONCE, you have to fail on purpose.

[Morty]

It was actually overwhelmingly skewed towards saving both, since it gave you the most war assets, wasn't at all difficult to pull off, and ended up with the quarians alive (the geth are irrelevant if you choose Destroy or Control at the end game). The only reason you wouldn't save them both is if you were deliberately being inefficient, or didn't play the first two games, in which case why are you even playing the third game in a continuity-based trilogy? :smalltongue:

I'm not talking about efficiency. I'm talking about who is in the right and who isn't. Saving both of them is indeed the best option, but the Geth are consistently portrayed as being less aggressive than Quarians ever since you meet Legion.


I feel that is story and gameplay segregation; the Templars are supposed to be a true "threat" to mages; their skills and abilities are supposed to make them the perfect mage hunters (although a mage with mana clash beats them at hunting other mages like a nuclear weapon beats a stick) but it seems like Bioware almost nerfed them.

Also, of course, Ulred is possessed but an EXTREMELY powerful pride demon who knows EXACTLY what he is doing.


It's not really about the power of the specialization available to the Warden and his/her companions. The NPC Templars consistently fail to do their job and contain mages. One of the most flagrant examples is the mage origin story, where the Templar-Commander and two Templars are smacked around by an amateur blood mage. Although to be fair, he knocked out the First Enchanter as well.

[Divayth Fyr]

For all the controversy about the Templars in Dragon Age 2, at least they're not as hilariously inept at their jobs as they were in Dragon Age: Origins.
I'm not so sure about that - we have the First Enchanter who learns blood magic secrets from a dangerous criminal (whom the Templars are unable to deal with) and tons of blood mages/abominations running around the city (not to mention the fact that Hawke is free to run around - though that's a gameplay thing). What exactly shows their competence?

[Avilan the Grey]

One of the most flagrant examples is the mage origin story, where the Templar-Commander and two Templars are smacked around by an amateur blood mage. Although to be fair, he knocked out the First Enchanter as well.

They were also taken completely by surprise. They were after him because of him A) trying to avoid becoming lobotomized, and B) because he broke into a place he was not allowed to go. Not because he was a blood mage.

If am up against a trained soldier, with heavy weapons, but I manage to hit him over the head with a cast iron frying pan, he will go down.

[Mx.Silver]

So my question to you folk, is how would you have changed the ending to actually make the decision difficult, while still keeping the fundamental relationship of mages as being subjugated by the templars?
Making the mages an actual threat to stability rather than the obviously oppressed victims would go some way, I think. DA's mage-templar relations is that they're fairly obviously influenced by Warhammer Fantasy but the problem is that the fundamental reason for those relations in that setting (the very real, very significant threat of Chaos) doesn't have an analogue in Thedas. Instead you have the situation whereby pretty much every bad thing done by mages never really comes across as being the fault of anyone beyond the individual mages in question. Hell, even blood magic, for all the games try to tell you how evil it is, falls under this. The Warden, Hawke, Merril - hell, even Jowan - don't necessarily come across as being all that bad.




I feel that is story and gameplay segregation; the Templars are supposed to be a true "threat" to mages; their skills and abilities are supposed to make them the perfect mage hunters (although a mage with mana clash beats them at hunting other mages like a nuclear weapon beats a stick) but it seems like Bioware almost nerfed them.


I just put it down to being a symptom of how essentially none of the story/lore details in Origins that you'd expect to be relevant are reflected in the actual mechanics. See also: Grey Wardens.

[Kish]

Why else would they show Meredith's suspicions being correct

Meredith's suspicions? Quote Meredith saying "Orsino is a blood mage" or any variation thereof, or please stop calling Orsino turning out to be a boss* "Meredith's suspicions." She made it abundantly clear that she only cares about finally getting her excuse, not about any specific crimes any mages might have committed--Sebastian, utter imbecile that he otherwise is, even comments on it--when she responded to Anders killing the Grand Cleric with, "Kill all the mages!...Not the one who did the killing, I don't care about him, just all the ones in the Gallows!"

*Quoting Meredith saying, "EA sucks" would also work.

As you may have gathered from my footnote, I don't think anything can be derived from Orsino's sudden psychotic break except that EA wanted another boss. My headcanon is that Varric made it up because, before fleeing the city with Hawke and Anders, Orsino asked Varric to make everyone who heard the story think he was dead.

[Psyren]

Seeing how they retconned Leliana, Wynne and Anders (and if you count the comics, Sten and Alistair), I doubt it would be a problem...

Bioware was able to dance a fine dance with the Mass Effect EU by not referring to Shepard's gender, any accomplishments that required a choice, or any choice-based sacrifices like the VS. But with Dragon Age they kinda gave it up and made their own canon - the Hero of Ferelden was a Dalish Elf who died to kill the Archdemon, and Hawke was a Mage who sided with the Mages. (Given that last bit it wouldn't surprise me if Anders is around out there somewhere, canonically.)


Unlike you, I don't believe they were trying to. Nor do I believe they could have done so within your strictures. They would have needed to fundamentally change what mages are (make them no longer people).

All of this.

[darksolitaire]

It was once clearly stated that nothing outside of games is not canon. Did they change this? While playing DA2 I didn't notice many retcons, Anders living being obvious exception. On Leliana, I don't think she dies in Lothering even if you don't recruit her, unlike Sten.


I just put it down to being a symptom of how essentially none of the story/lore details in Origins that you'd expect to be relevant are reflected in the actual mechanics. See also: Grey Wardens.

Being Grey Warden does give you talent point :smallbiggrin:

[Arbitrarity]

It was once clearly stated that nothing outside of games is not canon. Did they change this? While playing DA2 I didn't notice many retcons, Anders living being obvious exception. On Leliana, I don't think she dies in Lothering even if you don't recruit her, unlike Sten

But you CAN kill Leliana, though you have to go out of your way (unlock Reaver, have lots of disapproval). I suppose she could be playing possum or something (not that I saw this part of the game, because I'm not an evil monster)

[Divayth Fyr]

It was once clearly stated that nothing outside of games is not canon. Did they change this? While playing DA2 I didn't notice many retcons, Anders living being obvious exception.
Technically they did mention that "our playthroughs override the outside material". Of course this can be problematic when a novel is supposed to bridge two games (like Asunder) explaining what exactly did lead to the situation we get to experience and has characters which could be dead be rather important (and in unique positions others can't really fill)... Stating that they have their own, internal canon didn't help - as Psyren said, ME was handled differently in this regard.


On Leliana, I don't think she dies in Lothering even if you don't recruit her, unlike Sten.
If you choose to defile the Ashes she might turn on you (as does Wynne)


I suppose she could be playing possum or something (not that I saw this part of the game, because I'm not an evil monster)
Though this is the worst possible explanation - since it opens up the possibility of arguing that anyone (not seen to fall into lava or something like that) is alive...


not that I saw this part of the game, because I'm not an evil monster
Defiling the ashes could be a choice mad by an embittered elf/mage and wouldn't mark them as "evil monsters" (yes, it is proposed by an evil maniac - but the act itself is something I could see being made by a person who has a bone to pick with the Chantry).

[Morty]

I'm not so sure about that - we have the First Enchanter who learns blood magic secrets from a dangerous criminal (whom the Templars are unable to deal with) and tons of blood mages/abominations running around the city (not to mention the fact that Hawke is free to run around - though that's a gameplay thing). What exactly shows their competence?

They don't really do any worse than the Templars in Ferelden, where the concentration of abominations per square metre is much lower. And the Kirkwall Templars seem more efficient at rounding up illegal mages. Not to mention they do a pretty good job wiping them out when Meredith invokes the Right of Annulment.


They were also taken completely by surprise. They were after him because of him A) trying to avoid becoming lobotomized, and B) because he broke into a place he was not allowed to go. Not because he was a blood mage.

If am up against a trained soldier, with heavy weapons, but I manage to hit him over the head with a cast iron frying pan, he will go down.

Were they? They approached him slowly and deliberately while he first stood around and then stabbed himself through the hand with a knife. You'd think "grab him before he casts a spell" would be basically Lesson One for any mage-hunter. And they should have suspected he might try blood magic the moment he produced a knife.

[darksolitaire]

But you CAN kill Leliana, though you have to go out of your way (unlock Reaver, have lots of disapproval). I suppose she could be playing possum or something (not that I saw this part of the game, because I'm not an evil monster)

My bad, I totally forgot that. I must play proper failtrought sometime, killing and banishing all of my party. :smallamused:

[Mx.Silver]

Being Grey Warden does give you talent point :smallbiggrin:
And only you; Alistair doesn't get one. Because the player character is just that super special awesome.

[Divayth Fyr]

And the Kirkwall Templars seem more efficient at rounding up illegal mages.
Not counting up to three in our crew alone, countless random maleficar we fight on the streets and others like Feynriel, Gascard, Tarohne and her crew etc...


Not to mention they do a pretty good job wiping them out when Meredith invokes the Right of Annulment.
We don't have anything to really compare this to.


Were they? They approached him slowly and deliberately while he first stood around and then stabbed himself through the hand with a knife. You'd think "grab him before he casts a spell" would be basically Lesson One for any mage-hunter. And they should have suspected he might try blood magic the moment he produced a knife.
While the first part is logical, the knife thing could also be seen as a sign he used up his mana during the break-in or that he doubted his ability to overcome the Templars' defenses.

[Zevox]

The Geth vs Quarian one is better, IMHO.
Honestly, I don't see how there's any ambiguity to that one at all. Maybe back in ME1, when you have extremely limited information about the Geth and only get the brief mention from Tali of how the Quarians tried to destroy them after learning that they were becoming sapient, but after 2 and 3? The Quarians were always the aggressors with little to no justification for their actions, and the Geth always acted in self-defense. There's really no ambiguity to that. At least with the mage situation in Dragon Age you have the whole problem of Abominations to give some sort of reason for people to possibly come to the conclusion that the Templars and Circle system is necessary.

[Psyren]

They don't really do any worse than the Templars in Ferelden, where the concentration of abominations per square metre is much lower. And the Kirkwall Templars seem more efficient at rounding up illegal mages. Not to mention they do a pretty good job wiping them out when Meredith invokes the Right of Annulment.

That was only because they spent 3 years depleting/eroding the Circle through Tranquility. Which is why even if you support the Templars and they succeed in quelling the revolt, that the other Circles still manage to throw off the yoke, because they're more fully manned.


Honestly, I don't see how there's any ambiguity to that one at all.

Whereas I do, but we don't need to rehash that again.



As you may have gathered from my footnote, I don't think anything can be derived from Orsino's sudden psychotic break except that EA wanted another boss. My headcanon is that Varric made it up because, before fleeing the city with Hawke and Anders, Orsino asked Varric to make everyone who heard the story think he was dead.

This is a very good point - literally everything that happened in DA2 was hearsay except the main quests of each act (Hawke going to the Deep Roads and becoming rich, Hawke expelling the Qunari somehow, and the Fereldan Circles revolting.) They can literally retcon anything else and chalk it up to Varric lying or being misinformed.


Technically they did mention that "our playthroughs override the outside material". Of course this can be problematic when a novel is supposed to bridge two games (like Asunder) explaining what exactly did lead to the situation we get to experience and has characters which could be dead be rather important (and in unique positions others can't really fill)... Stating that they have their own, internal canon didn't help - as Psyren said, ME was handled differently in this regard.

Yep. Alistair being King and Sten finding his sword/becoming Arishok are other examples of their canon.

[Mx.Silver]

Oh and I must urge everyone to do the survey linked in the last thread

Eh, I found the Survey a bit unhelpful, in some respects. Most of it seemed to be focussed on generalities of the combat system, rather than more specific elements of encounter design, writing elements and how mechanics and narrative interplay. The character section is awkward as well, since I don't have a 'preferred party', as I rotate the squad fairly regularly (because what's the point of having multiple characters who banter with each other if you never use them).

Not that it matters too much for me since I doubt I'm even going to be able to play Inquisition even if I got hold of it - which I'm not sure I'd want to anyway. Might be something to consider for others though.

[Psyren]

I have a preferred party in every one of their games. If I wanted to hear the banter I have Youtube for that; I'm not going to struggle through spontaneous combats with no tank or two rogues (or no rogues!) because I wanted to hear Isabela flirt with Carver or whatever.

It's a lot easier to mix and match in Mass Effect of course because the only real role is "hacker," and then only in ME1. And with Garrus or myself filling that role I had total freedom with everyone else.

[Zevox]

Eh, I found the Survey a bit unhelpful, in some respects. Most of it seemed to be focussed on generalities of the combat system, rather than more specific elements of encounter design, writing elements and how mechanics and narrative interplay. The character section is awkward as well, since I don't have a 'preferred party', as I rotate the squad fairly regularly (because what's the point of having multiple characters who banter with each other if you never use them).
Yeah. I actually used that last section where you can give more specific feedback for once, because I didn't think the rest of the survey was going to be especially helpful to them as it is.

[Psyren]

I would love if they brought back Arcane Warrior. I hate how much harder the game is without a dedicated tank (particularly for the dragon fights), but I also hate feeling locked into Aveline if I go with mage Hawke because Fenris/Carver/Sebastian are useless. And in DA:O, Arcane Warrior was the best soloing build. Also, being an evil character or even a jokey one is annoying with Aveline.

[Avilan the Grey]

For me the survey was important because it game me opportunity to make sure my voice for a more Origins-like game play and combat heard.

[Psyren]

Yeah I was sure to support the zoom-out tactical style etc. but they already confirmed that's going to be in DA3 (even on the console versions) so that part wasn't as important.

I really do like the AI tactics trees though - I wish Mass Effect has something similar, then maybe your squad could have more than 3 skills apiece.

[The Rose Dragon]

I feel like the only person in this thread who thought Origins was boring (except for the voice acting). The story was bland, the majority of the characters were not interesting, the "dilemmas" were usually not, and combat was both repetitive to play and uninteresting to watch. It was the Bioware game I probably played the least amount of times, had no urge to go for higher percentages of completion, and I basically just keep the saves for Dragon Age II. And I played KotOR and Mass Effect, for crying out loud.

[Ailurus]

I feel like the only person in this thread who thought Origins was boring (except for the voice acting). The story was bland, the majority of the characters were not interesting, the "dilemmas" were usually not, and combat was both repetitive to play and uninteresting to watch. It was the Bioware game I probably played the least amount of times, had no urge to go for higher percentages of completion, and I basically just keep the saves for Dragon Age II. And I played KotOR and Mass Effect, for crying out loud.

I'm not quite sure why, but while I love Origins, and have a love/hate relationship with 2 (STOP DROPPING GUYS OUT OF THE RAFTERS!) I feel that Awakening is the weakest entry. Can't really put my finger on why, but I consistently burn out a short way through Awakenings. 50-60+ hrs in an origins Nightmare run? Sure. 30-40 hrs in a DA2 run? Barring occasional ragequits over some of the gameplay decisions, fine. 5-10 hrs into Awakenings? start just losing interest, and have to push myself to finish it.

[Psyren]

Dragon Age combat was never interesting to me. It was just something I slogged through to get back to the story; I burned through DAO with Storm of the Century spam. Mass Effect and Jade Empire were the ones that actually had fun combat to me, and the ones that I actually replayed on high difficulties to get the most of the experience. I'd never do that with DA, though DA3 might change my mind at long last.

[Morty]

I feel like the only person in this thread who thought Origins was boring (except for the voice acting). The story was bland, the majority of the characters were not interesting, the "dilemmas" were usually not, and combat was both repetitive to play and uninteresting to watch. It was the Bioware game I probably played the least amount of times, had no urge to go for higher percentages of completion, and I basically just keep the saves for Dragon Age II. And I played KotOR and Mass Effect, for crying out loud.

Not the only one, perhaps. I do like Origins, even though I like it less than I used to. But I don't consider it superior to DA2, unlike most people here.


I'm not quite sure why, but while I love Origins, and have a love/hate relationship with 2 (STOP DROPPING GUYS OUT OF THE RAFTERS!) I feel that Awakening is the weakest entry. Can't really put my finger on why, but I consistently burn out a short way through Awakenings. 50-60+ hrs in an origins Nightmare run? Sure. 30-40 hrs in a DA2 run? Barring occasional ragequits over some of the gameplay decisions, fine. 5-10 hrs into Awakenings? start just losing interest, and have to push myself to finish it.

Awakening wasn't very good, yes. The plot was dull and the mechanics came apart at he seams. I played through it once, and only once. I couldn't muster the will to do so again in later playthroughs.

[Pronounceable]

DA2 was much more preferable to DAO. I'll take fresh ideas (rags to riches in fantasyland) executed horribly over cliche fantasy claptrap (orc invaders!!!) executed fine. Someone could have their priorities crossed and might prefer DAO over DA2 but that's a poor, confused soul in need of help (or possibly a youngster who hasn't had enough of tripe fantasy crap). Awakening was less of a horrible tripe though and gets points for that (and only for that).

That doesn't mean DA2 was a good game. Combat was ****ty, most companions were insane and/or awful (**** Anders), plot was on rails, storytelling was far too hamfisted (mom nooo!!!), world never changed over a decade, the entire game happened in one cave and one warehouse, "iconic" NPC looks, prerelease marketing crap was unfathomably bad... Still, it had the glimmer of good ideas buried in the mountain of manure. And Varric.

As for the dumb main conflict of mage-templar problem in DA2: Both sides were stupid and deserving of extermination. The basic premise is good enough but the execution was so bad, there's no way to support either side without frothing with rage at stupidity.

Mages prove themselves time and time again to be all ticking time bombs in Kirkwall, a hairbreadth away from becoming a monster and slaughtering everyone nearby. While templars are all a bunch of oppressive crack addicts led by some murderous paranoid nutjob. Game beats you over the head again and again and again that far too many mages are dangerous, weak willed losers or callous psychopaths whose existence is a threat to everyone near them. But then somehow people playing the game think they're a blameless minority kept down by The Man? Sure, killing every still-human mage just in case they might become abominations is unbelievably stupid, but just letting them go free unsupervised is an even stupider option. But when the guys whose job is to supervise these dangerous people claim that best solution is to just kill em all, it's a toss up about who you're gonna side with as they're both villains escaped from some 90s superhero comic.

There's some weird psychological issue at work here that makes people playing the game project their opinions about vaguely similar issues in real life (any issue from real world has little to nothing to do with imaginary people that can become a magical monster thing and slaughter everyone at a moment's notice) onto the virtual game world (there should be academical studies about this phenomenon).

[Mx.Silver]

I feel like the only person in this thread who thought Origins was boring (except for the voice acting).
You're not. It's one of the few Bioware RPGs (that aren't NWN's main campaign) that I was starting to get into 'boredom-burnout' territory with before I'd finished it on my first playthrough. The thing about Origins is that it's flaws are more of a death by a thousand cuts, coupled with the fact that there really isn't anything particularly interesting in it that hasn't been done umpteen times before to make you overlook them. It's fairly well-polished but bland, contrasted with DA2 which is poorly-executed but has more of an interest factor to it. I can talk about Origins flaws for a long time (and have done in the past, much to the annoyance of my real-life friends), but since I doubt anyone besides myself finds discussing the flaws more interesting than the actual game I won't go into it right now.



With regards to Awakening, I'd agree it's not a very engaging experience to play. Which is a shame because as a premise it's probably got the strongest potential, certainly more so than Origins did. For example, the game is about the Wardens and everyone in your party is one (thereby avoiding the whole 'Darkspawn Taint does nothing' part of the 'Wardens are useless' problem); it's main antagonist is actually the main enemy and has personality and goals (again, ahead of Origins); the concept is primarily about managing and building-up a fortress and surrounding estate, which is both a strong one and surprisingly under-utilised as a main story-hook (and something fans have likely been keen on since BG2).

Unfortunately, this is all immediately let down by the writing and the fact that high-level DA:O combat is broken to the point where it's even less engaging than standard DA:O's. It's a shame, because in some ways Awakenings felt like it could have been closer to what was being talked about for Dragon Age back when it was first announced (which was a fair few years before Origins hit - one of the reasons I'd have been interested to see what the design process of the game was because it seems like there was a big shift in direction at some point).


There's some weird psychological issue at work here that makes people playing the game project their opinions about vaguely similar issues in real life (any issue from real world has little to nothing to do with imaginary people that can become a magical monster thing and slaughter everyone at a moment's notice)
It's called 'being a human experiencing a work created by other humans'. Every single work of fantasy (and SF in general) draws from the real-world for inspiration (because that's where the creators live); many of them deliberately go out of their way bring in themes that do reference things in the real world (The Witcher, for a game example, references racial discrimination quite clearly) and even the ones that aren't doing it on purpose, will still having themes that are applicable to the real world because, once again, they're made by people who live there.
I mean if you're going down this route you might as well argue that there's no point talking about the character's relationships with each other because they aren't real people and only real people can have inter-personal relationships.

[Zevox]

I'm not quite sure why, but while I love Origins, and have a love/hate relationship with 2 (STOP DROPPING GUYS OUT OF THE RAFTERS!) I feel that Awakening is the weakest entry. Can't really put my finger on why, but I consistently burn out a short way through Awakenings. 50-60+ hrs in an origins Nightmare run? Sure. 30-40 hrs in a DA2 run? Barring occasional ragequits over some of the gameplay decisions, fine. 5-10 hrs into Awakenings? start just losing interest, and have to push myself to finish it.
I'd guess that's because very little happens in Awakening in between the start and finish of the game. All the plot occurs at those points, while in between you mostly have dungeon crawling and foreshadowing for the end. And a little companion recruiting, but Awakening does less with its companions than Origins or 2.

[Beowulf DW]

There's some weird psychological issue at work here that makes people playing the game project their opinions about vaguely similar issues in real life (any issue from real world has little to nothing to do with imaginary people that can become a magical monster thing and slaughter everyone at a moment's notice) onto the virtual game world (there should be academical studies about this phenomenon).

It's called applicability, my in-need-of-a-hug friend. It means that people can reset their biases and view issues in a new light. Sort of like how some people compare Lord of the Rings to World War II. The issue in question with Dragon Age is the negative feedback loop, which is applicable to the War on Drugs and the War on Terror and general hatred and bias, among other things.

[Kish]

The biggest problem I had with Origins, was that after you finally confronted and killed the main villain, there was this big long stultifying mass battle through the city of Denerim as the game tried to persuade you that the main villain of the game was actually the barely-if-at-all sapient dragon, not the vile human lord.

Awakening...was just bad. (And it was downright insulting to the players' intelligence for EA to claim Oghren was a "fan favorite," rather than just being "We can be sure you didn't kill this one!")

[darksolitaire]

I kind of want to defend Awakening...but truth be told I played trough it once. Well, Anders was good and some quests were nice. Blackmarsh was ok. Level cap increase was great! Dilemma with Darkspawn had some ambiguity, unlike mages and templars.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Hey! I liked Oghren!

[Crow]

For the Templar vs Mage thing, it seems I am in the vast minority.

I went Templar. I tried to play it from Hawke's point of view, and everywhere I went, damn near every mage I met turned out to be a blood-magic using abomination. Like every one. Then Anders the maniac, who my Hawke gave the benefit of the doubt...well yeah. Even that annoying and stupid elf Merrill. She was such an idiot I wanted to shake her at times. No idea why I let her join the group. I was hoping Isabella would off her or something.

By the end of the game, I felt as if my Hawke would be like, "Merideth may be crazy, but she's right. I'll deal with her after these mages are out of the way."

On another note: How on earth does anyone like Merrill?

edit: I also liked Oghren.

[Pronounceable]

On another note: How on earth does anyone like Merrill?
She's extremely pathetic. This is apparently enough to create protective feelings in some people (despite the criminally insane amount of destructive power she possesses).
...
I didn't like Oghren. Being the most stereotypical NPC in a game as tripe as DAO sort of deserves a Darwin award. Also drunk fighty dwarf is baaaad (his backstory was cool though).

[Crow]

(his backstory was cool though).

His backstory was pretty much what I liked about him too. But it was enough to make me like him more than several of the other characters.

[Mx.Silver]

On another note: How on earth does anyone like Merrill?


Well, she's one of the nicer NPCs overall and she has a fair few funny banters (particularly with Isabella). There's also the fact that, despite how much the game tries to make an issue of her stupidity, most of the bad stuff that happens around is due to how people react to her, rather than anything she actually does. Honestly, the keeper is more of an idiot than she is, especially in regards to the end of Merril's quest-line where apparently it's decided that Hawke and co - who have killed multiple pride demons by this point- can't handle another one so Marethari pointlessly decides to 'sacrifice' herself. At which point the pride demon manifests anyway and Hakwe and co. proceed to kill it in under thirty seconds.
I'll grant she's overly naive with poor judgement skills, but again most of the consequences of her arc is that how people react to blood magic is comparatively as harmful as blood magic itself.

Also, on a personal note, I grew up in Wales so it's nice to hear a here the accent get some representation.

[Zevox]

Well, she's one of the nicer NPCs overall and she has a fair few funny banters (particularly with Isabella). There's also the fact that, despite how much the game tries to make an issue of her stupidity, most of the bad stuff that happens around is due to how people react to her, rather than anything she actually does. Honestly, the keeper is more of an idiot than she is, especially in regards to the end of Merril's quest-line where apparently it's decided that Hawke and co - who have killed multiple pride demons by this point- can't handle another one so Marethari pointlessly decides to 'sacrifice' herself. At which point the pride demon manifests anyway and Hakwe and co. proceed to kill it in under thirty seconds.
I'll grant she's overly naive with poor judgement skills, but again most of the consequences of her arc is that how people react to blood magic is comparatively as harmful as blood magic itself.
Pretty much that, yeah. She's a very kind person who is easy to sympathize with, and as much a victim of how messed up the world around her is as anything. Honestly, I suspect that many players wouldn't react nearly as negatively to her if the artifact she had been trying to investigate had been anything but that mirror - knowing what it did in Origins inherently makes people think her dumber for trying to understand it than they would if it were something they themselves did not understand either.

[Dienekes]

Meredith's suspicions? Quote Meredith saying "Orsino is a blood mage" or any variation thereof, or please stop calling Orsino turning out to be a boss* "Meredith's suspicions." She made it abundantly clear that she only cares about finally getting her excuse, not about any specific crimes any mages might have committed--Sebastian, utter imbecile that he otherwise is, even comments on it--when she responded to Anders killing the Grand Cleric with, "Kill all the mages!...Not the one who did the killing, I don't care about him, just all the ones in the Gallows!"

*Quoting Meredith saying, "EA sucks" would also work.

As you may have gathered from my footnote, I don't think anything can be derived from Orsino's sudden psychotic break except that EA wanted another boss. My headcanon is that Varric made it up because, before fleeing the city with Hawke and Anders, Orsino asked Varric to make everyone who heard the story think he was dead.

She claims that there are dangerous blood mages hiding in the upper levels of the Circle. And voila, there are dangerous blood mages hiding in the upper levels of the Circle. Yes, I can see how her claims were completely wrong on that account.

I'm not saying Meredith isn't a psychotic idiot, she is, but the event was so obviously set up to be a big, important and tough decision. You're party is split roughly evenly headed on those who side with the Mages vs those who side with the Templars. Hell, one of the repeatedly most level-headed of your companions sides with the Templars. The game had pounded into our heads repeatedly that the mages were destructive and fantastically dangerous, and even has a subplot that the land of Kirkwall is pseudo-cursed to make mages crazier and more prone to blood magic. The whole build up of the third act is in making this decision, it was supposed to be difficult.

But we only have 1 guy so far who copped up to siding with the Templar, as opposed to everyone else who sided with the mages. To me that says that the decision wasn't all that difficult a decision for us, so I am simply trying to find one that would be interesting. As a thought exercise if nothing else.

As to Merril and her mirror. I had no idea the mirror was in DAO, where was it? I didn't like her because it was obvious to me that it would end in disaster one way or the other, everyone told her so. She is however this odd mix of shy, vulnerable, and kind that people find cute for some reason that escapes me. It's like people's love for Tali, except instead of being striving with her people to accomplish her long term goals, Merril ignores all their advice and works alone at something that is incredibly dangerous and makes deals with a Pride Demon, which was obviously (to me anyway, at least how I interpreted the events) playing on her pride, which was demonstrated to be her biggest weakness. I did not think she had the cunning or strength to face down the demon, in fact no one thought she did.

Admittedly, that little story ended different than I expected. Her teacher was somehow an even bigger idiot than she was. At least now I see where she got it from.

[Dhavaer]

As to Merril and her mirror. I had no idea the mirror was in DAO, where was it?

In the Dalish origin.

[Kish]

She claims that there are dangerous blood mages hiding in the upper levels of the Circle. And voila, there are dangerous blood mages hiding in the upper levels of the Circle. Yes, I can see how her claims were completely wrong on that account.

That is an extraordinarily charitable (to Meredith, if correspondingly uncharitable to the mages) description of Meredith's claims.


You're party is split roughly evenly headed on those who side with the Mages vs those who side with the Templars. Hell, one of the repeatedly most level-headed of your companions sides with the Templars.

I honestly have no clue who you mean here. I'm guessing Aveline, not because she strikes me as level-headed at all, but because the thought of you meaning her makes my head hurt less than trying to fit Fenris or Carver into "one of the most level-headed of your companions." (Alternatively, you could be treating Varric's "I just don't care which side you pick" as siding with the templars.)

Considering the final boss is always Meredith, and the ending of the game is the uprising of all the Circles (which is "You accomplished something massive!" if you side with the mages but is, "Your final choice was unable to stop what Anders had started, though it meant death for all of the specific mages in Kirkwall." if you sided with the templars), I find it as obvious that the writers were aiming for, "Hawke will of course protect the mages...oh, I suppose we have to put in an option for Hawke to join Meredith in slaughtering them instead, sigh..." as you apparently find it that the writers were aiming for, "Hawke should have about a fifty percent chance of going either way here."

[Dienekes]

In the Dalish origin.

Ahh, didn't play that one. I don't particularly like elves in general and I kept hearing that one was the worst.

[Beowulf DW]

Ahh, didn't play that one. I don't particularly like elves in general and I kept hearing that one was the worst.

Also in the Witch Hunt DLC.

[Dienekes]

Also in the Witch Hunt DLC.

I, as a general rule, don't buy DLC. One of my quirks.

[Dienekes]

My apologies for the double post, but it's been 6 hours so I think I'm ok.


His backstory was pretty much what I liked about him too. But it was enough to make me like him more than several of the other characters.

He could have been cool if they actually played upon his weaknesses a bit. For instance, we see he has a drinking problem that was a large part of why he lost his position of prominence. Through the game we see him fart and laugh and fall unconscious from his alcoholism, but never really confront it. Then at the end of the game you can trust him with leading an army and he suddenly he's all professional.

They could have set up a situation where his drinking actually leads to a problem for the party, perhaps he was drinking during his turn for watch at camp or something. Whatever. And the Warden has to confront him about it, and either force him to leave, enable him (it was just a mistake don't worry about it), or confront his problem and have him deal with it. Afterward we see some of the trusted, intelligent commander he once was resurface as he gives some useful advice and takes a more serious turn. Or at least, still sarcastic and a bit crude, but not falling over in the middle of a conversation.


And to Kish. That there were blood mages in the Circle thing was literally what she was arguing with Orsino about seconds before Anders' attack. It turned out to be correct. But whatever, I know I'm not going to persuade you myself, so after a 5 minute google search I got this from David Gaider:


Those quotes were in response to a poster who was determined to paint the templars as evil oppressors-- when my position has always been there are no easy answers to this particular question. It's very easy for us comfortable western folk to take the attitude that anything which isn't democratic and fair is clearly wrong-- which is a pat answer to a complex problem, especially in a world where the situation is simply not the same as in our own.

You may believe we pushed too hard in the other direction, and that's fair, but if we had intended for there to be one solution there would be no argument about it at all, would there? What you see, after all, is there because we chose for it to be there.

If you still disagree with me on what their goal was with the Templar/Mage decision, that is your prerogative, and feel free to express it. But I don't think I'll get any further in this discussion with you, so I'm dropping out of this one.

[Kish]

But whatever, I know I'm not going to persuade you myself, so after a 5 minute google search I got this from David Gaider:
That does, indeed, illustrate that Gaider perceives the decision whether or not to slaughter all the mages as a morally ambiguous one. My respect for him as a writer did not decrease, for it was already nonexistent; he hasn't learned a thing since Loghain. I am, however, now somewhat nervous about Dragon Age 3 in a way I wasn't before. Then again, maybe I shouldn't be; with his track record, as long as he keeps aiming for ambiguous morality, he'll keep getting clearcut morality.

I just hope the game doesn't assume everyone perceives ambiguity where Gaider does, the way Dragon Age 2 did. In Dragon Age 1, I could kill Loghain and have no one expect me to regret it, whether Gaider thought I should have or not; in Dragon Age 2, I was constantly frustrated by people treating me like I'd ever acted like "mages should be automatically imprisoned" was a valid perspective.

[Dienekes]

That does, indeed, illustrate that Gaider perceives the decision whether or not to slaughter all the mages as a morally ambiguous one. My respect for him as a writer did not decrease, for it was already nonexistent; he hasn't learned a thing since Loghain. I am, however, now somewhat nervous about Dragon Age 3 in a way I wasn't before. Then again, maybe I shouldn't be; with his track record, as long as he keeps aiming for ambiguous morality, he'll keep getting clearcut morality.

I just hope the game doesn't assume everyone perceives ambiguity where Gaider does, the way Dragon Age 2 did. In Dragon Age 1, I could kill Loghain and have no one expect me to regret it, whether Gaider thought I should have or not; in Dragon Age 2, I was constantly frustrated by people treating me like I'd ever acted like "mages should be automatically imprisoned" was a valid perspective.

Oh I agree the writing was bad. It just seemed obvious to me what they were trying to go for, and failing at miserably. That's why I asked the folks here what they think would make it actually morally ambiguous instead of what we got.

Now admittedly, watching through the Templar ending it was not as stupid bad as I thought it would be. For instance you can choose to try and save as many mages as you can along the way (in a scene that also gave me more respect for Cullen as a character). But that needed to be something you know about before making the decision who to side with, not after everyone already saw Meredith as a crazy extremist who was taking it too far.

[Aux-Ash]

I've sided with both factions. Mostly I side with the mages because of the gross injustice of Meredith declaring the Right of Annulment, but the one where I sided with the templars turned out to be a very satisfying playthrough. In discussions I tend to differ towards pro-templar arguments however.

I think the easiest way to make the mage-templar conflict of DA2 more ambigous would have been to have built up Orsino better and make him take a more prominent position. As it is, he's way too reasonable. Yeah, he provokes Meredith every time he speaks to her but for the most part he's not that overbearing.
Meredith is being built up all through act 1 and 2 and by the point you actually meet her there's no question of who she is or what kind of person she is. Meredith is the iron lady of kirkwall, a tyrant to some and even her allies call her a zealot.
Orsino... the first time we even hear about Orsino is in Feynriel's dream, and if you don't do that one... then it's in ending of act 2.
He should have been given a better introduction, a build up where he's presented as a troublemaker and ideally... tied him to every single blood mage conspiracy in the game. Some he's behind, other's he's tipping of the templars about because they'd ruin his plans. Even have Anders produce some letters in the end, showing that Orsino basically gave him the instructions to the bomb and goaded him into doing it (and then have Orsino confirm it and even state that he tipped off the templars about the mage underground simply to provoke Anders)

I think that would have evened out the scales by changing the plot the least. Meredith's a tyrant, Orsino a revolutionary. Meredith's declaration would be immense injustice, but you know that Orsino, if protected, would ensure that Kirkwall would descend into the same situation again even if Meredith is ousted.

Of course... that sort of ending would probably require some more adjustments since it'd be pretty dark.

[Delusion]

I actually sided with the templars on my first play through (as a mage nontheless). I don't remember most of why I chose that, but one was that Carver was a templar, and I didn't want to have to kill him.

And I basically went "screw them" after almost every single free mage had turned out to be a blood mage or abomination.

[Crow]

And I basically went "screw them" after almost every single free mage had turned out to be a blood mage or abomination.

Amen to that. Exactly my line of reasoning on my first play through.

[Avilan the Grey]

Amen to that. Exactly my line of reasoning on my first play through.

Same here!

[Morty]

BioWare's favoured method of achieving moral ambiguity is, unfortunately, to make everyone a bastard, crazy, corrupt or any combination of the above.

[Partysan]

BioWare's favoured method of achieving moral ambiguity is, unfortunately, to make everyone a bastard, crazy, corrupt or any combination of the above.

True, but that's still better than their approach to "evil character choices".

[Aux-Ash]

BioWare's favoured method of achieving moral ambiguity is, unfortunately, to make everyone a bastard, crazy, corrupt or any combination of the above.

Mind, making members on both sides terrible people is actually not a half bad way of creating ambiguity. Just look at Anvil of the Void in DAO, Harrowmont is a much better person than Bhelen is yet Bhelen is the one that actually tries to make life better for the dwarves. Or looking at the Skyrim, it's easy to sympathize with the Stormcloak cause... it's their rampant racism that's the problem.

It's easy to take this too far, which arguably was what they did with the mages in DA2 (and this has been acknowledged by the devs). But the idea in itself isn't terrible.

[Morty]

The idea itself isn't, but like you said, it can be taken too far quite easily. And the result might be that the player just wishes he or she could just drown all those idiots instead of having to pick a side. Which is a common reaction to the Mage/Templar conflict.

[Dienekes]

Mind, making members on both sides terrible people is actually not a half bad way of creating ambiguity. Just look at Anvil of the Void in DAO, Harrowmont is a much better person than Bhelen is yet Bhelen is the one that actually tries to make life better for the dwarves. Or looking at the Skyrim, it's easy to sympathize with the Stormcloak cause... it's their rampant racism that's the problem.

It's easy to take this too far, which arguably was what they did with the mages in DA2 (and this has been acknowledged by the devs). But the idea in itself isn't terrible.

You see, I wouldn't call this making both sides terrible people. I also think Bhelen vs Harrowmont was one of the most interesting choices of DAO, where the ambiguity was actually there. At least until the epilogue which tells you that no, Bhelen was the right choice. But that's taking into account information that wasn't there during the game. Bhelen was a power hungry psychopath but one willing to change society, or at least claim he wanted to. It would have been entirely in his character to be lying about it. And Harrowmont was a decent guy, who just didn't want to upset the status quo, and also had the military background that could be helpful in your ultimate goal of stopping the Blight. A fun decision, and one that I picked both sides on, in different playthroughs.

[Psyren]

On another note: How on earth does anyone like Merrill?

For one, she's one of the only characters in the 'verse sensible enough to demonstrate that blood magic can be used simply as a power source instead of muddying their message by committing heinous atrocities/human rights violations.

For two, her goals are admirable. She wants the elves to stop being wandering gypsies and relegated to crime-filled preservations. Yeah, the eluvian might not be the safest way to go about it, but at least she has a bloody plan. The other Keepers seem content with wandering the world aimlessly until their people die out entirely.

And finally, her character is funny and naive and likable. She's driven and has a goal, but she isn't yammering on about it constantly like Anders and Fenris. It's also possible to change her mind, you know, like a real person instead of a caricature (if you so choose.) My one regret for her is that she can't learn healing magic, likely because they wanted to give all the healing scenes to Anders.

[Derthric]

I went with the mages. My Hawke was a mage and my cannon warden was a mage as well, and Hawke's cousin.

The Mage-Templar tensions in Origins felt more organic to me. There are mages fighting for their very souls and the souls of children in the Tower and they do not suddenly spaz out and start cutting themselves for MOAR POWWAAAAH. And the Templars work with the existing mage hierarchy to enforce its rules and when that fails then they turn to the Right of Annulment. And even then when the demons and abominations have seized the tower they take a gamble that's other than wipe out everyone.

In DA2 when every mage opponent turned out to be a blood mage or an abomination my suspension of disbelief could not take it. Instead of driving the point home about how dangerous the Mages are it made me think "Oh this again.....and again......look a blood mage how shocking, Not!". I think they drove the point home too hard. Mages are dangerous when left unchecked, the blights are a direct result of unchecked Mages mucking with the Maker himself. The threat seemed readily apparent to me. What DA2 just showed was that the negative feedback loop was the problem here, not the mages, and not the need to control or monitor them, but rather how it was being done.

[Psyren]

Honestly, the keeper is more of an idiot than she is, especially in regards to the end of Merril's quest-line where apparently it's decided that Hawke and co - who have killed multiple pride demons by this point- can't handle another one so Marethari pointlessly decides to 'sacrifice' herself. At which point the pride demon manifests anyway and Hakwe and co. proceed to kill it in under thirty seconds.

Exactly this. And we can't even claim "well, she didn't know that Hawke can kill Pride Demons" since we did exactly that with the Feynriel quest that she sent us on. So that part of Merrill's quest had me angrier with Marethari than with Merrill.


Mind, making members on both sides terrible people is actually not a half bad way of creating ambiguity. Just look at Anvil of the Void in DAO, Harrowmont is a much better person than Bhelen is yet Bhelen is the one that actually tries to make life better for the dwarves. Or looking at the Skyrim, it's easy to sympathize with the Stormcloak cause... it's their rampant racism that's the problem.

It's easy to take this too far, which arguably was what they did with the mages in DA2 (and this has been acknowledged by the devs). But the idea in itself isn't terrible.

Agreed here as well.


The idea itself isn't, but like you said, it can be taken too far quite easily. And the result might be that the player just wishes he or she could just drown all those idiots instead of having to pick a side. Which is a common reaction to the Mage/Templar conflict.

As disappointed as I am with both sides, it's not an even split - Meredith was a bigger threat than Orsino to me, by far.

[Beowulf DW]

Mind, making members on both sides terrible people is actually not a half bad way of creating ambiguity. Just look at Anvil of the Void in DAO, Harrowmont is a much better person than Bhelen is yet Bhelen is the one that actually tries to make life better for the dwarves. Or looking at the Skyrim, it's easy to sympathize with the Stormcloak cause... it's their rampant racism that's the problem.

It's easy to take this too far, which arguably was what they did with the mages in DA2 (and this has been acknowledged by the devs). But the idea in itself isn't terrible.

I think it's not a very good idea, myself. As we learned in Mass Effect, "They're saints and jerks, just like us." A few more misguided idealists, or maybe even people who do terrible things and hate themselves for it on both sides would have been nice.

"If there's a hell, I'm probably going to burn in it. But at least I'll end the hell this world has become."-That's the sort of attitude I would have liked to see more of. A templar/mage who does terrible things because they see no other recourse, and are visibly distraught over what they're doing over the course of the game. Anders came close to that kind of remorse, but his tone and self-righteous still seemed to be showing through.

[Psyren]

I think it's not a very good idea, myself. As we learned in Mass Effect, "They're saints and jerks, just like us." A few more misguided idealists, or maybe even people who do terrible things and hate themselves for it on both sides would have been nice.

"If there's a hell, I'm probably going to burn in it. But at least I'll end the hell this world has become."-That's the sort of attitude I would have liked to see more of. A templar/mage who does terrible things because they see no other recourse, and are visibly distraught over what they're doing over the course of the game. Anders came close to that kind of remorse, but his tone and self-righteous still seemed to be showing through.

Anders didn't "come close to that" - it described his motivation to a tee.

[Beowulf DW]

Anders didn't "come close to that" - it described his motivation to a tee.

If it did, I guess I didn't notice Ander's remorse. My bad. However, in my opinion, he was just too eager about the whole thing for me to really agree with your assessment, Psyren.

[Psyren]

If it did, I guess I didn't notice Ander's remorse.

Such as sitting down peacefully and letting you execute him for his actions without fighting back? Or statements like "there's nothing you can say right now that I haven't already said to myself?" Remorse like that?

[Kish]

If hanging around for ten years trying to come up with an alternative is eager, I'd hate to see what reluctant looks like.

[Zevox]

Such as sitting down peacefully and letting you execute him for his actions without fighting back? Or statements like "there's nothing you can say right now that I haven't already said to myself?" Remorse like that?
Indeed. Whatever anyone may think of Anders, his actions after the destruction of the Chantry ought to be proof enough that he knew full well how awful his actions there were, and hated that he had been driven to that point. He was exactly the sort of character Beowulf described.

[Beowulf DW]

Well, when I'm wrong, I'm wrong. I guess I let the whole betrayal after what seemed like a harmless side quest thing get the better of me. Sorry.

[Crow]

Well regardless of everything else, Anders' betrayal was enough to get me pissed off at the character. For that, I give the game's creators a high five.

Back to the Merrill thing: I keep seeing people use the term "likeable" to describe her. I guess I will just need to resign to the fact that what some people like, others find irritating and repulsive (intellectually). I guess that is one of the great things that keeps the real world interesting.

[Psyren]

Intellectually I found her appealing - the one mage besides my own that realized, "Hey, this blood magic thing doesn't have to be used for Teh Evulz. It has real actual benefits, like not relying on the dwarven drug/blood diamond trade, or exposing anyone who isn't a dwarf/lobotomy victim to horrible radiation."

And her cause is/was noble too.

[Giggling Ghast]

I like the contrast of Merrill's personality and her abilities. She's sweet and kind, but her brand of magic is as black as you can get and she's one of the strongesr damage-dealers in Hawke's party.

Also, I personallly find her to be quite pretty and her accent is endlessly charming. Her romance arc is very endearing. Of the four LIs in DA2, Hawke's relationship with Merrill comes the close to verging on 'normal.'

[Avilan the Grey]

Intellectually I found her appealing - the one mage besides my own that realized, "Hey, this blood magic thing doesn't have to be used for Teh Evulz. It has real actual benefits, like not relying on the dwarven drug/blood diamond trade, or exposing anyone who isn't a dwarf/lobotomy victim to horrible radiation."

And her cause is/was noble too.

I liked her looks, her accent and a lot of the banter. However the part from your quote? Not so much, since it is all made irrelevant by the Idiot Balls the size of Manhattan she, and her keeper are carrying around at all times.

[Psyren]

I liked her looks, her accent and a lot of the banter. However the part from your quote? Not so much, since it is all made irrelevant by the Idiot Balls the size of Manhattan she, and her keeper are carrying around at all times.

What Merrill did was risky, but not stupid. She did not charge up Sundermount all alone to try and free the demon, she made sure powerful people - people who had demonstrably dealt with Pride Demons before - went with her. She informed them of the risks ahead of time. She made Hawke promise to kill her if things got out of hand. What more would you have had her do?

And Marethari jumped the gun. Foolish, perhaps, but not Idiot Ball. That trope (like so many others) gets misused a lot - Idiot Ball refers to someone who is normally prudent or intelligent doing something so stupid merely to advance the plot, that it actually breaks their character. Marethari's sacrifice was not IB - she did what she felt she had to do to protect her wayward First. In that moment, she was frightened mother first, wise tribal guardian second, and nothing about that was out of character for her. That we'll never know whether such a sacrifice was necessary or not (and I firmly believe it wasn't), does not make it an Idiot Ball.

And I found Anders' constant condemnation of Merrill to be a bit grating. The line between what he was and an Abomination was pretty thin, especially since Justice slowly began to be corrupted inside him to become Vengeance. If it weren't for Hawke he would have become a Pride Abomination himself long ago, perhaps even the night he would have gone to save Karl had he gone alone.

[Morty]

Intellectually I found her appealing - the one mage besides my own that realized, "Hey, this blood magic thing doesn't have to be used for Teh Evulz. It has real actual benefits, like not relying on the dwarven drug/blood diamond trade, or exposing anyone who isn't a dwarf/lobotomy victim to horrible radiation."

And her cause is/was noble too.

We get something like that in Origins, too - when Jowan can use blood magic to let a mage enter the Fade and save Connor. Unfortunately, it's made rather pointless due to how easy it is to get the Circle to do it the normal way, using lyrium.

On the whole, I agree blood magic could use to be portrayed as something a bit more grey, with mages using it not out of hunger for power, but out of desperation - like Merrill. And there ought to be more mages who abuse their power without being blood mages.

[ArlEammon]

Yeah, make that six for mage. The writing was so one-sided for mage it was fairly disappointing.

I hope three is much more akin to Origins... yet with the vastly improved Qunrai.

"I don't know about that. "I just wanted to go one week without running into some insane mage. Just one week. Your mother was murdered by a blood mage, and Orsino was responsible for it. There's like a billion blood mages in Kirkwall alone, since it's the Ry'leh of Dragon Age.

[Avilan the Grey]

What Merrill did was risky, but not stupid. She did not charge up Sundermount all alone to try and free the demon, she made sure powerful people - people who had demonstrably dealt with Pride Demons before - went with her. She informed them of the risks ahead of time. She made Hawke promise to kill her if things got out of hand. What more would you have had her do?


Let's see... She makes deals with demons, period.
She dismisses every. legitimate. warning. about the mirror.

As for Idiot Ball used wrong... maybe you are correct. Maybe there never was an idiot ball, and the characters are just idiots.

Or Bioware are bad writers.


"I don't know about that. "I just wanted to go one week without running into some insane mage. Just one week. Your mother was murdered by a blood mage, and Orsino was responsible for it. There's like a billion blood mages in Kirkwall alone, since it's the Ry'leh of Dragon Age.

Exactly. The only, ONLY mage my Hawke trusted was Bethany (which also is my favorite character in the game). And her father, I presume, but unfortunately I got a fatal case of "Wrong Genre Savy" and managed to get her killed.
Her mother dies HORRIBLY because of blood magic, supported by the circle, why should she not side with the chantry? And that is again without counting the 1000000000000000000000 blood mages and abominations she has to fight in every abandoned warehouse / cave / cellar in Kirwall. Per night.

[Psyren]

Let's see... She makes deals with demons, period.

And? So did Flemeth, and a lot of good came of that decision. Ferelden would be a wasteland now if she hadn't, and Hawke would be dead. So what's your point?


She dismisses every. legitimate. warning. about the mirror.

Hawke dismissed every warning about the Deep Roads, and the Fade, and Sundermount. Sometimes you have to take risks to get what you need.



As for Idiot Ball used wrong... maybe you are correct. Maybe there never was an idiot ball, and the characters are just idiots.

Or Bioware are bad writers.

I would dearly love to see you do better... actually, scratch that, I wouldn't.

[Avilan the Grey]

And? So did Flemeth, and a lot of good came of that decision. Ferelden would be a wasteland now if she hadn't, and Hawke would be dead. So what's your point?

The fact that she is... what she is... because if it is "good" because she turning into a Deux Ex Machina both for Hawke and The Warden?

I am sure the men and daughters she has killed or consumed over the years agrees with you. Or not.

[Psyren]

The fact that she is... what she is... because if it is "good" because she turning into a Deux Ex Machina both for Hawke and The Warden?

You're still grossly misusing terms that you appear to have little understanding of. DEMs are used to solve the plot, not start it.



I am sure the men and daughters she has killed or consumed over the years agrees with you. Or not.

Putting aside that we have no proof of that besides Morrigan's word, it doesn't actually do a thing to my point. Had she died back in the past, Ferelden would have been overrun, and possibly even the rest of the world as well. Had she died back in the past, Hawke would be dead, and Kirkwall would be a Qunari outpost (or worse, once that idol/Feynriel got going.)

[Hyena]

I did the templar ending. Why?
Because every mage in the damned city is a blood mage. Even the reasonable ones, like Orsino? Blood mages. Everyone, who's not a blood mage? Abomination. Anders? A terrorist and a violent psychopath. Merril? Eh tu, Brute?
I spared everybody, who wasn't keen on this whole "Let's raze the Kirkwall" thing, but everybody else was put to sword.

[Crow]

I did the templar ending. Why?
Because every mage in the damned city is a blood mage. Even the reasonable ones, like Orsino? Blood mages. Everyone, who's not a blood mage? Abomination. Anders? A terrorist and a violent psychopath. Merril? Eh tu, Brute?
I spared everybody, who wasn't keen on this whole "Let's raze the Kirkwall" thing, but everybody else was put to sword.

Yup.

Back to Merrill: I think when you've resorted to favorably comparing Merrill to Flemeth, you've lost the argument here. I think that so many players were smitten by her cutesy naiveté (which again, I found repulsive) that they are willing to make almost any excuse for her. Much like people will do in real life too.

[Psyren]

Back to Merrill: I think when you've resorted to favorably comparing Merrill to Flemeth, you've lost the argument here.

So Flemeth didn't save the world then? I must have missed the playthrough where she left all the Grey Wardens to die at Ostagar and the credits rolled.

[Beowulf DW]

So Flemeth didn't save the world then? I must have missed the playthrough where she left all the Grey Wardens to die at Ostagar and the credits rolled.

Isn't this more or less one of the core issues of this series? What does it really take to save the world? How far are you willing to go to save your people, your family, those dear to you? Would you sacrifice your principles, your safety, even your soul?

[Psyren]

Isn't this more or less one of the core issues of this series? What does it really take to save the world? How far are you willing to go to save your people, your family, those dear to you? Would you sacrifice your principles, your safety, even your soul?

Indeed, it is. Which is why I find it so hard to condemn Merrill, when she is willing to risk her own life for her people.

And Flemeth, whatever she has become, very much has a soul - or at the very least, principles and honor. Morrigan is the one I have a harder time trusting - when you confront Flemeth in DA:O, she accepts her fate, but hints rather strongly that Morrigan is misleading you. Not having read the grimoire ourselves, we can only take Morrigan's word as to the contents.

Something about Morrigan's story doesn't ring true to me though. If Flemeth needed Morrigan to avoid dying, why would she even have a phylactery to hand off to Hawke? Why did she look so much younger in DA2 than DAO, even a year later atop Sundermount? How much of what Morrigan told us was true?

[Joran]

Let's see... She makes deals with demons, period.



The elves don't seem to think that there's much of a difference between spirits/demons.

"Anders: Do Dalish honestly not recognize the difference between demons and beneficial spirits?
Merrill: We've never thought of the Fade as the home of our gods.
Merrill: It is another realm, another people's home. No different or more foreign than, say, Orzammar."

and

"Merrill: Anders... There's no such thing as a good spirit. There never was.
Merrill: All spirits are dangerous. I understood that. I'm sorry that you didn't."

So there isn't that cultural injunction against negotiating with spirits that the humans/Chantry have. Likewise, the ancient Elves used blood magic fairly regularly and once again, they don't have the cultural prohibitions against blood magic.



She dismisses every. legitimate. warning. about the mirror.


For the Dalish, the Keeper is someone who is supposed to learn about the Elvish secrets and teach the next generation. Ideally, the Keepers will find ancient Elvish artifacts and try to learn their secrets, so it can be added to the greater knowledge of the Dalish.

The problem that Merrill has with Marethari is that Marethari seems too scared of the Eluvian to properly investigate it. Marethari already warned her about the taint, but through Merrill's own cleverness (and some help from a "spirit") she managed to remove the taint from the Eluvian.

Merrill does seem to realize it is dangerous and she goes about investigating it in systematic manner. To me, it seems like she takes the necessary care in investigating it.

[Crow]

I'm pretty sure she was just lucky to have the player character around.

[Psyren]

I'm pretty sure she was just lucky to have the player character around.

You could say the same of Feynriel, Keran, Cullen, Bartrand and anyone else who would have been owned hard by demons without Hawke around. That also includes Anders himself, who would have likely lost his mind (or been killed) all the way back in Act 1 if it weren't for Hawke, never mind faced with the girl in Act 2.

[Mx.Silver]

I'm pretty sure she was just lucky to have the player character around.

Something which is true of most of the cast in DA2 and every single person in Fereldan who wasn't directly opposed to The Warden. Honestly, given how obsessed with 'player empowerment' WRPGs tend to be this is a pretty common phenomena across the genre.

[Beowulf DW]

I'm pretty sure she was just lucky to have the player character around.

Well, she certainly was methodical about the whole thing. Let's not forget that she went for a whole decade before deciding that she needed to contact the demon again. Doesn't that imply that she was studying it the whole time and trying other solutions?


Indeed, it is. Which is why I find it so hard to condemn Merrill, when she is willing to risk her own life for her people.

And Flemeth, whatever she has become, very much has a soul - or at the very least, principles and honor. Morrigan is the one I have a harder time trusting - when you confront Flemeth in DA:O, she accepts her fate, but hints rather strongly that Morrigan is misleading you. Not having read the grimoire ourselves, we can only take Morrigan's word as to the contents.

Something about Morrigan's story doesn't ring true to me though. If Flemeth needed Morrigan to avoid dying, why would she even have a phylactery to hand off to Hawke? Why did she look so much younger in DA2 than DAO, even a year later atop Sundermount? How much of what Morrigan told us was true?

Considering her desperation to have Flemeth killed, and what was said and the tone in which it was said in Witch Hunt, it may be that Morrigan had been lying to the Warden to get him to kill Flemeth, using an idea from a story that she had already mentioned (Flemeth devouring the hearts of her daughters). This may have been motivated by, quite simply, terror. Perhaps Morrigan learned something about her mother that terrified her to the point that she tried to get the one person who might succeed, the Warden, to kill Flemeth. Let's not forget that in Witch Hunt, she's trying to get as far away from Flemeth as fast as she can.

[Psyren]

Something which is true of most of the cast in DA2 and every single person in Fereldan who wasn't directly opposed to The Warden. Honestly, given how obsessed with 'player empowerment' WRPGs tend to be this is a pretty common phenomena across the genre.

Precisely; in WRPGs you are The Chosen One. Hawke steamrolls demons, slays dragons, auto-makes his will save vs. blood magic, disbands whole merc companies, liquefies darkspawn without fear etc.

The fact that Merrill is trying this with you around is a point in her favor, not against it.



Considering her desperation to have Flemeth killed, and what was said and the tone in which it was said in Witch Hunt, it may be that Morrigan had been lying to the Warden to get him to kill Flemeth, using an idea from a story that she had already mentioned (Flemeth devouring the hearts of her daughters). This may have been motivated by, quite simply, terror. Perhaps Morrigan learned something about her mother that terrified her to the point that she tried to get the one person who might succeed, the Warden, to kill Flemeth. Let's not forget that in Witch Hunt, she's trying to get as far away from Flemeth as fast as she can.

I don't know - in WH it seemed more like she was running *to* something than away. The only time she mentions Flemeth is to tell you that she's alive, and to be wary. And that Flemeth is gathering power for something. She doesn't seem particularly scared either - eager, more like it. Morrigan seems more concerned about the child than about her mother, and perhaps the child is or will be her trump card.

What's truly interesting is
the portal Morrigan flees through is another Eluvian - and when the Warden says "Eluvians are portals? To where?" Morrigan replies "To another place, beyond this world and the Fade." Which says to me that wherever they lead, it's not necessarily a place where demons hold sway - and therefore that Merrill's experiment was not a fool's errand.

[Avilan the Grey]

You're still grossly misusing terms that you appear to be heavily misunderstanding. DEMs are used to solve the plot, not start it.



Putting aside that we have no proof of that besides Morrigan's word, it doesn't actually do a thing to my point. Had she died back in the past, Ferelden would have been overrun, and possibly even the rest of the world as well. Had she died back in the past, Hawke would be dead, and Kirkwall would be a Qunari outpost (or worse, once that idol/Feynriel got going.)

Fine. She is a cheap plot device to save the lives of the Warden and Hawke. Not a Deus Ex Machina.

Also, start plots? Really? When?

As for your second argument: I just don't see how these things have anyting to do with the fact that she is a truly evil creature.

And yes, I believe Morrigan, she seems truly terrified about her mother, and nothing in the games or lore shows that she is lying or that the fact that Flemeth is a body surfer is false.

[Psyren]

Fine. She is a cheap plot device to save the lives of the Warden and Hawke. Not a Deus Ex Machina.

"Anything which moves the plot forward or maintains it."

So... she's a character? :smallconfused:



Also, start plots? Really? When?

The two games? You know, the ones we're playing?



As for your second argument: I just don't see how these things have anyting to do with the fact that she is a truly evil creature.

Oh how vile of her, to save thousands of innocent lives from death and slavery. Twice. What a wicked, wicked creature.



And yes, I believe Morrigan, she seems truly terrified about her mother, and nothing in the games or lore shows that she is lying or that the fact that Flemeth is a body surfer is false.

Nothing says it's true either.

1) We've never actually seen Flemeth "body surf." Actually, she seems quite happy with her existing body. I'm not saying she hasn't before or can't, but I'm willing to bet that even if you don't do Morrigan's quest, the lying ***** will still be in DA3.
2) Flemeth does nothing to avoid her "death" at the Warden's hands.
3) Morrigan does nothing to inspire trust. She doesn't show you what's in the book, she doesn't tell you where she's taking the god-baby, she doesn't tell you why she's gating out of Ferelden or for how long, not a damn thing. Only that she needs POWAH! For... something.
4) I'm willing to bet the Warden, if he accompanied her, doesn't come back with her either.

[Avilan the Grey]

The two games? You know, the ones we're playing?

---

1) We've never actually seen Flemeth "body surf." Actually, she seems quite happy with her existing body. I'm not saying she hasn't before or can't, but I'm willing to bet that even if you don't do Morrigan's quest, the lying ***** will still be in DA3.
2) Flemeth does nothing to avoid her "death" at the Warden's hands.
3) Morrigan does nothing to inspire trust. She doesn't show you what's in the book, she doesn't tell you where she's taking the god-baby, she doesn't tell you why she's gating out of Ferelden or for how long, not a damn thing. Only that she needs POWAH! For... something.
4) I'm willing to bet the Warden, if he accompanied her, doesn't come back with her either.

By my definition the plots has already been started before she shows up. By Duncan in the first game, and by the decision to go to Kirkwall in the second. All she does is saving the lives of the characters for her own agenda.

1. No, we don't. It is not clear if she actually body surfs or just devours the lifeforce of her daughters.

2. Except fighting, you mean? On top of that, the second game definitely shows she has already taken steps to avoid dying by the Warden's hand.

3. What read in her character and what you read in her character are obviously two different things. I see pure dread after finding out what her mother is, and what she does. I also see nothing, AT ALL, before that that indicates any kind of hatred against her mother. They bicker, but that's it.
However the biggest insight in her character is actually when you follow the Friendship path, and not the Romance part.
(She is also my prefered romance interest in the game, which kind of sucks, since I prefer to play female characters.)

4. Don't know about this one.

And yes, a character who prolonges her life by killing her own daughters is definitely someone we should pass no judgement on, because her own selfish needs coincides with saving the life of the hero of the story.

[Psyren]

1. No, we don't. It is not clear if she actually body surfs or just devours the lifeforce of her daughters.


2. Except fighting, you mean? On top of that, the second game definitely shows she has already taken steps to avoid dying by the Warden's hand.

3. What read in her character and what you read in her character are obviously two different things. I see pure dread after finding out what her mother is, and what she does. I also see nothing, AT ALL, before that that indicates any kind of hatred against her mother. They bicker, but that's it.
However the biggest insight in her character is actually when you follow the Friendship path, and not the Romance part.
(She is also my prefered romance interest in the game, which kind of sucks, since I prefer to play female characters.)

4. Don't know about this one.


1) Or none of the above. Just Morrigan's word, based on a book she won't let you read.
2) A fight that ultimately makes you stronger. And somehow I doubt she was giving it her A-game, or the Warden would likely be dead. And seeing as how she could fly all the way to Gwaren, she could have simply avoided the confrontation altogether if she wanted to. There's more going on here than what is on the surface.
3) When you show up at Flemeth's hut, Flemeth says Morrigan is tricking you. So one of them has to be lying, perhaps even both.
4) We'll see.



And yes, a character who prolonges her life by killing her own daughters is definitely someone we should pass no judgement on, because her own selfish needs coincides with saving the life of the hero of the story.

Which daughters has she killed? What proof do you have?

But lets pretend for a moment that she did do that. Cold calculus. She sees the future, and while you can claim that saving the Warden was motivated by selfishness, she saves Hawke whether the Warden kills her or not.

[Avilan the Grey]

Which daughters has she killed? What proof do you have?

But lets pretend for a moment that she did do that. Cold calculus. She sees the future, and while you can claim that saving the Warden was motivated by selfishness, she saves Hawke whether the Warden kills her or not.

I don't have more proof than whats in the games. I am just reading the characters different than you. Plus the fact that she has been living for a heck of a long time. Many centuries, at least. She does something to stay alive.
As for "which daughters"? Well I guess that depends on if you pay attention to the ingame legends or not. I believe them, since arbitary scepticism is something I loathe in fiction.

Also, how do you know she isn't giving her A-game? Knowing the engine restrictions, she is fighting about as competent as the other high dragon. On top of this she will try to get out of the fight by proposing you lie to her daughter.

[Calemyr]

My two cents.

Templar vs Mages: Templar, all the way. Just not these Templar.

When playing a mage, my Hawkes invariably come to the conclusion that magic is a danger and steps must be taken. Certainly, some individuals have the discipline and talent to survive on their own (Hawkes in particular), and clearly nobody else can be trusted to solve the problems that city has, but providing structure, education, and security (for mages and non-mages alike) are admirable goals if done with proper care and respect. The establishment is broken, yes, but it needs to be rebuilt, not abolished.

When playing a non-mage, Bethany is all the reason my Hawkes need to support the Templar. Not only is she in their hands, she is happy with her status for the first time in her life, comfortable and safe instead of running and hiding. She has a place she belongs for once. Bethany is a poster child for the value the Circle can provide.

That said, the abuse and flagrant disregard the Templar display for the mages in their care is proof that they shouldn't be in control.

Merril: Merril is... complicated. First, she's the only slightly likable LI in the game to my mind (other than Sebastian). Fenris is a brooding, self-absorbed twerp; Isabella is simply amoral, and doesn't really care about anything as long as she gets her fun; and Anders is an extremist bigot who can't see past his own warped ideals and is rapidly spiraling out of control. Sebastian is decidedly better, and his whole 'chaste marriage' idea leads to some very funny dialogue, but it's female-only and he's an archer - and we've already got the most awesome archer in video games in the party as it is.

Merril, on the other hand, is like a puppy. Yes, a puppy is a perfect description. Cute in an adorably awkward way, sweet to a fault, and prone to peeing on the carpet and chewing up the furniture no matter how you try to prevent it. There's a reason puppies are cute - it's the only way they survive to adulthood. As maddening as she is, however, she's still more pleasant company than the other three.

Can Merril handle her blood magic? Yes, better than anyone who isn't named Hawke. Can she handle it as well as she thinks she can? Hell no. For all that she realizes she's playing with an angry viper, she still fails to realize that her control is an illusion meant to destroy her. She means well, better than Fenrir and certainly better than Anders and Isabella, but she's still too consumed in her own mind to realize how self-destructive her nature is. In the end, however, I tend to regard her as a puppy: enjoy the good times, appreciate the affection, grumble under my breath as I inevitably have to clean up the mess she's makes, all in the hope that it'll be worth it all once she grows the hell up.

[Psyren]

What evidence is there that Merrill can't control it? The Warden and Hawke are capable of learning blood magic and waltzing away unscathed too. Also Jowan, and Gascard. So clearly it's not impossible in the setting, just supremely difficult.


I don't have more proof than whats in the games.

So, none then.



Well I guess that depends on if you pay attention to the ingame legends or not. I believe them, since arbitary scepticism is something I loathe in fiction.

It's very common for irrational rumors to spring up around spellcasters in fantasy settings. Even the worldly Zevran wonders aloud if the Circle Magi can turn him into a frog for instance.

Aveline: "A Chasind legend. Witches that steal children."
Flemeth: "Bah! As if I had nothing better to do!"

It's being played for laughs simply because of how ridiculous it is. It's like Elminster kidnapping young boys or something.



Also, how do you know she isn't giving her A-game?

It's simple really. She's a powerful spellcaster and blood mage. Yet, other than actually becoming a dragon, she doesn't cast a single spell in that fight. Even Uldred actually stops swinging to cast a spell or two.

Chances are pretty good that in DA3 we'll get an idea of what she's really capable of doing.

[Divayth Fyr]

It's simple really. She's a powerful spellcaster and blood mage. Yet, other than actually becoming a dragon, she doesn't cast a single spell in that fight. Even Uldred actually stops swinging to cast a spell or two.
For all we know her modus operandi when actually fighting is to transform into a dragon and kill things. And since shapeshifters cannot cast while transformed, it can be argued the transformation has a similiar effect.

[Psyren]

That still doesn't preclude:

- Flying away to heal
- Flying away at all
- Any blood magic at all prior to shifting.
- Strafing the party the way she did to the darkspawn in 2, which happened before her fight with the Warden.

So no, I don't believe she was going all out.

[Kish]

I believe them, since arbitary scepticism is something I loathe in fiction.
"Arbitrary scepticism[sic] is something I loathe in fiction" seriously overdignifies, "Someone in the game says it, I believe it, that settles it." You may believe that every random in-game idiot's claims are Word of God if it pleases you, but please don't act like that's an argument.

[Zanos]

Mages are dangerous when left unchecked, the blights are a direct result of unchecked Mages mucking with the Maker himself. The threat seemed readily apparent to me. What DA2 just showed was that the negative feedback loop was the problem here, not the mages, and not the need to control or monitor them, but rather how it was being done.

Some of Corypheus's ramblings in Legacy strongly suggest that the Chantry's telling of this tale is not the entire truth:

"The light. We sought the golden light. You offered... the power of the gods themselves. But it was... black... corrupt. Darkness... ever since. How long?"

“The city! It was supposed to be golden! It was supposed to be ours!”

I hope DA3 expands on what actually happened considerably, because if the Chantry is covering something up it could very well be one of the biggest plot points in DA.

[Psyren]

It's almost certain the Chantry's tale is, if not outright wrong, missing key pieces. They have no explanation for Andraste's powers for instance.

[Ailurus]

Some of Corypheus's ramblings in Legacy strongly suggest that the Chantry's telling of this tale is not the entire truth:

"The light. We sought the golden light. You offered... the power of the gods themselves. But it was... black... corrupt. Darkness... ever since. How long?"

“The city! It was supposed to be golden! It was supposed to be ours!”

I hope DA3 expands on what actually happened considerably, because if the Chantry is covering something up it could very well be one of the biggest plot points in DA.


To me, they agree with the Chantry's teachings - after all, the Chantry claims they got to the golden city, but the act of them going there corrupted it and turned them into Darkspawn. All his rantings could easily match up with that story - they use blood magic to open the gate/portal/etc. but in doing so they corrupt it.

Now, there is still the major issue of the maker being the very definition of an absentee god. So I also agree that there's a lot they could expand upon, and also a whole lot that the Chantry isn't telling. And I also hope DA3 does expand on it.

[Zanos]

It's almost certain the Chantry's tale is, if not outright wrong, missing key pieces. They have no explanation for Andraste's powers for instance.
Yeah, it's pretty well-established in the first game that the Chantries story has some holes, but this is the very core of their doctrine being called into question. That is, the absence of the Maker, the necessity of the chant, the dangers of magic, and the origin of the taint.


To me, they agree with the Chantry's teachings - after all, the Chantry claims they got to the golden city, but the act of them going there corrupted it and turned them into Darkspawn. All his rantings could easily match up with that story - they use blood magic to open the gate/portal/etc. but in doing so they corrupt it.

Now, there is still the major issue of the maker being the very definition of an absentee god. So I also agree that there's a lot they could expand upon, and also a whole lot that the Chantry isn't telling. And I also hope DA3 does expand on it.
Part of one of the quotes is what gets me, honestly: "You offered... the power of the gods themselves."

Seems like if anything, they were tricked or at least misled to enter to Golden City. I personally think that the blight was sealed inside the Fade, and the act of the Magisters stepping in certainly unleashed the taint, but I don't think it created it. This is partially speculation, but the idea that something tricked the mages into releasing it certainly has potential. I don't want to get into Epileptic Trees, though.

Seeing the Imperium in DA3 is one of my hopes, but I don't really expect it, honestly. I doubt there's much left of interest from the Imperium of old anyway.

[Ailurus]

Part of one of the quotes is what gets me, honestly: "You offered... the power of the gods themselves."

Seems like if anything, they were tricked or at least misled to enter to Golden City.


You = Dumat (at least the way I read it). The old gods convinced the Magisters to go after the Maker, who had imprisoned all the old gods. Was there trickery involved? Sure, but what do you expect if you listen to a bunch of ancient, exiled gods who are asking you to take on the guy who created your world?

[Aux-Ash]

I think one of the most awesome things with Corypheus is that his confused recollection take us forward yet move our positions on the matter nowhere at all. His statements simultaneously validate and invalidate Chantry teachings.

As far as I am concerned he's one of the more interesting villains of DA. Both on his own, and the fact that he's suspiciously similar the Architect (which makes that name -very- omnious).

Does anyone besides me suspect we'll meet a third similar entity in DAI?

[Divayth Fyr]

You = Dumat (at least the way I read it). The old gods convinced the Magisters to go after the Maker, who had imprisoned all the old gods. Was there trickery involved? Sure, but what do you expect if you listen to a bunch of ancient, exiled gods who are asking you to take on the guy who created your world?
This is true only if you believe the Chantry's version. After all, there is no Maker in the elvish theology and no spirit confirmed that he was there (as beings from the Fade they would be in the best posiotion to know of his existance). Also, for all we know some Magisters might have actually believe the Creator (as the Maker was supposedly called in Tevinter) abandoned not only mortals, but also his Golden City.


To me, they agree with the Chantry's teachings - after all, the Chantry claims they got to the golden city, but the act of them going there corrupted it and turned them into Darkspawn. All his rantings could easily match up with that story - they use blood magic to open the gate/portal/etc. but in doing so they corrupt it.
Wasn't the story that their presence corrupted the City (so it turned black after they entered)? In that case, they should catch at least a glimpse of gold going black. But that is not what Corypheus says.


That still doesn't preclude:

- Flying away to heal
- Flying away at all
- Any blood magic at all prior to shifting.
- Strafing the party the way she did to the darkspawn in 2, which happened before her fight with the Warden.

So no, I don't believe she was going all out.
Well, there is no proof for what she could do at that point (apart from flying away - but escape could be used for a few other characters in the game, the fact they didn't doesn't mean they weren't going all out ;)

[darksolitaire]

Does anyone besides me suspect we'll meet a third similar entity in DAI?

What bothers me that both are not core game characters. So there's no guarentee. :smallfrown:

[Psyren]

This is true only if you believe the Chantry's version. After all, there is no Maker in the elvish theology and no spirit confirmed that he was there (as beings from the Fade they would be in the best posiotion to know of his existance). Also, for all we know some Magisters might have actually believe the Creator (as the Maker was supposedly called in Tevinter) abandoned not only mortals, but also his Golden City.

Agreed.



Well, there is no proof for what she could do at that point

Are you kidding me?? The Dragon Age 2 scene took place before her fight with the Warden!

[darksolitaire]

Are you kidding me?? The Dragon Age 2 scene took place before her fight with the Warden!

Yeah, but there's still no proof that she could have done that at that particular time. :smallconfused:

[Psyren]

Yeah, but there's still no proof that she could have done that at that particular time. :smallconfused:

It came before it. Chronologically. If there's a reason she couldn't do it later, the onus is on them to establish it. That's how stories work.

[Divayth Fyr]

It came before it. Chronologically. If there's a reason she couldn't do it later, the onus is on them to establish it. That's how stories work.
So, they were supposed to show why she doesn't do something they most likely didn't even think about at that time? How would they even do it, show someone hit her with a fire extinguisher and damage the wings? :smallconfused:

[Psyren]

So, they were supposed to show why she doesn't do something they most likely didn't even think about at that time? How would they even do it, show someone hit her with a fire extinguisher and damage the wings? :smallconfused:

A simple statement from her (in DA2) would work. "I don't perform displays like that often... I find them... taxing."

So without evidence to the contrary, the conclusion that she was holding back is a logical one.

[123456789blaaa]

So...what do people think of the various theories connecting the Maker-Elven Gods-Old gods? Have they even been discussed in the various Dragon Age threads on here before?

[Archpaladin Zousha]

The most popular theory seems to be "THEY'RE ALL FLEMETH!"

[Zevox]

So...what do people think of the various theories connecting the Maker-Elven Gods-Old gods? Have they even been discussed in the various Dragon Age threads on here before?
I don't think that they have been discussed, at least that I've seen.

Don't know how much stock I'd put in such theories at this time, honestly. The only ones of those that we even know for sure exist are the Old Gods, and we don't even know for certain if they'd qualify as gods in the sense that we'd normally think of, or are just particularly ancient and powerful Dragons.

[Psyren]

The only one I'm curious about is Fen'harel, who apparently caused the downfall of the elves by locking their gods away. It's almost certainly a metaphor for something.

[Kish]

The only one I'm curious about is Fen'harel, who apparently caused the downfall of the elves by locking their gods away. It's almost certainly a metaphor for something.
My spouse's theory is that the entity the Dalish call Fen'Harel is the same as the entity the Chantry calls the Maker.

[123456789blaaa]

I don't think that they have been discussed, at least that I've seen.

Don't know how much stock I'd put in such theories at this time, honestly. The only ones of those that we even know for sure exist are the Old Gods, and we don't even know for certain if they'd qualify as gods in the sense that we'd normally think of, or are just particularly ancient and powerful Dragons.

Mostly it was various threads over on the Bioware forums.

And yeah, looking over my sources again, I don't think I'd be comfortable calling them "theories". There's just too much vagueness and not enough solid evidence. Interesting notions maybe?


My spouse's theory is that the entity the Dalish call Fen'Harel is the same as the entity the Chantry calls the Maker.

Yeah I've seen this pop up a bunch.

Anyways, a few of the ones I remember (with the posts and my own comments):


Not sure this is the right place to post this, but I recently discovered something curious once going over Elven mythology. Basically, this curious thing is some noticeable similarities between the elven mythos and parts of chantry history concerning the old gods, the darkspawn and the maker.

First, the elven part: the elves claim that there were two types of divine deities; The Creators, whom they worshipped, and The Forgotten Ones, who fought with the Creators and were essentially evil. Then there was Fen'Harel, the trickster god, who managed to stay on both sides. Then one day, Fen'Harel tricked both the creators and the forgotten ones and sealed them away (the Creators in "the Heavens", the Forgotten Ones in "the abyss"), preventing them from interacting with mortals (which the elves claim is the reason that Arlathan fell). Ever since, it's said that Fen'Harel roams the realm of dreams, keeping vigil over his prisoners.

Now, the chantry take on things: the Chant of Light says that the Maker sealed away the "false" Old Gods that the Tevinter Imperium worshipped (and who supposedly taught the Magisters magic) in the deep roads. However, they were still able to contact the magisters, and convince them to physically invade the Fade in an attempt to conquer The Golden City (seat of the Maker). When this failed, the tevinters were cursed with a taint which transformed them into the first darkspawn, which would later spread throughout the deep roads, nearly annihilate the dwarves, and then rise up to the surface in what was later called the First Blight.

Now, for the similarity I noted: Fen'Harel sealed away The Forgotten Ones in "the abyss". The Maker sealed away the Old Gods. See the similarity between Fen'Harel and the Maker?. Now, if we assume "the abyss" is the same as the Deep Roads underneath Thedas, then it seems quite possible that the forgotten ones and the old gods are the same. The elves have next to no knowledge of the forgotten ones left, so they don't seem to know what they look like. It's possible they could have taken the shape of dragons. And when they realized Fen'Harel's treachery, surely they would've wanted to escape - ala approaching the Tevinter magisters in their dreams. Fen'Harel might've slipped up on occasion during his guard, so the FOs/OGs could've contacted the tevinters while they dreamt, guiding them to grow powerful enough to defeat Fen'Harel and thus free them.

Simultaneously, seeing as Fen'Harel resided in the Fade/Beyond, he might've also created a place to reside in - maybe what the Chantry calls the Golden/Black City? From there, he could rule over the realm - or just watch it for amusement, depending on his preference. He might even have used some of the spirits that lived there to guard the Creators and/or the FOs.

Back to the Tevinters, they later (supposedly) entered the Fade physically by using up most of their lyrium and the life energy of a hundred slaves. It didn't go well, says the Chant of Light. If we assume Fen'Harel and the Maker are the same being, just as we earlier assumed the FOs and the OGs were the same, then we can probably agree on that FH/Maker wouldn't appreciate the attempt to free his enemies. So, he tricked and cursed the magisters and sent them back to their own realm, where they became the first darkspawn, cursed to hear the desperate calling of the Old Gods/Forgotten Ones, find them and taint each of them in turn, each time causing a blight. Ridiculing his enemies that way would certainly be a twist that could amuse the Lord of Trickery.

TL; DR: The theory is, basically, that Fen'Harel and the Maker, and the Forgotten Ones and the Old Gods, are the same, and that the Chant of Light is just a human (Andraste's) take on elven myths, based on quite a few coincidential similarities between the two histories.

Note that I don't really believe that this is the case, it was just a theory to enjoy myself and (hopefully) some of you guys here and get us thinking. Thinking is good smilie

Feel free to comment; I'm ready for anything (yes, I expect a lot of you will call me nutssmilie). Oh, and please inform me if this isn't where I'm supposed to post this, thank you.

Edit; Oh, I forgot to mention something. Remember the curse Zathrian created, which in turn created the werewolves of the Brecilian Forest? That shows elven magic is capable of cursing other beings. If a mere (though powerful) elven keeper could create a curse which transformed a whole village into beasts, imagine what an elven god could do with a curse...perhaps turn some overly curious mages into a horde of soulless monsters? smilie

The above is interesting. I don't believe all of it (for example, I don't think that Fen'Harel created the Golden City and it's possible The Forgotten Ones really were dragons instead of just "taking the shape" of them) but it think it's worth posting. I do remember something about David Gaider smacking the theory down though...I'll see if I can find a cite.


I'll say it again. As of right now we know there are only 3 Forgotten Ones. Maybe the elves forgot others, but I doubt it.

One thing that interests me is the elven myth in which the sun burns so brightly out of jealousy toward Elgar'nan that it reduces everything on the earth to ashes. The Chantry's symbol for the Maker also happens to be a blazing sun with a ring around it. It's also the symbol of a Tevinter witch cult, but with a black eye.


From the Elgar'nan codex entry -


Long ago, when time itself was young, the only things in existence were the sun and the land. The sun, curious about the land, bowed his head close to her body, and Elgar'nan was born in the place where they touched. The sun and the land loved Elgar'nan greatly, for he was beautiful and clever. As a gift to Elgar'nan, the land brought forth great birds and beasts of sky and forest, and all manner of wonderful green things. Elgar'nan loved his mother's gifts and praised them highly and walked amongst them often.

My theory:

The Sun = The Maker
The Earth = The Stone

- The maker is always sybolized as the sun and during Andraste's maker-blessed revolution, the sun somehow unleashed droughts and famine on the Imperium. The sun and the maker go hand-in-hand and both are adressed as male.
- The stone has always been referred to as a living deity by the dwarves, like the earth here. It is also referred to as female, like the earth here.

Just some quick speculation and little out there, but what do you guys think?

Also note that in the Dalish myths, the sun "bowed its head close to the body of the land" and created the first god. The Maker is also the creator according the Chantry (though of everything, not just beings). The Maker also lived in the Fade according to the Chantry. Perhaps the Dalish myth is a metaphor for the Maker (or whatever kind of being he is) coming to the physical world? And note that Andraste didn't create the relgion of the Maker, she only revived it.


Okay, so, here's a theory of mine based off some stuff said by Corypheus

1. The "Golden City" was supposed to be home to the "Creators", plural, not "Creator" or "Maker"

2. The Old Gods, or at least, Dumat, goaded Corypheus and his magisters to go into the golden city

3. The golden city was black when they got there

It seems like Corypheus was essentially tricked to go into the city. Now
who, in the DA setting, is famous for trickery? Fen'harel, of course,
the Dread Wolf of the elven pantheon, who could walk amongst the
Creators and Forgotten Ones and turn them against eachother. I think
this has something to do with the elven pantheon due to the multiple
creators, rather than one, singular maker. And personally, it strikes me
odd that the "god of silence" would trick the magisters into doing
this. As such, maybe Dumat was tricked by Fen'harel and he, in turn,
told Corypheus to go there?

I'm beginning to think that Fen'harel is/was the maker, actually. By instigating a war between the old gods and creators he gets THEM out of the way, and by creating a blight he neutralizes the power of "mortals" (humans- mostly tevinter at that time- elves and dwarves) and that allows him to reign supreme. It also explains why the maker has such prohibitions against magic: mages could theoretically reenter the black city and take him down.

Perhaps the Golden City is where the "good" Elven gods lived?




Well Silence can be associated with "Calm" or "Tranqui

lity".

Tranquility, as in the cutting off the connection of the Fade?

Dumat, being the "dragon of silence," seems fitting. He is said to have taught blood magic to the magisters - blood magic being one component involved in the invasion into the Golden City, an act that supposedly rendered it Black (cutting it off from mortal/mage access - although if we go with the "it was already black" theory/concept, then the invasion allowed for the taint to cross forth...perhaps). So it's a bit of a domino effect to "silence" the harmony with the Fade and all the music therein.

And with the Legacy DLC playing upon a few musical themes (Conductor achievement, the dialogue about hearing drums, etc), and taking place in an area that the dwarves lived/thrived/imprisoned pestilent baddies, maybe Dumat somehow factors into whatever severed the dwarves from the Stone, and the main melody of its song.

...and such is my speculation for the day.

Dumat being the "Dragon of Silence" is particularly interesting given what we know of the "Call" of the Old Gods:


In Dragon Age: Origins - Awakening, it is revealed that there is a particular relation between darkspawn and the slumbering Old Gods. The darkspawn taint is linked with the ancient dragons, all darkspawn constantly hearing the call of the Old Gods. It is presumed that as the fall of the magisters occurred—and they were transformed into the first darkspawn—the link between them and the Old Gods who had ordered them to sin against the Maker remained. Hearing their call, the darkspawn search for the Old Gods continuously. When they find one, they corrupt it and it becomes an archdemon, proceeding to command them into a horde and unleash a new Blight.

The Architect, a sentient darkspawn emissary in Dragon Age: Awakening, describes the call of the Old Gods as a "terribly beautiful sound". He goes on to consider darkspawn existence and their pursuit for the ancient dragons as a never-ending aspiration towards a perfection they can never have, as it is corrupted in the instant they touch it.

It is also revealed that at some time after their Joining, Grey Wardens also start hearing this call. This is the actual Calling and the moment when Grey Wardens know they must descend into the Deep Roads to find their death in battle. The alternative would be to become fully tainted, nothing more than ghouls, or to simply die from the taint.

The Lyrium Idol is also interesting in light of this:


I hope I am not the only one that made this link or thought about it but during the Family Matters Companion quest. That Varric's babbling about 'The Song' sound very similiar to what The Mother from Awakenings said about the Archdemon? I also decided to look at the scenery of the Primeval Thaig and all the carved reliefs reminded me of Dragons and that usually means Tevinter? On top of this the things Bartrand did to the servants cutting pieces of flesh off of them just screams darkspawn type behaviour and reminded me of Hespith little Rhyme.

Thoughts ppl smilie

Sources:

http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/141/index/5262534/1
http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/304/index/6874294/1
http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/304/index/7981164/1
http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/304/index/6935684/1
http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/304/index/6742685/1http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Old_Gods
http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/371/index/15044371/5
http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/304/index/6666786/1

Most of the above also have extended threads that you can read if you're interested.

[Psyren]

My spouse's theory is that the entity the Dalish call Fen'Harel is the same as the entity the Chantry calls the Maker.

Oh cool, I didn't know you were married. Hopefully he/she likes OotS :smallsmile:

And yeah, it does make sense that the dominant monotheistic religion of the land might be tied to a cosmic event that sealed away the other religions.

[Zanos]

-snip-
Why must I feed myself on speculation?

Some of this, if true, would imply that the physical bodies of the Elven pantheon are actually sealed "in Heaven."

Dragon Age 3.......

IN SPACE!

Maybe the fade, somewhere? Even if they aren't true I love reading these theories for some reason.

Aux-Ash makes a good point, though. Corypheus words certainly imply that there is at least some truth to the Chantry's tale. The Tevinger Magisters did physically enter the golden/black city, an act which did unleash the taint. Dumat tricking the magisters into entering the city seems to fit with some of other Corypheus quotes. He demands to speak with the First Acoylte, and asks if Dumat has forsaken him.

I guess that particular scheme didn't really turn out so great for Dumat, or anyone else. I just hope BW writers don't forgot about all the lore they established in the past two games. I get disappointed when interesting plot threads aren't resolved.

[Zevox]

Anyways, a few of the ones I remember (with the posts and my own comments):
Yeah, mostly I'd qualify that as wild guessing. I particularly think they give too much credence to the shared sun symbolism, since the sun is something very commonly used as symbolism in myths, usually for similar general themes (life, creation, good, etc), simply because what it actually is and does evokes those things.

I'll give it this though: the similarities between the Elven and Human myths do lead to the possibility that both were inspired by the same events or phenomenon.

[Avilan the Grey]

It's simple really. She's a powerful spellcaster and blood mage. Yet, other than actually becoming a dragon, she doesn't cast a single spell in that fight. Even Uldred actually stops swinging to cast a spell or two.

Chances are pretty good that in DA3 we'll get an idea of what she's really capable of doing.

Reading this and your other post later on, it seems you are not aware of, or care for, engine limitations. She doesn't "fly away to heal" or "strafe the party from the air" since NO DRAGON IN THE GAME CAN DO THAT. Not Flemeth, not "Andastre", not the Arch Demon.

Or do you think they aren't bringing their A game either?

As for casting spells:

1. As far as I understand it, she is NOT a blood mage. There is nothing in the game that hints on her being one, and her daughter isn't either. (The fact that you can make any mage party member a blood mage in the game is a serious WTF, but that's beside the point).

2. No shapeshifter can cast spells when shifted.

3. As pointed out her modus operandi seems to be "shapeshifter first".


"Arbitrary scepticism[sic] is something I loathe in fiction" seriously overdignifies, "Someone in the game says it, I believe it, that settles it." You may believe that every random in-game idiot's claims are Word of God if it pleases you, but please don't act like that's an argument.

Yes. Morrigan is "any in-game idiot". :smallsigh:

I know that there are a lot of people who don't believe her, or even hate the character, but I do.

[Divayth Fyr]

A simple statement from her (in DA2) would work. "I don't perform displays like that often... I find them... taxing."

So without evidence to the contrary, the conclusion that she was holding back is a logical one.
Seeing how many things in DA2 could use a simple statement to explain them - like how does Hawke get access to all the specializations, how does the constant bringing of supplies from dangerous Deep Roads areas work and so on. They don't - but that is no evidence for anything.

[Beowulf DW]

Seeing how many things in DA2 could use a simple statement to explain them - like how does Hawke get access to all the specializations, how does the constant bringing of supplies from dangerous Deep Roads areas work and so on. They don't - but that is no evidence for anything.

The specialization descriptions often explain how Hawke gets access to them on their own, actually.

[Kish]

Yes. Morrigan is "any in-game idiot". :smallsigh:

Really, Morrigan in your game said, "Yes, Flemeth definitely steals children"? The one in my game was more like, "Not that I really care, but I doubt she does."


I know that there are a lot of people who don't believe her, or even hate the character, but I do.
That is particularly ironic, considering your attitude toward abominations and what she says about abominations and, in fact, I can't think of anything Morrigan actually says in the game that you don't disregard...

1. As far as I understand it, she is NOT a blood mage. There is nothing in the game that hints on her being one, and her daughter isn't either.

...including, apparently, Morrigan's own statement that the ritual she offers to perform for the Warden is blood magic.

Picking and choosing some statements to give total authority and others (by the same characters) to throw out the window isn't significantly better than just admitting, "I just hate blood magic and spirit possession because I do." And it's no closer to being an argument that other people should do the same. The fact that you're apparently forgetting and misattributing who said what just puts the cherry on the WTF sundae here. That's not even getting into the fact that apparently practicing a school of magic which you've decided to hate, is cause to hate a character, but disapproving greatly of not letting a Tevinter practitioner of said school of magic kill a bunch of innocent people to increase your Constitution is not, in your view.

...In fact, your having dragged in "some people hate Morrigan" caused me to notice something hilarious here. Morrigan's attitude toward Anders would be pretty much the exact opposite of yours: "Obnoxious goody-goody who is sanctimonious about blood magic...but he blew up the Chantry, so he can't be all bad." And yet, hating the Chantry, wanting every mage who cooperates with it dead for the crime of not finding a way to rebel against it, being generally in favor of blood magic as long as it doesn't involve her personally making a deal with a demon, and reliably being all in favor of hurting people and opposed to helping them...none of those seems to impact your view of Morrigan.

[Morph Bark]

And here I thought Dragon Age 3 had come out. Bawww.

[Avilan the Grey]

Really, Morrigan in your game said, "Yes, Flemeth definitely steals children"? The one in my game was more like, "Not that I really care, but I doubt she does."

That is particularly ironic, considering your attitude toward abominations and what she says about abominations and, in fact, I can't think of anything Morrigan actually says in the game that you don't disregard...

...and, apparently, Morrigan's own statement that the ritual she offers to perform for the Warden is blood magic.

Picking and choosing some statements to give total authority and others (by the same characters) to throw out the window isn't significantly better than just admitting, "I just hate blood magic and spirit possession because I do." And it's no closer to being an argument that other people should do the same. The fact that you're apparently forgetting and misattributing who said what just puts the cherry on the WTF sundae here. That's not even getting into the fact that apparently practicing a school of magic which you've decided to hate, is cause to hate a character, but disapproving greatly of not letting a Tevinter practitioner of said school of magic kill a bunch of innocent people to increase your Constitution is not, in your view.

Morrigan didn't believe it most stories about her mother, until she read the grimoire.

Morrigan never says anything positive about abominations. She DOES say that she considers only idiots choosing to become one. Basically she values herself too high to consider the idea.

The end ritual... I give you that one. But up to that point, Morrigan does not practice blood magic; she is only a blood mage if you explicitly decide to make her one.
You could also make the point that performing a ritual from a book, despite not actually BEING a blood mage is not worse than you drinking the cup in the beginning of the game.

For the rest... what exactly are you talking about? I have no clue.

[Kish]

Morrigan never says anything positive about abominations.


For the rest... what exactly are you talking about? I have no clue.
Considering you've already flatly claimed something that's in the game isn't in the game, I decline to try to figure out what you mean by "the rest."

[Avilan the Grey]

Considering you've already flatly claimed something that's in the game isn't in the game, I find the idea of trying to figure out what you mean by "the rest"...unprofitable.


I am talking about this:

"That's not even getting into the fact that apparently practicing a school of magic which you've decided to hate, is cause to hate a character, but disapproving greatly of not letting a Tevinter practitioner of said school of magic kill a bunch of innocent people to increase your Constitution is not, in your view. "

I have no clue as to what you are referring to there.

Also, I went through the game many many times. I do not recall Morrigan saying something positive about abominations, at any point. She condemnds people for being fools for making deals with demons, insults demons to their faces for offering such deals, and so on, though.

Edit: I think I know what the issue is here. The point is that Morrigan, just like Viconia, my favorite Bioware character of all time, is that they can change. If you talk to them (you don't even have to romance Morrigan) you can SEE the change take place over the dialogues in the games.
Anders, on the other hand does the opposite; no matter how much you talk to him, he BETRAYS you.
As for Merrill... Maybe I'm too hard on her; her stupidity is just too grating for me. I guess I am more like Morrigan than I thought... :smallwink::smalltongue:

Edit again: Another issue, of course, is that I am far more forgiving about Morrigan simply because it is DA:O, and I had not yet played DA2. I have stated several times that what finally made me go over to the "dark side", aka Chantry, and get a non-tolerance for blood mages is the game itself (DA2). Basically the interaction with "neutral" and enemy mages in DA2 consists of: "We just want to be left alone and are no dangers to anyone. I will now turn into an abomination and try to kill you because Derpy Writing".

[Divayth Fyr]

The specialization descriptions often explain how Hawke gets access to them on their own, actually.
After checking the wiki I can agree about two of the rogue ones and the Templar. I didn't see anything like that for any of the mage ones and the rest of the warrior's.

[Psyren]

Reading this and your other post later on, it seems you are not aware of, or care for, engine limitations. She doesn't "fly away to heal" or "strafe the party from the air" since NO DRAGON IN THE GAME CAN DO THAT. Not Flemeth, not "Andastre", not the Arch Demon.

Or do you think they aren't bringing their A game either?

The Archdemon DOES DO THAT. Did you even play DAO? :smallconfused: He flies out of reach of your melee and volleys the party with spirit attacks (Spirit Smite and Dark Vortex) during Phase 2.

The other dragons are clearly just beasts, not intelligent abominations or corrupted deities in dragon form, so I wouldn't expect their tactics to be any better than shown.

And I never said anything about her casting spells while shifted.


Seeing how many things in DA2 could use a simple statement to explain them - like how does Hawke get access to all the specializations, how does the constant bringing of supplies from dangerous Deep Roads areas work and so on. They don't - but that is no evidence for anything.

That's my point. If the game demonstrates she can do something at time A, and you are claiming she cannot at time B, the onus is on you to prove that she lost that ability between A and B.



Edit: I think I know what the issue is here. The point is that Morrigan, just like Viconia, my favorite Bioware character of all time, is that they can change. If you talk to them (you don't even have to romance Morrigan) you can SEE the change take place over the dialogues in the games.
Anders, on the other hand does the opposite; no matter how much you talk to him, he BETRAYS you.
As for Merrill... Maybe I'm too hard on her; her stupidity is just too grating for me. I guess I am more like Morrigan than I thought... :smallwink::smalltongue:

1) You still have yet to produce a shred of evidence for Merrill's so-called "stupidity." Learning blood magic from a demon is not enough.

2) What Anders did was not a betrayal of you, unless you were already supporting the templars, in which case it's in character for him not to care what you think anyway.

3) Wait, you're judging Merrill and you haven't even played DA2? :smallconfused: What little credibility you had left just blew away like so much dust.

[Calemyr]

1) You still have yet to produce a shred of evidence for Merrill's so-called "stupidity." Learning blood magic from a demon is not enough.

2) What Anders did was not a betrayal of you, unless you were already supporting the templars, in which case it's in character for him not to care what you think anyway.

3) Wait, you're judging Merrill and you haven't even played DA2? :smallconfused: What little credibility you had left just blew away like so much dust.

1) Merril does a lot of dumb things, but mostly they're innocent. If it weren't for Varric spending a fortune ensuring her safety, the elf would be dead several times over by the end of the game. In terms of her personal crusade, however, she is bull headed and never considers that those arguing against her could possibly have any point. Her actions lead directly to the death of her mentor and possibly her entire community, just because she's so stupidly stubborn, willfully blind, and flat out arrogant.

2) Oh, there are lots of ways Anders betrayed you. He lied to you about the purpose of the ingredients, he killed the one faction that was reliably supporting you, and all because the peace you were struggling to maintain wasn't the bloody victory he wanted. Even without the romance, even without Templar leanings, it's still a betrayal.

3) That isn't what he said.

and I had not yet played DA2.
Avilan's impression of Morrigan was solidified before DA2. Not that he's never played the game.

[Psyren]

If it weren't for Varric spending a fortune ensuring her safety, the elf would be dead several times over by the end of the game.

Can you elaborate on this? What exactly did Varric do for her?


Her actions lead directly to the death of her mentor and possibly her entire community, just because she's so stupidly stubborn, willfully blind, and flat out arrogant.

No, her mentor led directly to the death of her mentor. Marethari jumped the gun despite knowing you are capable of handling Pride demons.



2) Oh, there are lots of ways Anders betrayed you. He lied to you about the purpose of the ingredients, he killed the one faction that was reliably supporting you, and all because the peace you were struggling to maintain wasn't the bloody victory he wanted. Even without the romance, even without Templar leanings, it's still a betrayal.

First off, I wasn't struggling to maintain any kind of peace. Hell, I would have forced a revolt against Meredith right at the start of Act 3 had Elthina not butted her overly large nose in.

Second, he actually didn't lie about the ingredients. "Mix them together and boom, Justice and I are free." Every word true.



3) That isn't what he said.

Avilan's impression of Morrigan was solidified before DA2. Not that he's never played the game.

Merrill, not Morrigan, and solidifying your opinion of a character before playing the game they're in is still fallacious.

[Calemyr]

Can you elaborate on this? What exactly did Varric do for her?

A running joke in the banters Varric and Merril have is that Merril is completely oblivious to the danger she puts herself into routinely, and that Varric uses his cash and contacts to ensure that she remains safe despite that. Things like walking around the slums after dark and such.


No, her mentor led directly to the death of her mentor. Marethari jumped the gun despite knowing you are capable of handling Pride demons.

The mentor was an idiot, yes. Her actions, however, were the direct result of Merril's insistence. One person being a blithering moron doesn't keep the other from being wrong.


First off, I wasn't struggling to maintain any kind of peace. Hell, I would have forced a revolt against Meredith right at the start of Act 3 had Elthina not butted her overly large nose in.

Second, he actually didn't lie about the ingredients. "Mix them together and boom, Justice and I are free." Every word true.

Fair point. I didn't say it was always a betrayal, however, just that you don't have to be a Meredith fan boy to feel that way.

And just because his wording is technically true doesn't mean it's not an outright deception. I believe he uses the word "cure" when he initially brings it up, and paints it as a sort of medicine/ritual at every step of the quest.


Merrill, not Morrigan, and solidifying your opinion of a character before playing the game they're in is still fallacious.

He was talking about how he was more forgiving of Morrigan because that was back in DAO, before DA2 turned everyone and their sister into a blood mage/abomination. Merrill is treated on the merits of DA2, which is, as you suggest, the proper course. As a result, Morrigan gets the better of the exchange.

[Divayth Fyr]

That's my point. If the game demonstrates she can do something at time A, and you are claiming she cannot at time B, the onus is on you to prove that she lost that ability between A and B.
If it was the same game, sure. But it wasn't - so "holding back" is as valid as a theory as "she would do that if someone though about her being able to a few years earlier".

[Psyren]

A running joke in the banters Varric and Merril have is that Merril is completely oblivious to the danger she puts herself into routinely, and that Varric uses his cash and contacts to ensure that she remains safe despite that. Things like walking around the slums after dark and such.

Varric's penny-pinching grousing can hardly be taken to mean he's actually spending a fortune to keep her safe, nor does it mean she wouldn't be safe if he didn't. Merrill can handle bandits easily.



The mentor was an idiot, yes. Her actions, however, were the direct result of Merril's insistence. One person being a blithering moron doesn't keep the other from being wrong.

It doesn't make them wrong either. She should have let us worry about it; since she didn't, we'll never know if Merrill could have succeeded or not. Specifically, you and Avilan will never know, so acting like you do is nonsensical.



Fair point. I didn't say it was always a betrayal, however, just that you don't have to be a Meredith fan boy to feel that way.

And just because his wording is technically true doesn't mean it's not an outright deception. I believe he uses the word "cure" when he initially brings it up, and paints it as a sort of medicine/ritual at every step of the quest.

Okay fine, he was deceptive. I still don't consider that betrayal. It's not like he's the only companion to mislead you - all of them do it.



If it was the same game, sure. But it wasn't - so "holding back" is as valid as a theory as "she would do that if someone though about her being able to a few years earlier".

But in the latter game all they had her say was that "I have an appointment to keep." She knew she was going to die. If she had already resigned herself, that's further proof that she wasn't going to fight her hardest.

And logically it makes absolutely no sense for her to go all out. She knew it would be the Warden coming to slay her. What if she killed him? And then who would face the Archdemon? Nothing about this theory makes any sense whatsoever.

No, she fought enough to make it look realistic and took a dive.

[Mx.Silver]

The Archdemon DOES DO THAT. Did you even play DAO? :smallconfused: He flies out of reach of your melee and volleys the party with spirit attacks (Spirit Smite and Dark Vortex) during Phase 2.


Should also be noted that the High Dragon in DA2 frequently pulls out from the main fight to strafe from a distance as well. It's not that uncommon a tactic. The High Dragon in DA:O, while not strafing, would also fly up and then swoop down on people too. Flemeth's lack of any such behaviour is and always was rather unusual, given her apparent intelligence.

[Joran]

The mentor was an idiot, yes. Her actions, however, were the direct result of Merril's insistence. One person being a blithering moron doesn't keep the other from being wrong.


Marethari did a multitude of idiotic things, even before she sacrificed herself for no apparent reason. Basically, Marethari did everything wrong in handling Merrill. She forbid the initial study, in direct contravention of what a Keeper is supposed to do, to the extent that Merrill was forced to consult a demon. (Note: Marethari was wrong about the taint and the Eluvian being dangerous; Merrill has handled the artifact in a populated area for YEARS without anything bad happening.) Merrill eventually left to study on her own, and in the meantime, Marethari kept poisoning the attitude of Merrill's clan against her. As an example, Pol was more scared of Merrill than a freaking GIGANTIC SPIDER, because of Marethari's influence.

Finally, when Marethari did sacrifice herself, she managed to tell exactly no one, leading the clan, based on everything Marethari told them, to blame Merrill. What did Marethari accomplish by sacrificing herself? She put Merrill in danger by having her attacked by a Pride Demon, then attacked by her own clan.

Marethari has to be the stupidest character in the entire Dragon Age series.

[Calemyr]

Varric's penny-pinching grousing can hardly be taken to mean he's actually spending a fortune to keep her safe, nor does it mean she wouldn't be safe if he didn't. Merrill can handle bandits easily.

I severely underestimated Merrill, then. In my experience, the gangs that prowl at night come with enough strength and man-power to give four people a decent workout, much less a single glass-cannon mage. End game (3rd act), I'd buy it, but until then?

I mean, yeah, she can defend herself, but she doesn't actually look out for herself at all. She's simply oblivious until she's cornered, then she'd better hope her offensive magic can save her.


It doesn't make them wrong either. She should have let us worry about it; since she didn't, we'll never know if Merrill could have succeeded or not. Specifically, you and Avilan will never know, so acting like you do is nonsensical.

The mirror she is working on is explicitly corrupted by the darkspawn taint. It claimed two of their tribe already (one might become a warden). She makes deals with a demon of pride to obtain blood magic because the demon claims it will work. She does this without regard to any reservations anyone has, willingly isolating herself from anyone and everyone in pursuit of a goal that does not have sense written anywhere on it beyond "this is part of our history".

Had Merrill actually shown some inkling of acceptance that other people may have had a point, but decided it was still worth the risk, I would have been more comfortable with it. Her acknowledging the risks of working with any form of spirit is the only reason I'm neutral on her blood magic. As it is, she dismisses all argument as the whining of close-minded reactionaries.


Okay fine, he was deceptive. I still don't consider that betrayal. It's not like he's the only companion to mislead you - all of them do it.

They don't all trick you into being unknowingly complicit it a world-changing act of terrorism. One that descends your adopted city into all-out war. That's unique to Anders.


Marethari did a multitude of idiotic things, even before she sacrificed herself for no apparent reason. Basically, Marethari did everything wrong in handling Merrill. She forbid the initial study, in direct contravention of what a Keeper is supposed to do, to the extent that Merrill was forced to consult a demon. (Note: Marethari was wrong about the taint and the Eluvian being dangerous; Merrill has handled the artifact in a populated area for YEARS without anything bad happening.) Merrill eventually left to study on her own, and in the meantime, Marethari kept poisoning the attitude of Merrill's clan against her. As an example, Pol was more scared of Merrill than a freaking GIGANTIC SPIDER, because of Marethari's influence.

Finally, when Marethari did sacrifice herself, she managed to tell exactly no one, leading the clan, based on everything Marethari told them, to blame Merrill. What did Marethari accomplish by sacrificing herself? She put Merrill in danger by having her attacked by a Pride Demon, then attacked by her own clan.

Marethari has to be the stupidest character in the entire Dragon Age series.

Yes. Marethari did everything exactly wrong. As does pretty much everyone else, really. Even Wynne fails to register the threat in her own circle until it had already cost her her life (sort of), and she's the closest to sensible I can think of in the franchise.

[Kish]

The Archdemon DOES DO THAT. Did you even play DAO? :smallconfused: He flies out of reach of your melee and volleys the party with spirit attacks (Spirit Smite and Dark Vortex) during Phase 2.
And the only reason he doesn't simply fly away once he realizes it's not going to be a cakewalk, is that Riordan crippled his flying ability before your fight with him ever starts!

...even without templar leanings...
You still do not recognize that what you keep calling "struggling to maintain the peace" and asserting was Hawke's goal, not just your Hawke's goal, is totally siding with the templars. "You monsters stay in your cages, and we won't kill you" is not a compromise. Would you say Fenris betrayed you if you wanted to do some business with Tevinter slavers, and Fenris used your information about their location to kill them all first? That Aveline betrayed you if you set out to slaughter all the guards in Kirkwall, and she warned them you were coming? Whether you would or not, you would certainly have no grounds to be surprised.

Similarly, if you decided your character's primary goal was to keep the mages well and securely in their prison, you should have realized ten seconds into talking to him that Anders was your enemy. And bad programming as it was that he would ask you to do anything for him or trust you with any information that could be used to hurt mages, baffling as it is that you chose to comply with any of his requests, it's more baffling still that you apparently expected him to renounce everything he had ever said and betray all the mages in the Circle for you.

[Psyren]

What Kish said, and also:


I severely underestimated Merrill, then. In my experience, the gangs that prowl at night come with enough strength and man-power to give four people a decent workout, much less a single glass-cannon mage. End game (3rd act), I'd buy it, but until then?

The canonicity of the gangs' strength is disputable, and if you're just going by gameplay, a "glass-cannon mage" can solo DA2 on Nightmare anyway. Merrill's abilities in particular (Wrath of the Elven, Walking Bomb, Sleep/Horror, Wounds of the Past etc.) are extremely well-suited to dealing with packs of humans.



The mirror she is working on is explicitly corrupted by the darkspawn taint.

A taint she cleansed. So what?



Had Merrill actually shown some inkling of acceptance that other people may have had a point, but decided it was still worth the risk, I would have been more comfortable with it. Her acknowledging the risks of working with any form of spirit is the only reason I'm neutral on her blood magic. As it is, she dismisses all argument as the whining of close-minded reactionaries.

She acknowledges the risks every bloody time you talk to her. It seems that the only acknowledgement she could give that would satisfy you would be to give up her dreams entirely.



They don't all trick you into being unknowingly complicit it a world-changing act of terrorism.

That happens whether you're complicit or not. You have every chance to back out.

[Giggling Ghast]

She does this without regard to any reservations anyone has, willingly isolating herself from anyone and everyone in pursuit of a goal that does not have sense written anywhere on it beyond "this is part of our history".

That sort of understates the current plight of the elves. They've lost virtually everything about who they are - their homeland, history, their culture and their magic. Their situation will never improve, barring some unforeseen major upheaval.

It's easy for us to say "Well, the Eluvian isn't that important/too dangerous," but consider it from Merrill's perspective: she's been told all her life it was her role to restore the lost lore of the Dalish. If you could trade one life willingly given to get a small piece of that lost culture back, wouldn't it be worth it?

Marethari didn't think so, but quite frankly, Marethari's priorities are totally f***ed.

Truth be told, I also think Merrill also suffers from a degree of survivor's guilt. She wants the loss of her friends to mean something, even if it means dying too. That comes across if you're willing to support her.

[Calemyr]

You still do not recognize that what you keep calling "struggling to maintain the peace" and asserting was Hawke's goal, not just your Hawke's goal, is totally siding with the templars. "You monsters stay in your cages, and we won't kill you" is not a compromise. Would you say Fenris betrayed you if you wanted to do some business with Tevinter slavers, and Fenris used your information about their location to kill them all first? That Aveline betrayed you if you set out to slaughter all the guards in Kirkwall, and she warned them you were coming? Whether you would or not, you would certainly have no grounds to be surprised.

Similarly, if you decided your character's primary goal was to keep the mages well and securely in their prison, you should have realized ten seconds into talking to him that Anders was your enemy. And bad programming as it was that he would ask you to do anything for him or trust you with any information that could be used to hurt mages, baffling as it is that you chose to comply with any of his requests, it's more baffling still that you apparently expected him to renounce everything he had ever said and betray all the mages in the Circle for you.

I reiterate: I did not mean it is always a betrayal, just that there are many ways it could be viewed as such. I didn't mean to make any claims on YOUR Hawke and how you play the game. Simply that you don't have to be a Meredith fanboy to feel betrayed by Anders.

However, a pro-peace stance is NOT necessarily a pro-Templar stance. Unless you care to assert that the Templar are entirely identified with peace.

In my game, for example, my Hawke saw the concept of the Templar as a flawed but critical concept. He also saw the actual faction to be elitist zealots that chemically enslaved their own men and employed monsters worse than any abomination. Had he his way, he would have just beaten both sides to a pulp to begin with. But he was trying to help hold the city together, which meant finding a way to defuse the tension without picking one side over the other. He was willing to go to battle against the extremists on either side to protect the innocents on both sides. The Chantry was vital to keeping the two in check.

You can bet he saw Anders' action as one hell of a betrayal, bringing the entire city to its knees because he'd rather see a broken system destroyed than fixed.

Likewise if you don't even think about the Templar v Mage conflict at all, and simply look at it as "how can I protect the citizenry best", Anders betrays you there as well.

I cannot acknowledge your point about Aveline and Fenris as not valid, however. True, both of them would have turned against you if you did those actions, but that is not betrayal. It is a conflict of interest, and one that results in them being on a different side than you. In the finale of the game, when your allies break based on their agenda and their loyalty to you, that is not betrayal. Anders pretending to trust you, pretending to be loyal, pretending to want to get better just to recruit your aid in his monstrous act, devastating the city you've come to represent and stabbing you in the back while still trying to act like your friend? That is a betrayal.

Isabella stealing the key to resolving the Qunari crisis and running away to leave you trapped in the middle? That is a betrayal. One that she can find redemption for, but a betrayal none the less. We expect that though, it's Isabella.

Oh, and not doing the loyalty mission doesn't matter. With the knowledge the character has at that point, the only reason I can think of for not helping is lack of trust, lack of interest, or pure metagaming. He comes to you as a friend, seemingly sincere and contrite, begging for help in a bid to cure him of his affliction. You'd have to be a total jackass to say no, given the situation. And the result remains the same even if you do say no: using you as a cover, he sets a match to the fuse on a bloody civil war that spreads far beyond the city limits, with your name going down in history as the criminal responsible.

[Psyren]

However, a pro-peace stance is NOT necessarily a pro-Templar stance.

It is, however, an anti-mage stance, since "peace"/"holding the city together" for them means indefinite confinement and slow attrition by lobotomy/execution.



You can bet he saw Anders' action as one hell of a betrayal, bringing the entire city to its knees because he'd rather see a broken system destroyed than fixed.

Fixed how?? :smallconfused:



Likewise if you don't even think about the Templar v Mage conflict at all, and simply look at it as "how can I protect the citizenry best", Anders betrays you there as well.

Mages are citizens too.


We expect that though, it's Isabella.

And she gets a pass and Anders doesn't... why, exactly? She caused at least as many deaths if not more.

Is it the boobs? It's the boobs, isn't it.



Oh, and not doing the loyalty mission doesn't matter. With the knowledge the character has at that point, the only reason I can think of for not helping is lack of trust, lack of interest, or pure metagaming.

You can gather the materials and still stop short of distracting the grand cleric without metagaming. You even keep the romance that way.

[Giggling Ghast]

"Pro-security" seems more apt than "pro-peace." Putting aside the ethical quandaries, I would say that annulling the Circle is the best option for the security of the city and the Free Marches.

Aside from Meredith, the templars pose no risk to the citizens of Kirkwall. But some of the members of the Circle are practicing blood magic and know how to summon demons, so there's a strong possibility some will become possessed while on the run and turn on innocent citizens.

General Tarquin Approves + 10

[Calemyr]

It is, however, an anti-mage stance, since "peace"/"holding the city together" for them means indefinite confinement and slow attrition by lobotomy/execution.

No. It's an anti-apostate stance. An anti-bloodmage stance. An anti-trouble maker stance. I was more than happy to give "good" mages a pass, even if they weren't in the Circle. The half-elf kid with the visions? I sent him to the Dalish, where he could be cared for better.

Is the Circle in general a good thing? It's not a nice thing, that's for sure. There's something about it that's inherently offensive, probably that whole "freedom lost for accident of birth" thing. However, I am hard pressed to think of any better way to handle the dilemma, as mages are a definite and dire threat to themselves and those around them if untrained.

The problem is that the Circle carries the atmosphere and connotation of a prison rather than a school and support group. To use X-Men terminology, it should be Xavier's Institute, not Genosha Island.

The other problem is that, when one side has such a dominating aspect of superiority, such as the mages have, those who lack that aspect will inevitably resent those that have it. By its very nature the Templar will attract the worst possible people for the job and, given how shorthanded they are, they cannot afford to turn such people away.


Fixed how?? :smallconfused:

As in - make the Circle what it *should* be. It should be the equivalent of a university, not a concentration camp. The Templar should be there to police rogue mages, not evil maggots who would lobotomize a girl simply for the excuse to rape her first.


Mages are citizens too.

Not in this setting, they don't get that luxury. They are people, however. People with inherent vulnerabilities and dangers that have significant impact on the rest of the populace. They cannot be left to their own devices, by and large, as their history has clearly shown. They should, however, be treated with as people rather than the mortal epitome of a callous creator's ire.


And she gets a pass and Anders doesn't... why, exactly? She caused at least as many deaths if not more.

Is it the boobs? It's the boobs, isn't it.

No. It's the pirate. And the unabashed selfishness. And the glowing sparkly letters over her head that say "She will betray you in a second if it gets her what she wants". You don't blame the snake for biting, you blame yourself for letting it get that close.

Don't get me wrong. I don't like Isabella at all. She just can't betray my trust if she never had it to start with.


You can gather the materials and still stop short of distracting the grand cleric without metagaming. You even keep the romance that way.

That's how far I go. But it still makes me complicit in giving him the resources to achieve his goal and the advantage of my reputation, which allows him to operate with more freedom and less accountability than he should. And I still stand accused as the mastermind of world changing act of terrorism.

[Beowulf DW]

After checking the wiki I can agree about two of the rogue ones and the Templar. I didn't see anything like that for any of the mage ones and the rest of the warrior's.

We can infer where Hawke got the other specializations:

Blood mage: Hawke might have cut him/herself and realized the power; used fortune to obtain tomes on the subject discreetly.

Berserker: Hawke spends enough time with dwarves for them to have put him in touch with a dwarven berserker. He could even have learned it from the Ashlanders in King Cailen's army, it just took him a while to get the hang of it.

Force Mage: It says that Kirkwall's Circle is renowned for this, so he could easily have gotten some pointers from them.

Reaver: Hawke has killed enough dragons to have gallons of dragon blood, and forbidden knowledge of ancient rituals isn't hard to come by in this city.

Spirit Mage: Could be justified as a result of progressing more and more into the Creation school, and Anders could have helped him out, too.

Now I grant you that isn't as good as most of DA:O in which you had to meet people (and old souls and demons and...). It seems that Bioware didn't realize the narrative implications of the specializations, and chose to make them available for the sake of player convenience.

[Psyren]

@ Hawke and Blood Magic:

It's heavily implied that Hawke learns blood magic from Tarohne's books. (Tarohne is the blood mage that tried to seed the Templars with demons in Act 1 - she kidnapped Keran and tried to kill Cullen in Act 1 through Wilmod.) If you spare her accomplice Idunna (the blood mage in the Blooming Rose that tries to make you kill yourself), she will write to you in Act 2 telling you that she has been reborn in the Chantry and asks you to destroy Tarohne's books, which contain "dark secrets she learned from the Fade." (Read: blood magic.) She then tells you where they can be found. Even if Hawke destroys them immediately, he receives their power each time.

Even if you killed Idunna in Act 1, the books are still there in Act 2 - they must simply be located manually. Here again they impart their power to Hawke upon being picked up.


@Calemyr:

However, I am hard pressed to think of any better way to handle the dilemma, as mages are a definite and dire threat to themselves and those around them if untrained.

I can - train them, harrow them, and let them live free afterward. Again, it's not like they can really become fugitives, thanks to the Chantry's GPS tracking system.

And if that solution never occured to or was dismissed by the Chantry, then the Chantry has indeed failed and needs to be removed.



The problem is that the Circle carries the atmosphere and connotation of a prison rather than a school and support group. To use X-Men terminology, it should be Xavier's Institute, not Genosha Island.

I agree, but it would never get to Xavier's with Meredith and Elthina - perhaps especially Elthina - in charge.



Not in this setting, they don't get that luxury.

This is one point then on which we can and will never agree. Both games go out of their way to show the humanity of the mages, from the very beginning of the franchise with Jowan's bumbling romance.



Don't get me wrong. I don't like Isabella at all. She just can't betray my trust if she never had it to start with.

So you treat her heinous actions better than Anders' heinous actions simply because you saw them coming?



That's how far I go. But it still makes me complicit in giving him the resources to achieve his goal and the advantage of my reputation, which allows him to operate with more freedom and less accountability than he should. And I still stand accused as the mastermind of world changing act of terrorism.

Accused? :smallconfused:
Mere moments after the blast, Meredith is asking you to join her. Clearly she doesn't hold you responsible for anything.

And he can get all those resources without you anyway. Last Straw happens even if you don't help him at all.

[Kish]

Cassandra thinks you co-caused it.

Unsurprisingly, my position is the complete opposite of Calemyr's: I regret that you can't actually be Anders' equal partner instead of--ultimately--a supporting character in a game which is far more Anders' story than Hawke's. (Of course, if you were in on the scheme from the start, Varric might still tell Cassandra you were tricked by Anders...)

[Avilan the Grey]

@Psyren:I was going to reply to all your points but Calemyr did it for me. I have nothing else to add. :smallsmile:
Edit: Oh about the Archdemon: I don't recall it being able to shoot at me from the air, only when landed.


Should also be noted that the High Dragon in DA2 frequently pulls out from the main fight to strafe from a distance as well. It's not that uncommon a tactic. The High Dragon in DA:O, while not strafing, would also fly up and then swoop down on people too. Flemeth's lack of any such behaviour is and always was rather unusual, given her apparent intelligence.

I thought about it and I am pretty sure it is a map issue. The map where you fight Flemeth is so small it actually only have one designated landing area. She cannot shift position, because the game engine (the map, specifically) has no other place for her to fit, than where she starts the fight. So it is, again, a limitation set by the game.

[Kish]

This is one point then on which we can and will never agree. Both games go out of their way to show the humanity of the mages, from the very beginning of the franchise with Jowan's bumbling romance.
Technically speaking, it's absolutely true that mages are not citizens in Kirkwall. The problem is that Calemyr doesn't recognize how evil that is, and that treating it as anything other than a horrific injustice...

...is taking an unambiguous position in the mage/templar conflict. "You don't have to side with the templars to dedicate your Hawke to Preventing the Conflict. You just have to believe all the same garbage Cullen spews at you about mages not being people. A neutral person could totally do that!"

[Avilan the Grey]

So you treat her heinous actions better than Anders' heinous actions simply because you saw them coming?

No, but it is less of a personal betrayal. As Calemyr puts it: You don't blame the snake for biting you, you blame yourself for getting too close.

However if your loyal dog turns on you...

Especially if you played Awakening, of course; but then the feeling of betrayal is doubled by the fact that most people who played Awakening also feel betrayed by Bioware for changing Anders...

[Psyren]

Technically speaking, it's absolutely true that mages are not citizens in Kirkwall. The problem is that Calemyr doesn't recognize how evil that is, and that treating it as anything other than a horrific injustice...

...is taking an unambiguous position in the mage/templar conflict. "You don't have to side with the templars to dedicate your Hawke to Preventing the Conflict. You just have to believe all the same garbage Cullen spews at you about mages not being people. A neutral person could totally do that!"

It's sad, really.


No, but it is less of a personal betrayal. As Calemyr puts it: You don't blame the snake for biting you, you blame yourself for getting too close.

However if your loyal dog turns on you...

Your mistake is in thinking of Anders (or indeed, any party member) as a dog. You already have one of those, and it has no motivations or goals of its own. We don't need 6 more of them.

[Kish]

Pretending, just for this post, that Anders is evil and a Hawke who tries to stop him is good rather than the other way around.

He's still very up-front about his beliefs and goals when you first meet him. He lies about the specific means he's using to free the mages in Chapter Three (annoyingly, even if he has every reason to believe you'd be on board with it). But he tells you many times that the Chantry's oppression of mages must end. If you stand against him, he actually emphasizes it far more than if you stand with him from the start and he has nothing to convince you of. The appropriate comparison for a pro-mage-oppression Hawke isn't Isabela=snake, Anders=loyal dog; it's Isabela=(wild animal of some sort), Anders=tiger who spelled out to you in roars of one syllable that you look like dinner, and for some reason you kept wandering around his jungle glade sticking your arms within his reach anyway.

If you somehow got the idea that, even as Anders spelled out that he was utterly opposed to you and everything you were choosing to stand for, he was your Loyal Dog, you have only yourself to blame.

[Calemyr]

Okay, I'll start with this (should have said this earlier, but hindsight and all that): I am only seeking to clarify my stance. Because some people either clearly get it wrong or willfully misinterpret it. I don't give a rat's tail if you agree with me. You're welcome to your own opinions.

What Anders makes clear from the get-go is that he's an avid advocate of mage rights, feels frustrated and powerless about the situation, and will talk anyone to death about his stance on it. He also makes it clear that he does not want to hurt anyone as a rule and is horrified when Justice gets too aggressive. Even if he's an annoying soap-box preacher, he's still a sweet and well-meaning individual.

We've had the conversation before about how every time skip shows the Anders/Justice relationship gets more and more tilted in Justice's side, while the persona of Anders simply shrivels up and dies without anyone but Varric even noticing. The character of Anders ramps up the aggression constantly while ramping down the humor at every turn, to the point that jokes that would have really amused him in Act 1 only piss him off in Act 3. But even Justice tended to focus his actual wrath on those actually responsible for crimes, not just those who allowed it to happen. For all his griping about the stalemate and the Chantry, he never showed signs that he would be willing to murder them in cold blood. Hot blood, happily, but not cold blood.

What he did at the Chantry was cold blooded, premeditated murder of well-meaning people for no other reason than because their tenacious pursuit of diplomacy was getting in the way of the bloody war he believed would cleanse the world. He murdered people whose only crime was the desire to keep things from spiraling out of control. This is not the well-meaning advocate he was advertised as, and certainly not the good-natured free spirit who adored the kitten he kept in his pack.

So, yeah, he went from loyal friend and companion (dog) to deceitful, amoral murderer in one move. To make matters worse, there is nothing, nothing, you can do. You befriend him, boom. You challenge him, boom. You ignore him, boom. You try to help him, boom. You don't help him, boom. You can't kill him, you can't unfriend him, you can't call him out on it. Boom, boom, boom.

As for "not realizing how evil" the mages' plight is, I fully comprehend it. I would claim instead that others are failing to comprehend the real consequences of DA-style mage would have. No, the mages are not citizens. Yes, that is an absolutely horrible way to handle it. You don't create peace that way, you create resentment and radicals, and that's how it turns out. Many of the mages would never have become blood mages if Meredith and her Templars didn't act the way they did.

But the problem is that the Templar's position is not invalid. Not by a long shot. If you look at the background of this franchise, mages have proven to be every bit the threat the Templar claim them to be. Not all of them, not even most of them, but a lot of them and their impact on the world has been indescribable. The rules barring mages from noble titles was not forged of blind prejudice, it was a reaction to numerous very real incidents where mages either took over the country (the Imperium) or created chaos and destruction with blood magic (Warden's Keep in DAO).

Keeping the mages in the Circle isn't the problem, locking them up and treating them like sub-human scum is. If the Templar and the Circle worked together they could make an arrangement that worked for all involved (minus blood mages, abominations, and other such things). Unfortunately, if there's one thing the news has taught me, it's that it's entirely possible for two good people of honest character and honorable intent to have completely irreconcilable perspectives. (I'm looking at Gregor and the archmage from DAO, here, not Meredith and Orsino.)

[Archpaladin Zousha]

That's pretty much how I view it. You raise a good point that even though the relationship between Gregoir and Irving is far from amiable, as Irving's reason for wanting to catch Jowan in the act in the Mage origin is so Lily doesn't get off the hook for her involvement, which is something of a spiteful attitude.

That said, I still feel compelled to support the mages in DA II's ending. I view it more as damage control than anything else, preventing too many innocent mages from suffering for Anders/Justice's zeal. I still execute Anders (at his own request, too) but Orsino does have a point that the Circle was NOT responsible for the Chantry's destruction, and calling the Right of Annulment on them is NOT justified in this instance. I also tended to support the Templars prior to that point anyway, like by sending Grace and her conspirators to the Circle instead of letting them escape, but helping Feynriel find the Dalish.

I agree that the game could have done a better job of making it feel more nuanced among your companions. Their reactions and sentiments split the game in a rather black-and-white way that cheapens the discussion.

[Dienekes]

That's pretty much how I view it. You raise a good point that even though the relationship between Gregoir and Irving is far from amiable, as Irving's reason for wanting to catch Jowan in the act in the Mage origin is so Lily doesn't get off the hook for her involvement, which is something of a spiteful attitude.

That said, I still feel compelled to support the mages in DA II's ending. I view it more as damage control than anything else, preventing too many innocent mages from suffering for Anders/Justice's zeal. I still execute Anders (at his own request, too) but Orsino does have a point that the Circle was NOT responsible for the Chantry's destruction, and calling the Right of Annulment on them is NOT justified in this instance. I also tended to support the Templars prior to that point anyway, like by sending Grace and her conspirators to the Circle instead of letting them escape, but helping Feynriel find the Dalish.

I agree that the game could have done a better job of making it feel more nuanced among your companions. Their reactions and sentiments split the game in a rather black-and-white way that cheapens the discussion.

For this discussion I watched the Templar ending. You actually can try and save as many mages as you are able and have the Templars straight up ignore Meredith's lunacy. It was a thoroughly satisfying thing to watch. It also should have been shown to be an option during the big decision, not something that comes up after you just agreed to support the psychotic axe crazy mage killer.

[Mx.Silver]

I thought about it and I am pretty sure it is a map issue. The map where you fight Flemeth is so small it actually only have one designated landing area. She cannot shift position, because the game engine (the map, specifically) has no other place for her to fit, than where she starts the fight. So it is, again, a limitation set by the game.

Yeah, I mean it's not as if the studio who made the game could have made a bigger map or anything. That would just be ridiculous. :smalltongue:


Actually having said that, given the rest of Origins, I will concede that sort of screw-up is all too plausible.


Especially if you played Awakening, of course; but then the feeling of betrayal is doubled by the fact that most people who played Awakening also feel betrayed by Bioware for changing Anders...
And by changing Anders we mean removing Sir Pounce-a-lot. Because that was far and away the best thing about Anders in Awakening. And indeed the only memorable thing about Anders in Awakening. And arguably the only memorable about the companions in Awakening in general.


Now I grant you that isn't as good as most of DA:O in which you had to meet people (and old souls and demons and...). It seems that Bioware didn't realize the narrative implications of the specializations, and chose to make them available for the sake of player convenience.
It should be noted that in origins you only had to meet these people in one playthrough (or buy the books in Awakening) and then you unlocked them for every character across all your playthroughs. You could even unlock the specialisation, reload a save before you unlocked it and it would then stay unlocked (so you then didn't even have to make any 'bad' decisions). Because the DA franchise just seems to hate the idea of letting its setting lore inform its mechanics, and vice versa.

[Joran]

And by changing Anders we mean removing Sir Pounce-a-lot. Because that was far and away the best thing about Anders in Awakening. And indeed the only memorable thing about Anders in Awakening. And arguably the only memorable about the companions in Awakening in general.


What about Sigrun?! She was hilarious.

I also like Mhairi, mainly because she was too good for this world.

[Giggling Ghast]

I quite like Justice myself. I also liked Velanna despite her being a shrill harpy.

[Zevox]

Eh, I think I'd agree with the notion that Anders was the only really memorable companion from Awakening. The rest were just okay at best. Justice is the only other one that stands out, and him mostly for the novelty of being a spirit.

[Avilan the Grey]

Your mistake is in thinking of Anders (or indeed, any party member) as a dog. You already have one of those, and it has no motivations or goals of its own. We don't need 6 more of them.

Haha very funny. :smallsigh:
You know exactly what I mean.


Pretending, just for this post, that Anders is evil and a Hawke who tries to stop him is good rather than the other way around.

---

If you somehow got the idea that, even as Anders spelled out that he was utterly opposed to you and everything you were choosing to stand for, he was your Loyal Dog, you have only yourself to blame.

First paragraph:
I assume that the statement that a Hawke trying to prevent a terrorist attack is evil because of it is a joke.
ROFLMAO. Good one, you made me laugh.

Second:
Now, the point is that even if you are 100% pro mage, he STILL blows up the chantry. And it is VERY VERY possible that Hawke ISN'T okay with that.

And for the rest, see Calemyr's post above. He says everything else I agree with.

[Beowulf DW]

Now, the point is that even if you are 100% pro mage, he STILL blows up the chantry. And it is VERY VERY possible that Hawke ISN'T okay with that.

And for the rest, see Calemyr's post above. He says everything else I agree with.

^pretty much how I played.

Why does supporting peace mean supporting the templars? I supported the mages while hoping that eventually Elthina would be convinced to step in and tell Meredith what an absolute **** she was being. My Hawke wanted war to be an absolute last resort. Anders escalates the situation not because it's finally come to that last resort, but because it was most expedient for him (and perhaps because he had a death wish). Am I really expected to view such underhanded handed tactics, forcing Hawke and the mages into a corner, as justified or righteous?

[Kish]

One wonders what you would consider "time for the last resort" to be. Apparently not universal imprisonment without trial or universal forced celibacy or random search and seizure or a templar who proposes lobotomizing every mage everywhere being politely told "no" and, when he figures, "I'll just get started on the project on my own while I'm waiting for them to change their minds, lobotomizing every mage I can find a vague excuse to lobotomize," the only thing that stops him is getting assassinated by an outsider.

After ten years of watching these things, Anders apparently disagreed with your assessment that "this isn't enough to start a war over; Elthina might actually do something eventually." His position is comprehensible. Yours, not so much.

[Avilan the Grey]

One wonders what you would consider "time for the last resort" to be. Apparently not universal imprisonment without trial or universal forced celibacy or random search and seizure or a templar who proposes lobotomizing every mage everywhere being politely told "no" and, when he figures, "I'll just get started on the project on my own while I'm waiting for them to change their minds, lobotomizing every mage I can find a vague excuse to lobotomize," the only thing that stops him is getting assassinated by an outsider.

After ten years of watching these things, Anders apparently disagreed with your assessment that "this isn't enough to start a war over; Elthina might actually do something eventually." His position is comprehensible. Yours, not so much.

Pro-mage Hawke might not be in favor of blowing up the Chantry for several obvious reasons:

1. She might be religious
2. She might favor peace over war
3. She might think two wrongs doesn't make one right (killing innocents for the cause(tm))

Other than this I can't really get into this without sliding into IRL politics, so let's agree to disagree on what is neccesary, and more importantly who is "by default evil" and what a natural reaction to the events unfolding would be.

[Psyren]

Look Avilan - I can appreciate that your Hawke may have been peaceful, religious, and otherwise unwilling to bring matters to a head.

The fact is that Anders is not you and was not willing to sit by any longer. And that is totally in character for him. This whole tangent started because you said:


The point is that Morrigan, just like Viconia, my favorite Bioware character of all time, is that they can change. If you talk to them (you don't even have to romance Morrigan) you can SEE the change take place over the dialogues in the games.
Anders, on the other hand does the opposite; no matter how much you talk to him, he BETRAYS you.

Expecting Anders to change is synonymous with expecting Anders to not be Anders. "Gosh, this whole mage thing is the most important thing in my life, important enough to die over, but I'm a party member in a WRPG so I guess I'll have to put all my convictions aside if the player keeps choosing pro-templar dialogue options" is neither good writing nor good roleplaying. By making him force the matter regardless, Bioware met my expectations for his character. Even when you do take the very difficult route of getting him to side with the Templars, he tells you he is going to kill himself after the battle. He has no desire to go on, having given up his reason for living.



One wonders what you would consider "time for the last resort" to be. Apparently not universal imprisonment without trial or universal forced celibacy or random search and seizure or a templar who proposes lobotomizing every mage everywhere being politely told "no" and, when he figures, "I'll just get started on the project on my own while I'm waiting for them to change their minds, lobotomizing every mage I can find a vague excuse to lobotomize," the only thing that stops him is getting assassinated by an outsider.

After ten years of watching these things, Anders apparently disagreed with your assessment that "this isn't enough to start a war over; Elthina might actually do something eventually." His position is comprehensible. Yours, not so much.

Maybe he should have written a sternly-worded op-ed to Val Royeaux. :smallamused:

[Ailurus]

One wonders what you would consider "time for the last resort" to be. Apparently not universal imprisonment without trial or universal forced celibacy or random search and seizure or a templar who proposes lobotomizing every mage everywhere being politely told "no" and, when he figures, "I'll just get started on the project on my own while I'm waiting for them to change their minds, lobotomizing every mage I can find a vague excuse to lobotomize," the only thing that stops him is getting assassinated by an outsider.

After ten years of watching these things, Anders apparently disagreed with your assessment that "this isn't enough to start a war over; Elthina might actually do something eventually." His position is comprehensible. Yours, not so much.

Except most of those are NOT problems with the Chantry. Those are problems with Meredith and some of the insane if not sadistic lieutenants she has working for her. Cullen is easily the most hard-line Templar we see in DA:O, and many of the high ranking Kirkwall templars make him look beyond reasonable.

Where was Gregor ordering mass-Tranquilling? Even when nearly the entire tower is overrun by demons and abominations and most of his men are dead from it, he's still willing to accept a solution that does not involve Annulment.

Where is any evidence of enforced celibacy in the Fereldan tower? Heck, the events in the Circle quests in DA:O make it seem like the Templars are pushed a lot more to celibacy than the mages. (Not to mention that Cullen of all people is on the verge of falling for a Mage-Warden)

Even look at Awakening Anders. He's run away from the circle, what, a dozen times or something? In the Kirkwall circle, he would have been executed or made Tranquil after the first or second time.

In Anders really wanted to improve the lot of the Kirkwall mages he'd have made a smaller bomb and found a way to get it in or near Meredith's office. Or, the smarter approach would be to find some way of more discreetly eliminating Meredith. Take her out, minimize collateral damage, and surrender to the Templars immediately afterwards.

By contrast, not only does blowing up the Chantry do nothing to help the Kirkwall mages, it in fact hurts them and other mages in multiple ways. It drives the Templars all over Thedas to clamp down harder, and it removes them from what controls the Chantry did have over them (though, I can see that one not being entirely anticipated). In Kirkwall itself, not only does it lead to open war in the streets, but Anders and especially Justice should both know what happens when the Veil is torn. And blowing up the Chantry in a place that already has a weak Veil is nothing short of criminally irresponsible, as is confirmed by all the demons you encounter in the final sequence and even possibly Orsino's possession.

[Psyren]

Except most of those are NOT problems with the Chantry. Those are problems with Meredith and some of the insane if not sadistic lieutenants she has working for her.

Elthina outranks her! If the commander is being a douchenozzle and the general is whistling and firmly looking the other way, the general is equally at fault!

[Kish]

I find, "Those abuses of power are less extreme in other places, therefore the fact that the power exists, that nothing Meredith did was illegal until the very end, that the lobotomizations of a lot of random innocent mages went completely without internal comment, is not cause to start a war in and of itself" logically bankrupt, I'm afraid. Yes, of course Anders chose the worst chantry in Thedas to blow up; the amazing thing is that that's apparently a point against him.


By contrast, not only does blowing up the Chantry do nothing to help the Kirkwall mages, it in fact hurts them and other mages in multiple ways.
...You kind of haven't paid attention to the ending of Dragon Age 2, have you? I may not (read: don't) sympathize with, "But I think mages should be imprisoned and I didn't want my character to be part of starting a revolution!" but it's better than, "I reject the game's reality and substitute my own, in which there was no revolution, just the templars grinding their boots into helpless mages even harder, which was totally the fault of Anders, not the templars in question."

[Ailurus]

...You kind of haven't paid attention to the ending of Dragon Age 2, have you? I may not (read: don't) sympathize with, "But I think mages should be imprisoned and I didn't want my character to be part of starting a revolution!" but it's better than, "I reject the game's reality and substitute my own, in which there was no revolution, just the templars grinding their boots into helpless mages even harder, which was totally the fault of Anders, not the templars in question."

Where did I say I reject the game's reality? The simple fact is that the game's reality and aftermath show that the Mage-Templar war is frankly sending Thedas to the point of ruin. After Anders sets off his bomb, two of the fifteen circles of Magi have the Right of Annulment declared and executed on them. The Templars clamped down on all of the circles for a few years, and then finally decided that they'd had enough and essentially declared themselves free of Cantry control and virtually dropped a Right of Annulment on the entirety of Thedas. Similarly, the Mages dissolved all of the local circles after several first enchanters were killed and are now prepared to go into all out war with the Templars. While fighting for their very survival is quite understandable, how do the mages benefit from this? How do the templars? How does the Cantry? How do the average people? Nobody got any benefit from Anders blowing up the Chantry.



I find, "Those abuses of power are less extreme in other places, therefore the fact that the power exists, that nothing Meredith did was illegal until the very end, that the lobotomizations of a lot of random innocent mages went completely without internal comment, is not cause to start a war in and of itself" logically bankrupt, I'm afraid. Yes, of course Anders chose the worst chantry in Thedas to blow up; the amazing thing is that that's apparently a point against him.

When did I say that? I said the problems were caused by Meredith. Even if there is some way someone could try to make her actions seem legal, they were immoral. As where those of her lieutenants, who I already said were insane at best. But saying "this one place is bad so we need to destroy everything" is the issue.

At the time of DA:O, there were 15 Circles of Magi outside the Imperium. One (Kirkwall) is bad. One (Fereldan) is not bad. So why are you automatically assuming that the other 13 unvisited circles are as bad as Kirkwall? Sure, there are some mages who don't like the circles (Anders, Jowan), but there are other mages who have no issues with the circles (Wynne, Irving, whoever the young mage from Starkhaven was). And even after Anders sets off his bomb, even after the Templars begin clamping down on the other circles, it takes multiple meetings and votes for the other Circles to decide to separate from the Chantry. If things were really Kirkwall-bad everyone but Fereldan, why didn't they jump at the chance? If everyone really hates the Templars so much, why did most of the mages keep trying to reconcile the matter?

The mages in Kirkwall do have a bad situation at the start of the game, yes. And its only made worse after Meredith gets the idol. But just because one police force gets out of control does not mean you should blow up a governmental building and declare war on the whole country. And that's what Anders did.

[Logic]

Eh, I think I'd agree with the notion that Anders was the only really memorable companion from Awakening. The rest were just okay at best. Justice is the only other one that stands out, and him mostly for the novelty of being a spirit.

I personally disagree. My preferred companions in Awakening were Nathanial Howe, Sigrun, and Anders. (I played a Warrior Warden)

I always thought that of those three, Anders was the least developed and likeable.

[Calemyr]

I personally disagree. My preferred companions in Awakening were Nathanial Howe, Sigrun, and Anders. (I played a Warrior Warden)

I always thought that of those three, Anders was the least developed and likeable.

Sorry, but you have to leave. This is a Dragon Age thread. Logic has no place here.

For my part, I usually went with Nathaniel, Anders, and Justice, as I liked to play an Arcane Warrior. (Good grief, that was fun. She could solo the spectral dragon when the rest of the part couldn't last 10 seconds. Unstoppable tank one moment, walking air strike the next.)

I felt the characters were all pretty good, honestly. What they lacked was spotlight. After they joined you, there was little time to see who they were unless they were already in your party. Which meant that the characters you worked with most were great while everyone else was flat-out forgettable.

[Crow]

I'm still trying to find all of these "innocent" mages in Kirkwall.

Also, I am apparently the only one who genuinely liked Isabella's character. Though I disagreed with much that she did. :smallsmile:

[Zevox]

Pro-mage Hawke might not be in favor of blowing up the Chantry for several obvious reasons:
[...]
3. She might think two wrongs doesn't make one right (killing innocents for the cause(tm))
Better way to put this one: rejecting a "the ends justify the means" mentality. Which is personally my take on it. I sympathize 100% with Anders' motives, but condemn his actions. Even agreeing that starting a war is not unjustified here, I think he should have found a way to do it that didn't involve the mass murder of innocent people. Commendable motivations no more justify that than the desire to protect people from Abominations justifies the Circle system.

Of course, now that the war has been started, I'm damn well going to do everything you're allowed to in the next game to make sure it ends in the mages' favor. But Anders won't be around to see it, because there was no way I was letting him go free after what he did.


I personally disagree. My preferred companions in Awakening were Nathanial Howe, Sigrun, and Anders. (I played a Warrior Warden)

I always thought that of those three, Anders was the least developed and likeable.
I think my party tended to rotate almost everyone in Awakening, except Oghren. Personally, I don't think any of them were particularly well-developed, but I found Anders by far the most likeable. The rest really just an "eh" from me.

[Mx.Silver]

Also, I am apparently the only one who genuinely liked Isabella's character. Though I disagreed with much that she did. :smallsmile:

You're probably not; you're just the only person who felt the need to declare you did apropos of nothing.

[Psyren]

While fighting for their very survival is quite understandable, how do the mages benefit from this?

Er, you answered your own question there.

As for the rest, frankly I couldn't care less "how the templars/Chantry benefit from this." The "average people" meanwhile include as many people who have benefited from magic (including indirectly) as were harmed by it - they are not a homogenous block. They also include mage families, who no longer have to have their children ripped from their arms and locked away.



When did I say that? I said the problems were caused by Meredith.

The problems were caused just as much by Elthina; she could have stripped Meredith of power at any time. She certainly had plenty of reason to - even the other Templars were complaining against her, and even before Act 2.



The mages in Kirkwall do have a bad situation at the start of the game, yes. And its only made worse after Meredith gets the idol. But just because one police force gets out of control does not mean you should blow up a governmental building and declare war on the whole country. And that's what Anders did.

1) You don't know how bad the other circles are.
2) The Fereldan circle was actually pretty bad. For trying to escape, they put Anders in solitary confinement for an entire year. It's a wonder he stayed as sane as he did.

[Beowulf DW]

Not that the debate over the point at which war on a nigh mythical scale becomes justified is dull, but I'm gonna switch gears here.

Wasn't there a line in DA2 about Revka Amell having multiple children sent to different Circles? Wouldn't that mean that the Human Mage Warden has several siblings scattered throughout Thedas? We could potentially see another member of the Hawke/Amell clan in DA3 and subsequent games, possibly even as player characters. That almost sounds like Highlander with the MacLeods.

How about it? Anyone else think we're likely to see another Amell?

[ArlEammon]

Not that the debate over the point at which war on a nigh mythical scale becomes justified is dull, but I'm gonna switch gears here.

Wasn't there a line in DA2 about Revka Amell having multiple children sent to different Circles? Wouldn't that mean that the Human Mage Warden has several siblings scattered throughout Thedas? We could potentially see another member of the Hawke/Amell clan in DA3 and subsequent games, possibly even as player characters. That almost sounds like Highlander with the MacLeods.

How about it? Anyone else think we're likely to see another Amell?

I hope we see the descendants of the Couslands as well as the Amell.

[Ailurus]

Er, you answered your own question there.

No, the question is "how is a life and death struggle superior to living in the circles?"




1) You don't know how bad the other circles are.
2) The Fereldan circle was actually pretty bad. For trying to escape, they put Anders in solitary confinement for an entire year. It's a wonder he stayed as sane as he did.

1) True, we don't know for sure. But what we do know for sure Kirkwall is worse than both Starkhaven and Fereldan. And, again, the consensus of the Circles was to stay with the Chantry for three years after the bomb went off.
2) If you read his DA2 codex entry, you'll see that his solitary confinement only happened after he was "Recaptured and returned dozens of times." What do you expect to happen to someone who keeps breaking the same rule over and over and over? (Plus, since Anders refused to stay with the Wardens for very long either, that makes it even more clear where the problem is).

[Aux-Ash]

The problems were caused just as much by Elthina; she could have stripped Meredith of power at any time. She certainly had plenty of reason to - even the other Templars were complaining against her, and even before Act 2.

I see this argument being brought up a lot in regards to Elthina. Things is, there's no evidence ingame or out of it that it was within Elthina's power to demote Meredith. It's not an unreasonable guess, sure. But whenever her inaction is discussed ingame she's never accused of protecting Meredith or asked why she's not demoting her. The codex never states that she has this power, neither in her own, Meredith's or any of the chantry related entries. It's something that we never even see hints of ingame. The lore even seem to suggest it's the Seekers, not Grand Clerics that would handle such issues.

And even if it were true, we hit the second hurdle... Meredith may not be popular, not even among most of ehr own men, but prior to Elthina's death there was actually no evidence available that Meredith did anything illegal according to Chantry law.
So if Elthina did strip Meredith of her power, a quick letter to Val Royeux would quickly lead to a big mess that ends up with Meredith back in her position and Elthina replaced with someone considerably more supportive of Meredith.

[Kish]

Better way to put this one: rejecting a "the ends justify the means" mentality. Which is personally my take on it. I sympathize 100% with Anders' motives, but condemn his actions. Even agreeing that starting a war is not unjustified here, I think he should have found a way to do it that didn't involve the mass murder of innocent people.
Interestingly, the only one of your companions who really seems to care that Anders just killed a bunch of priests, as opposed to "Anders just killed a GRAND CLERIC, rargh the blasphemy" or, "Anders just killed order in Kirkwall," is a blood mage named Merrill.

[Psyren]

I see this argument being brought up a lot in regards to Elthina. Things is, there's no evidence ingame or out of it that it was within Elthina's power to demote Meredith.

No in-game evidence - except everything we know about the Chantry and Templar Order, you mean?

Codex - Grand Cleric Elthina:


Reverend Mother Elthina assumed the mantle of grand cleric almost twenty years ago; she is responsible for the spiritual well-being of southern Free Marches (everything south of Starkhaven and the Minanter River). She has long been a calming presence in the city, renowned for her kindness and generosity. People frequently turn to her to mediate disputes-particularly those involving the powerful Templar Order, over whom she holds authority as the Chantry's ranking representative.

And Templar Order:


The Order is composed of numerous branches, each of them centered around a specific community or region they are assigned to defend and monitor. Templars may be assigned to the Circles of Magi but also to individual Chantries. Each main branch of the organization is led by a Knight-Commander. In Thedas there are fifteen Knight-Commanders, who in turn answer to the head of the local chantry, often a Grand Cleric, depending on the region in question.

And Knight-Commander:


A Knight-Captain, though lower-ranking, has the authority to relieve a Knight-Commander of duty if they overstep their bounds. The same right is held by Divine and Grand Clerics who may act on the suggestions of the order of The Seekers of Truth.

Need I continue?


And even if it were true, we hit the second hurdle... Meredith may not be popular, not even among most of ehr own men, but prior to Elthina's death there was actually no evidence available that Meredith did anything illegal according to Chantry law.

They don't have to prove anything. She can even just be relieved of duty while they investigate the charges, or let her keep her rank but reassign her.



So if Elthina did strip Meredith of her power, a quick letter to Val Royeux would quickly lead to a big mess that ends up with Meredith back in her position and Elthina replaced with someone considerably more supportive of Meredith.

If that happened, and Elthina was indeed overruled, at least then she would have tried. But standing around with her bony thumbs lodged in her *** while the pot bubbles is no excuse at all.

[Kish]

Also, if there's anyone in Thedas more de facto supportive of Meredith than Elthina's "No, no one do anything" mewling, the Chantry is even more messed up than I thought--and I thought it was beyond saving and needed to be torched. If you want to argue that starting a war was inappropriate, you should probably try to argue that Kirkwall is some kind of meaningless statistical outlier, a horror that has absolutely nothing to say about the Chantry's policies and their logical results. Not that another Grand Cleric would look at its hellish Circle and say, "Good job, keep grinding them down!"

[Beowulf DW]

My position in trying to keep war from breaking out was not to protect Elthina or the Chantry, but to protect the innocents that would inevitably get caught in the crossfire should war break out. To that end, my Hawke was trying to change the Circle gradually, and subtly killing the lower ranking templars that went over the line. Yes, I was appalled by the high number of Rites of Tranquility and executions, but as I saw more and more blood mages hurting innocent people, I figured that the increased number of punishments was due to the unusually high number of serious offenders. Anders claims that the templars are constantly over-stepping their bounds, and in some cases this is certainly true. However, I must question just how true Ander's claims are the vast majority of the time. His zealotry and extremism makes his claims questionable. He's makes it increasingly clear that he believes that templars are an evil that must be purged from the world. Like Fenris, Anders wears on my nerves simply due to how little room I have to reason with him. Much like in the real world, I find people like that infuriating, frightening, and deserving of a swift punch to the face, or a sharp knife to the throat.

[Aux-Ash]

And Knight-Commander:

Oh... how had i missed that one? Fair enough, consider the point conceded.

[Derthric]

Elthina really did drop the ball in her position of authority in Kirkwall. For the three years between the Kunari attack and the start of Act III, she did nothing to stabilize the city in anyway, shape, or form. There was no Viceroy because somehow Meredith was somehow muddling the new selection process. Tensions between Mages and Templars were so tight I think my mabari would have the sense to take action. She was the last person with authority to do anything that could have united the city and she never used it. To her credit she probably did keep Meredith from slaughtering the mages earlier but that is about it.

[ArlEammon]

Elthina really did drop the ball in her position of authority in Kirkwall. For the three years between the Kunari attack and the start of Act III, she did nothing to stabilize the city in anyway, shape, or form. There was no Viceroy because somehow Meredith was somehow muddling the new selection process. Tensions between Mages and Templars were so tight I think my mabari would have the sense to take action. She was the last person with authority to do anything that could have united the city and she never used it. To her credit she probably did keep Meredith from slaughtering the mages earlier but that is about it.

She was a Priest. It was likely that Meredith could have pulled a Beckett on her in private. Out in the open, however, where there were witnesses everywhere? No.

[Logic]

Better way to put this one: rejecting a "the ends justify the means" mentality. Which is personally my take on it. I sympathize 100% with Anders' motives, but condemn his actions. Even agreeing that starting a war is not unjustified here, I think he should have found a way to do it that didn't involve the mass murder of innocent people. Commendable motivations no more justify that than the desire to protect people from Abominations justifies the Circle system.

Of course, now that the war has been started, I'm damn well going to do everything you're allowed to in the next game to make sure it ends in the mages' favor. But Anders won't be around to see it, because there was no way I was letting him go free after what he did.


I think my party tended to rotate almost everyone in Awakening, except Oghren. Personally, I don't think any of them were particularly well-developed, but I found Anders by far the most likeable. The rest really just an "eh" from me.
I liked Nathanial and Sigrun as soon as I met them. Anders was the better Mage choice compared to Velanna, which is why he was in my party more often than she was.

And I fell in love with Sigrun's voice early on. Then I found out she was voiced by Natalia Cigliutti.

I was glad to see Anders in Dragon Age II, but I was also hoping to see some more of the Origins characters as well (namely Wynne.)

I really dislike what Anders did to the Elthina, and I thought it was out of character, even considering he was bonded with Justice.

I had been supporting the Mages far more often than the Templars up to that point, but the way I saw it, the Mages were the ones razing the city.

[Beowulf DW]

Just to act as a sort of devil's advocate, I'm going to try to defend Elthina. Does anyone remember some of her discussions with Sebastian? She mentioned that the Divine was growing worried with the situation in Kirkwall, and that she feared an exalted march might be declared if the situation was perceived to become chaotic. I think that she was putting up with Meredith and keeping her from going off the deep end (which is exactly what happened when Elthina was killed) in order to ward off what she perceived as the greater evil: an exalted march into the city to quell disorder.

[Ailurus]

Just to act as a sort of devil's advocate, I'm going to try to defend Elthina. Does anyone remember some of her discussions with Sebastian? She mentioned that the Divine was growing worried with the situation in Kirkwall, and that she feared an exalted march might be declared if the situation was perceived to become chaotic. I think that she was putting up with Meredith and keeping her from going off the deep end (which is exactly what happened when Elthina was killed) in order to ward off what she perceived as the greater evil: an exalted march into the city to quell disorder.

On that note, there is a quest too (dunno if its part of Sebastian's DLC or not, but I recall having him along when I did that) where you go and meet Leliana who was sent to Kirkwall by the Divine specifically to assess the situation in the city - and it ends with Leliana recommending that Elthina pack up and leave the city for her own safety.

[Aux-Ash]

Just to act as a sort of devil's advocate, I'm going to try to defend Elthina. Does anyone remember some of her discussions with Sebastian? She mentioned that the Divine was growing worried with the situation in Kirkwall, and that she feared an exalted march might be declared if the situation was perceived to become chaotic. I think that she was putting up with Meredith and keeping her from going off the deep end (which is exactly what happened when Elthina was killed) in order to ward off what she perceived as the greater evil: an exalted march into the city to quell disorder.

Yeah... and let's not forget that Meredith's replacement would be Cullen, Alrik or Karras (the only three named Templar officers we see). The Iron Lady of Kirkwall proves herself (after Elthina's death) to not be the best leader... but I'm not sure any those three are any better.
Cullen has redeeming qualities, but I'm not sure I want to put him near a Knight-Commandership just yet. Especially not so soon after Kinloch hold. And as Meredith's second in command, he'd share equal blame for any templars abusing power.

Alrik (granted, by act 3 he's probably dead) would be a catastrophe as a Knight-Commander. Karras is ruthless, merciless and hates mages (and apparently also a rapist as well).

And I don't think anyone needs to be told why letting the Gallows sit without a Knight-Commander for the 4-6 weeks it'd take to get a new Knight-Commander for Val Royeaux would be a terrible idea.
Not to mention that this hypothetical new KC would be chosen by Lord-Seeker Lambert (also known as: "I make Meredith seem cozy in comparison").

Keeping Meredith in her position may have been a bad idea... but I'm not sure the alternatives would be better... Nor satisfy the mages of the Gallows... it'd be too little, too late.


On that note, there is a quest too (dunno if its part of Sebastian's DLC or not, but I recall having him along when I did that) where you go and meet Leliana who was sent to Kirkwall by the Divine specifically to assess the situation in the city - and it ends with Leliana recommending that Elthina pack up and leave the city for her own safety.

It's in Sebastian's DLC yes, and she adamantly refuses to leave once the message is passed along. Maybe her diplomatic approach isn't the most effective, but at the very least she takes her charge rather seriously. She reveals herself to be very much aware that the city is teetering on the brink and that she thinks it's important she tries to steer it away from that.

[Psyren]

Just to act as a sort of devil's advocate, I'm going to try to defend Elthina. Does anyone remember some of her discussions with Sebastian?

Oh boy, do I ever! Glad you brought that up.

See, the conversation between Elthina and Sebastian doesn't help the point at all. If anything it highlights how grossly incompetent/willfully ignorant Elthina was even more:

It starts off with Sebastian admonishing Elthina ("Do you never intend to give a public answer, your Grace?" "What have I been asked?" "About the mages! You could calm this fire if you stepped forward.") To which she gives a subtle dig that all mages are maleficar: "The Chantry's teachings are clear. Those who turn against them would not listen more to me than to Andraste."

With that bit of stupidity still fresh on the air, Hawke then walks in and asks bluntly if she favors the Templars. She professes to favor peace, and that neither side seems to want it. She then blithely informs you that the Divine has sent an agent (Leliana of course) to assess the situation in Kirkwall - and sends you to tell the agent that everything is fine!

Now, Leliana actually has two brain cells to rub together, so she doesn't buy it. She knows war will come and tells you to ask Elthina to leave. And at this point Elthina gets angry/stubborn and says she won't, revealing aspirations of martyrdom in the Maker's name. Ugh.

[Beowulf DW]

Oh boy, do I ever! Glad you brought that up.

See, the conversation between Elthina and Sebastian doesn't help the point at all. If anything it highlights how grossly incompetent/willfully ignorant Elthina was even more:

It starts off with Sebastian admonishing Elthina ("Do you never intend to give a public answer, your Grace?" "What have I been asked?" "About the mages! You could calm this fire if you stepped forward.") To which she gives a subtle dig that all mages are maleficar: "The Chantry's teachings are clear. Those who turn against them would not listen more to me than to Andraste."

With that bit of stupidity still fresh on the air, Hawke then walks in and asks bluntly if she favors the Templars. She professes to favor peace, and that neither side seems to want it. She then blithely informs you that the Divine has sent an agent (Leliana of course) to assess the situation in Kirkwall - and sends you to tell the agent that everything is fine!

Now, Leliana actually has two brain cells to rub together, so she doesn't buy it. She knows war will come and tells you to ask Elthina to leave. And at this point Elthina gets angry/stubborn and says she won't, revealing aspirations of martyrdom in the Maker's name. Ugh.

Well, yes, Elthina actually believes in her faith. As such, she is not in support of the mages turning against the Chantry. Maybe she does have delusions of martyrdom, but I choose to interpret her actions as being stuck between a rock and a hard place, namely the Divine and Meredith. And while the codex tells us that a Knight-Commander answers to a Grand Cleric, how much power does Elthina actually have? Who is really in control in a military dictatorship, the president or the general? On the one hand, Meredith might have turned on Elthina, which would be like a rabid dog tearing apart its leash. And then where would Kirkwall be? On the other hand, Elthina has Justinia V breathing down her neck with the possibility of an Exalted March, should the Divine suspect the situation has grown dire. In the midst of all of this, she chooses to stay with the people of Kirkwall, because a Grand Cleric fleeing for safety would probably set off a panic.

[Psyren]

But you're forgetting the other side of things - she has a direct line to the Divine via the Agent, which means she could have easily requested Meredith's removal. And if Meredith rebelled, it would be proof that she was mad with power and needed to be taken down.

As for "actually believes in her faith" - that's rubbish, her faith says no such thing. The Chantry doesn't believe that all mages are evil, otherwise there would be no Circle, just witch hunts and slayings. Yet she believes none could possibly see reason, even when Chantry hardliner Sebastian urges her to step forward.

When Elthina says no mages will listen to her, Hawke immediately comes to the correct conclusion - that Elthina has already made up her mind. When Hawke points it out though, Elthina continues to waffle and prevaricate and deflect.

[Beowulf DW]

And if the Divine or Elthina had moved too radically against the Templars, they would have declared the Nevarran Accords null and void, which would have left the Templars free to do whatever the hell they wanted. Incidentally, this happens anyway.

[Crow]

which she gives a subtle dig that all mages are maleficar: "The Chantry's teachings are clear. Those who turn against them would not listen more to me than to Andraste."

Which, as the game itself shows us, nearly all of them are.

[Aux-Ash]

But you're forgetting the other side of things - she has a direct line to the Divine via the Agent, which means she could have easily requested Meredith's removal. And if Meredith rebelled, it would be proof that she was mad with power and needed to be taken down.

As for "actually believes in her faith" - that's rubbish, her faith says no such thing. The Chantry doesn't believe that all mages are evil, otherwise there would be no Circle, just witch hunts and slayings. Yet she believes none could possibly see reason, even when Chantry hardliner Sebastian urges her to step forward.

When Elthina says no mages will listen to her, Hawke immediately comes to the correct conclusion - that Elthina has already made up her mind. When Hawke points it out though, Elthina continues to waffle and prevaricate and deflect.

Uh... Psyren... you do realise that Sebastian urges her to step forward because he believes her voice would help still the mages. He's not actually calling on her to remove Meredith. The opposite is closer.

And she's right that no mages would listen to her (though actually she's just refering to the mages that already fight/use blood magic. The rest have no turned away from the teachings of andraste). Things in Kirkwall are so far gone that if she voices support on the side of the templars, the mages stop respecting her. If she supports mages, the templars does. Supporting either side means that she loses her ability to arbitrate and equally important... it means accepting that there can be no peace. That war is the only outcome.

Besides... much like Leliana would not be swayed by Elthina's words of peace after an assassination attempt, asking her to have the Divine depose Meredith when seemingly Meredith was just proven right would be equally ineffective.

[Avilan the Grey]

Which, as the game itself shows us, nearly all of them are.

This. So very much this.

[Kish]

But you're forgetting the other side of things - she has a direct line to the Divine via the Agent, which means she could have easily requested Meredith's removal. And if Meredith rebelled, it would be proof that she was mad with power and needed to be taken down.

As for "actually believes in her faith" - that's rubbish, her faith says no such thing. The Chantry doesn't believe that all mages are evil, otherwise there would be no Circle, just witch hunts and slayings. Yet she believes none could possibly see reason, even when Chantry hardliner Sebastian urges her to step forward.

When Elthina says no mages will listen to her, Hawke immediately comes to the correct conclusion - that Elthina has already made up her mind. When Hawke points it out though, Elthina continues to waffle and prevaricate and deflect.
My question is: How exactly would Elthina act differently if she were possessed by a sloth demon? "Take a stance--any stance--in the conflict between templars and mages." "No. Action is bad." "Say something to someone, anything to anyone, other than telling them not to do anything or that they shouldn't have done something." "No. Action is bad." "LEAVE KIRKWALL BEFORE YOU GET KILLED." "No. Action is bad."

(No, I don't think she's possessed by a sloth demon. I just don't think needing to go into the Fade and check to tell the difference is a good quality in a Grand Cleric.)

[Psyren]

Which, as the game itself shows us, nearly all of them are.

I would say it's closer to half the mages you face that use blood magic.

But even if you were right, and 100% of enemy mages used blood magic, that is still a subset (enemy mages) not every mage in Kirkwall.


Uh... Psyren... you do realise that Sebastian urges her to step forward because he believes her voice would help still the mages. He's not actually calling on her to remove Meredith. The opposite is closer.

I didn't say a thing about Sebastian wanting her to remove Meredith. :smallconfused:



And she's right that no mages would listen to her (though actually she's just refering to the mages that already fight/use blood magic. The rest have no turned away from the teachings of andraste).

She makes no distinction between the two in her statement. None.


Things in Kirkwall are so far gone that if she voices support on the side of the templars, the mages stop respecting her. If she supports mages, the templars does.

So she's willing to risk her life, but not her respect? That makes zero sense. :smallconfused:


Besides... much like Leliana would not be swayed by Elthina's words of peace after an assassination attempt, asking her to have the Divine depose Meredith when seemingly Meredith was just proven right would be equally ineffective.

Leliana is literally there as a direct line to the Divine. I send my Agent, you tell my Agent what is really going on, my Agent reports back to me. No red tape. What freaking better opportunity is there to say "hey, the situation is indeed kinda bad, but I think a different Knight-Commander is just the ticket? One who isn't pissing off the mages, nobles, and even her own Templars?"

[Sanguine]

I would say it's closer to half the mages you face that use blood magic.

But even if you were right, and 100% of enemy mages used blood magic, that is still a subset (enemy mages) not every mage in Kirkwall.

Fun Fact: Maleficar does not mean Blood Mage. According to the Chant of Light any mage who uses their magic to harm another of the Maker's children is a Maleficar.

Magic exists to serve man, and never to rule over him.
Foul and corrupt are they
Who have taken His gift
And turned it against His children.
They shall be named Maleficar, accursed ones.
They shall find no rest in this world
Or beyond.

By that definition, Mage Hawke, all mage Companions, every enemy mage, and every mage who fights against the Templars in the end is a Maleficar. I would say that is pretty much all of the mages in game.

Edit: Though it is true that when most people say Maleficar, in-game or out, they mean Blood Mage.

[Psyren]

Fun Fact: Maleficar does not mean Blood Mage. According to the Chant of Light any mage who uses their magic to harm another of the Maker's children is a Maleficar.

Magic exists to serve man, and never to rule over him.
Foul and corrupt are they
Who have taken His gift
And turned it against His children.
They shall be named Maleficar, accursed ones.
They shall find no rest in this world
Or beyond.

Fun fact - that passage is actually placed under Blood Magic in the Codex. So I read that as Bioware's intent with the term.

[Divayth Fyr]

Fun fact - that passage is actually placed under Blood Magic in the Codex. So I read that as Bioware's intent with the term.
Still, with the way it is presented we can also assume all mages are Maleficar or that Blood Magic is a gift from the Maker ;)

[Kish]

Fun Fact: Maleficar does not mean Blood Mage. According to the Chant of Light any mage who uses their magic to harm another of the Maker's children is a Maleficar.
No one in the game seems to interpret the Chant of Light to disallow all combat spells. Even those people who push to have all mages killed or lobotomized don't use that interpretation of the Chant.

[Sanguine]

No one in the game seems to interpret the Chant of Light to disallow all combat spells. Even those people who push to have all mages killed or lobotomized don't use that interpretation of the Chant.

That is true, I've just always found it amusing that the actual relevant scripture can be applied just as easily to combat magic as blood magic. Thus why I labeled it a fun fact.

I was not however aware the passage was in the codex entry for blood magic. I got it from the preacher outside the Denerim Chantry in Origins.

[Kish]

Actually following the Chant of Light, rather than peering at it and going, "Hm, what angle do I read this at to get it to tell me to do what I want to do anyway?" seems, as far as I can tell, unknown in Thedas. "Mages shouldn't use any combat spells" just isn't a useful interpretation to anyone.

[Sanguine]

Actually following the Chant of Light, rather than peering at it and going, "Hm, what angle do I read this at to get it to tell me to do what I want to do anyway?" seems, as far as I can tell, unknown in Thedas. "Mages shouldn't use any combat spells" just isn't a useful interpretation to anyone.

I would argue that the people being killed and or maimed by combat spells would be all for that interpretation.:smalltongue:

[Kish]

Not if it means they can't have their side's mages blast the mages who were blasting them.

Particularly not if, in practice, it means lying down and getting slaughtered by the Qunari because the Qun says that fighting is the only thing mages are supposed to do.

[Aux-Ash]

I didn't say a thing about Sebastian wanting her to remove Meredith. :smallconfused:

Looking over it again... I think I misread that bit. Disregard that particular comment.


She makes no distinction between the two in her statement. None.

The very phrase you quoted:
"The Chantry's teachings are clear. Those who turn against them would not listen more to me than to Andraste."

All mages have not turned against the Chantry's teachings. Only the ones in violent opposition to the templars. This is not an accusation aimed at all mages. It's a statement that her siding with the templars would achieve nothing (or even cause even more unrest) since the mages violently opposing the templars are already disregarding the Chantry's decrees.


So she's willing to risk her life, but not her respect? That makes zero sense. :smallconfused:

Not at all. In her mind, if she has to lay down her life for peace then she's prepared to do so. But if she loses the respect, the ear of both sides, then it does not matter what she says because they're not listening. If she supports Meredith, more mages stop caring. If she supports the mages, she loses her influence over the templars.

It is only their respect for her that makes the two templars disregard Meredith and escort Orsino back to the Gallows at the beginning of act 3. Meredith herself... is not pleased... to put it mildly. She actually starts sending her petitions for RoA directly to the Divine, implying that after that point she's actually not respecting Elthina anymore.


Leliana is literally there as a direct line to the Divine. I send my Agent, you tell my Agent what is really going on, my Agent reports back to me. No red tape. What freaking better opportunity is there to say "hey, the situation is indeed kinda bad, but I think a different Knight-Commander is just the ticket? One who isn't pissing off the mages, nobles, and even her own Templars?"

And then what?

Will the mages sit still and happily await the new KC? Including resolutionists such as the ones attacking Leliana, the ones that broke out the likes of Evelina and Huon or Anders?
With Meredith gone (and that's assuming the templars will allow her to step down) would that not be the perfect opportunity to strike?

Who will lead the templars until then? Otto "mr tranquil solution" Alrik? Knight-Lieutenant "magekiller" Karras? Cullen "there's an argument to apply the rite of tranquility more widely"? Because those are the officers we see. We're talking weeks here, if not months. All for a completely unproven Knight Commander... or worse... Lambert himself.

And besides... the Divine "acting without the red tape" is basically what happens in Asunder. It does not turn out well.

[Psyren]

That is true, I've just always found it amusing that the actual relevant scripture can be applied just as easily to combat magic as blood magic. Thus why I labeled it a fun fact.

I was not however aware the passage was in the codex entry for blood magic. I got it from the preacher outside the Denerim Chantry in Origins.

In-game, whenever someone refers to "maleficar" they mean "blood mage" rather than just "mage."


The very phrase you quoted:
"The Chantry's teachings are clear. Those who turn against them would not listen more to me than to Andraste."

All mages have not turned against the Chantry's teachings. Only the ones in violent opposition to the templars.

But not all mages are in violent opposition, just as not all mages turn to blood magic. But she refuses to speak out to or for any mage at all.



Not at all. In her mind, if she has to lay down her life for peace then she's prepared to do so. But if she loses the respect, the ear of both sides, then it does not matter what she says because they're not listening. If she supports Meredith, more mages stop caring. If she supports the mages, she loses her influence over the templars.

By doing nothing, she is supporting Meredith. If two schoolboys are wrestling on the ground, one is clearly bigger and has the other one pinned, and the bigger one is rubbing dirt into the smaller one's mouth, you are not neutral by standing off to the side and saying "well darn, if I get involved neither of them will listen."

Meredith currently has the power, and Meredith is currently abusing it. Not opposing her is tacit approval.



It is only their respect for her that makes the two templars disregard Meredith and escort Orsino back to the Gallows at the beginning of act 3. Meredith herself... is not pleased... to put it mildly. She actually starts sending her petitions for RoA directly to the Divine, implying that after that point she's actually not respecting Elthina anymore.

No. She refers to Elthina as "Her Grace" and fears her disapproval all the way up until The Last Straw.



And then what?

Will the mages sit still and happily await the new KC?

Templars have this thing called a hierarchy. Cullen already has the respect of his fellows, the mages, and even Hawke. He will do fine as a stand-in until either a knew KCom arrives, or he could even be promoted to the post himself. And if Elthina had bloody done it early enough, Thrask would have still been around to be Knight-Captain in his place.

[Kish]

Cullen already has the respect of his fellows, the mages, and even Hawke.
Eh...my Hawke sure didn't respect him, but I'll give him the "less bad than Meredith" badge that everyone in the city (except Elthina) can have for the asking.

(Then I will go back to hoping I finally get to kill him in Dragon Age 3.)

[Beowulf DW]

No. She refers to Elthina as "Her Grace" and fears her disapproval all the way up until The Last Straw.

That was in public in front of the half of Kirkwall that Hawke hadn't killed yet. Again, Psyren I feel the need to point out the Nevaran Accord. It wasa deal between the Chantry and the original Inquisition to unite to keep the mages in check, without slaughtering them all. If the Templars perceive that the Chantry isn't keeping up its end of the deal, they have the right to annul the Accord, meaning they refuse to acknowledge Chantry authority. Elthina had the support of the common folk of Kirkwall, but Meredith had the Templars. Who has the real power in this situation?

[Psyren]

Eh...my Hawke sure didn't respect him, but I'll give him the "less bad than Meredith" badge that everyone in the city (except Elthina) can have for the asking.

(Then I will go back to hoping I finally get to kill him in Dragon Age 3.)

Fair enough :smalltongue:


That was in public in front of the half of Kirkwall that Hawke hadn't killed yet. Again, Psyren I feel the need to point out the Nevaran Accord. It wasa deal between the Chantry and the original Inquisition to unite to keep the mages in check, without slaughtering them all. If the Templars perceive that the Chantry isn't keeping up its end of the deal, they have the right to annul the Accord, meaning they refuse to acknowledge Chantry authority. Elthina had the support of the common folk of Kirkwall, but Meredith had the Templars. Who has the real power in this situation?

1) Has Meredith ever disrespected/disparaged Elthina in private?
2) I'll answer your last question with a quote: "Power resides where men believe it resides." - Varys, Game of Thrones.

Meredith commands the Templars only because they acknowledge her authority. Were she to oppose Elthina, you're assuming every Templar would go along lockstep with that decision. And yet, I strongly doubt that would be the case. Cullen might, or might not. Thrask certainly wouldn't. Sebastian certainly wouldn't. Even a pro-Chantry Hawke would likely have the opportunity to choose which to follow right then and there. And so on. But the point is that we'd never get to reach that kind of rift, because Elthina was so cowardly as to not want to take any sort of action that might potentially put her at odds with the Templars. In fact, I'm willing to bet that so many Templars followed her in her madness (and grumbled in private) solely because Elthina was implicitly backing her too.

And even if Elthina was worried about a violent schism in the Templars, that's precisely the kind of thing Leliana is equipped to handle. Tell her Meredith is out of control and needs to be replaced. Get some swords of your own fresh from Orlais. Then have her removed, bloodlessly, because all of your men and half of hers are on board with the decision.

[Aux-Ash]

But not all mages are in violent opposition, just as not all mages turn to blood magic. But she refuses to speak out to or for any mage at all.

But the conversation in question is about supporting Meredith (further)... which is what she's rejecting.


By doing nothing, she is supporting Meredith. If two schoolboys are wrestling on the ground, one is clearly bigger and has the other one pinned, and the bigger one is rubbing dirt into the smaller one's mouth, you are not neutral by standing off to the side and saying "well darn, if I get involved neither of them will listen."

Meredith currently has the power, and Meredith is currently abusing it. Not opposing her is tacit approval.

Arguably all the things Meredith does do are within her legal limits. She may not be popular, but she's actually not breaking any laws. Her holding secular power temporarily is actually not illegal, nor is it the first time she's done so (last time it led to her being promoted). In fact, not even the Right of Annulment in last straw is illegal (though awfully close to it)

What Elthina does do is dispel open conflict between the first Enchanter and Meredith on the streets and rejecting the Right of Annulment. It's not nothing, it's silent diplomacy. Her efforts may not be making things better (yet), but she's making sure it does not escalate (too quickly).

As you may have noticed... as soon as Elthina died the dam burst completely... with noone there to stop Meredith at all.

Elthina's efforts, even combined with Hawke's, are not enough no. I'd even go so far as to accept that Elthina fails at what she tries to do. But she does not do nothing.


No. She refers to Elthina as "Her Grace" and fears her disapproval all the way up until The Last Straw.

I don't recall Meredith saying she fears Elthina's disapproval... care to remind me where she does so I can look it up? :smallsmile:


Templars have this thing called a hierarchy. Cullen already has the respect of his fellows, the mages, and even Hawke. He will do fine as a stand-in until either a knew KCom arrives, or he could even be promoted to the post himself. And if Elthina had bloody done it early enough, Thrask would have still been around to be Knight-Captain in his place.

I'm not sure about Cullen being good material for holding the reigns of a circle, much less the Gallows. In time sure, but I think it would have been too soon.
Thrask is not even Knight-Lieutenant though, he won't become Knight-Captain anytime soon.

[Psyren]

But the conversation in question is about supporting Meredith (further)... which is what she's rejecting.

Sebastian said nothing about supporting Meredith either. He simply wanted Elthina to do her damn job and actually lead.


Arguably all the things Meredith does do are within her legal limits.

What is legal and what is right are not always the same thing, particularly where Meredith is concerned.

Silent diplomacy is not diplomacy if one faction is actively oppressing the other. It is approval.



I don't recall Meredith saying she fears Elthina's disapproval... care to remind me where she does so I can look it up? :smallsmile:

Orsino: "This is getting us nowhere. Grand Cleric Elthina will put a stop to this."
Meredith: *quickly runs after him* "You will NOT bring Her Grace into this!!"



I'm not sure about Cullen being good material for holding the reigns of a circle, much less the Gallows. In time sure, but I think it would have been too soon.

He's a better choice than Meredith. And anyway, as I said, it could have been a stopgap measure until Meredith's replacement arrived from Orlais, someone who might actually give the mages some breathing room and stop running roughshod over the nobility.

And if that person turned out to be just as bad, at least Elthina would have tried.



Thrask is not even Knight-Lieutenant though, he won't become Knight-Captain anytime soon.

He had the trust of many of the mages and templars alike. He would have been the logical choice for an elevated role.

[Kish]

Sebastian said nothing about supporting Meredith either. He simply wanted Elthina to do her damn job and actually lead.
Indeed, from what I've seen online, Sebastian doesn't care in the least whether you defend the mages or set out to wipe them all out with Meredith at the end, as long as you kill Anders. As far as he's concerned, there is one person in Kirkwall who really matters, and she's the Grand Cleric.

[Giggling Ghast]

With that bit of stupidity still fresh on the air, Hawke then walks in and asks bluntly if she favors the Templars. She professes to favor peace, and that neither side seems to want it. She then blithely informs you that the Divine has sent an agent (Leliana of course) to assess the situation in Kirkwall - and sends you to tell the agent that everything is fine!

Keep in mind that Leliana was assessing the situation in Kirkwall to determine whether an Exalted March was necessary. You don't declare a religious crusade just to bring order to a city; that's like treating a disease by burning the infected alive. If things were so bad that the Divine deemed it necessary, then Kirkwall would have likely been destroyed.

[Psyren]

Keep in mind that Leliana was assessing the situation in Kirkwall to determine whether an Exalted March was necessary. You don't declare a religious crusade just to bring order to a city; that's like treating a disease by burning the infected alive. If things were so bad that the Divine deemed it necessary, then Kirkwall would have likely been destroyed.

Which is why you tell her, you know, "removing one crazy woman could likely solve all of this" - not "we are on the way to destruction, take off every zig!"

[Beowulf DW]

Most Holy,

The Seekers are well aware of the part you played in the rebellion. You call me to the Grand Cathedral in the middle of the night on “urgent” business only to speak of trivial matters? And then, when I return to the White Spire, I discover chaos . . . and one of your agents in the midst of the apostates.

Did you think I would not notice? Did you believe yourself above repercussions for such acts? It was a dark day when the Chantry placed such an incapable woman upon the Sunburst Throne. I will not stand idle and watch you destroy what ages of tradition and righteousness have built.

In the twentieth year of the Divine Age, the Nevarran Accord was signed. The Seekers of Truth lowered our banner and agreed to serve as the Chantry’s right hand, and together we created the Circle of magi. With the Circle no more, I hereby declare the Accord null and void. Neither the Seekers of Truth nor the Templar Order recognize Chantry authority, and instead we will perform the Maker’s work as it was meant to be done, as we see fit.

Signed this day on the fortieth year of the Dragon Age,
Lord Seeker Lambert van Reeves

That was the Lord Seeker, the head of the Templar order, flipping the bird to the Divine simply for discreetly trying to help the mages. Every Knight-Commander and most of their Templars are following him. The fact of the matter is, if Elthina had decided to take a stand against the Templars, most of them would probably have backed Meredith against the mages, with a small minority defecting. The fact that the situation at the end of DA2 and during (presumably) most of DA3 is so bad suggests that most of the Templars are fed up with a Chantry (and a Divine) whose policy is to attempt to slowly and steadily improve the lot of the mages. If Elthina had come out and said that Meredith (and by extension, her Templars) were to blame for the tensions, there is no doubt in my mind that Meredith would have turned on Elthina. Meredith could claim that a blood mage is controlling the Grand Cleric, or something to that effect, and most of her drooling attack dogs would go along with her.

[Psyren]

Well if the Chantry can't even control their own Templars, congratulations - you've just proven Anders completely right in blowing the damn thing up and starting an all-out war for survival.

Where is that letter from btw? I didn't see anything like that in the game.

[Aux-Ash]

Psyren: It's from Asunder, the book.

As for our discussion... I'm beginning to think we'll simply have to agree to disagree. I don't see it leading anywhere.

[Giggling Ghast]

Which is why you tell her, you know, "removing one crazy woman could likely solve all of this" - not "we are on the way to destruction, take off every zig!"

I don't think the Chantry would agree that Meredith was solely the problem. Leliana states in Faith that the Divine believes a group of blood mages called the Resolutionists - a splinter faction of the Libertarians - are causing at least some of the trouble in Kirkwall, and she herself agrees with that statement.

Stating to Leliana that Meredith is the problem might lead the Divine to conclude that both the Kirkwall templars and the Circle of Magi have fallen into total disarray and an Exalted March is necessary. Really, the best thing is to tell the Divine to stay out of it.

[Beowulf DW]

Psyren: It's from Asunder, the book.

As for our discussion... I'm beginning to think we'll simply have to agree to disagree. I don't see it leading anywhere.

Yeah, it's not in the games, but I feel it does a magnificent job of illustrating the tensions within the Chantry leading up to the war. The Chantry under Justinia had been trying to improve the lot of the Circle, but they faced an uphill battle against centuries of tradition and entrenched hatred and bias.

Agreeing with the second point, as well. We seem to have reached an impasse.

[Psyren]

Psyren: It's from Asunder, the book.

The book that came out after the game, you mean? It seems like they were trying to put a patch out to justify Elthina's stupidity after the fact. I'm not buying it. (In more ways than one.)



As for our discussion... I'm beginning to think we'll simply have to agree to disagree. I don't see it leading anywhere.

Fine by me.


Really, the best thing is to tell the Divine to stay out of it.

If an Exalted March is necessary to remove Meredith, so be it. It only means that Anders' thesis statement was right - the Circle is indeed not a solution if one individual can degenerate the entire system so badly.

"A quick death now or a slow one later - I'd rather die fighting."

[Dienekes]

If an Exalted March is necessary to remove Meredith, so be it. It only means that Anders' thesis statement was right - the Circle is indeed not a solution if one individual can degenerate the entire system so badly.

"A quick death now or a slow one later - I'd rather die fighting."

I don't think just removing Meredith would solve the problem. You still have every other named mage and templar who doesn't go by Thrask or is related to Hawke.

The templars are filled with rapists, murderers, and straight up incompetents. The mages are brimming with blood mages, supporters of murderers, and are if possible even more violent and idiotic than the templars. If you're going to do an Exalted March it's probably best to burn the whole place down and start anew. Take the Roman method of dealing with such problems. Mind you, that's basically a pure evil thing to do, but it would solve the problem much better than getting rid of any one individual would.

[Psyren]

There are good mages and templars too. It's just with Meredith in charge they are forced to keep to back rooms and shadows, and the only ones that act openly are the ones in direct support or direct defiance of her methods (and thus, the Circle-As-Jail concept as a whole.)