Templars or Mages? And why did you choose one over the other?

[Arlen]

Just wondering what the prevailing preference is among players. While I know there is no real benefit or hindrance to choosing either, I think it would be fun to know.

[Kurosu]

The templar / mage argument is the biggest gray area of the franchice. Neither side is right or wrong .

When I first played DA: O and DA 2 when I was younger I instantly chose mages all the time since I wanted their freedom. Later I realised that their freedom has huge concequences and potential risks. But the current system can easily be abused ( see DA 2 ) .

The ideal solution to the templar - mage problem for me would be similar to the Circles, but with The Templars also being monitored by someone . Templars to feel like guardians , not like jail wardens.

[Arlen]

Originally posted by Kurosu:

The templar / mage argument is the biggest gray area of the franchice. Neither side is right or wrong .

When I first played DA: O and DA 2 when I was younger I instantly chose mages all the time since I wanted their freedom. Later I realised that their freedom has huge concequences and potential risks. But the current system can easily be abused ( see DA 2 ) .

The ideal solution to the templar - mage problem for me would be similar to the Circles, but with The Templars also being monitored by someone . Templars to feel like guardians , not like jail wardens.

Interesting take - But I believe the Chantry was supposed to originally keep oversight of the Templars, a check to their power so to speak. Which brings me to my next point, Power Currupts, and absolute power currupts absolutely. One can have the best of intentions, but given the power to enact and enforce those intentions, you ultimately remove free will. I also realize that this conversation is a tangent of my original post. 8 )

For the record - I usually choose the Templars. Not because I like them, or what they have become, because i am against authoritarian organizations, but because Templars are best suited to deal with a mage thats been taken over by a demon. By choosing the mages, I would be effectively eliminating Templars from the world, Mages are born, Templars are trained, and I cannot prevent a mage from growing into their power, I can train Templars to be compassionate and have empathy and to protect the Mage from the world, themselves, and if need be, as a last resort, to eliminate a mage that has succumbed to the lure of the demons.

Eventually, the Inquisition will succumb to the trappings of power, it is inevitable, as my Herald will eventually grow old, die, and be replcaced, and what it stood for will get twisted and warped by those trying to assume the mantle of inquisitor.

[EA Latium]

If I had to choose one, mages. I liked their struggle with its dangers and passion.

[Arlen]

Originally posted by EA Latium:

If I had to choose one, mages. I liked their struggle with its dangers and passion.

understandable.

[LukanGamer]

Mages, Templar are always failing at their job, take their job FAR to far, have no reason to be bad in either those areas other then maybeeee the select few that get addicted to lyrium but that differnt thing (unlike mages who have little control/choice near enslaved and the whole demons in their head thing).

[Abyss]

Templars (only in inq) and only because it’s my favourite introduction to Cole. Also I just like the mission better. But morally, I don’t think I could choose between them

[BoxMageOfOld]

TL;DR Templars because you have to start somewhere

Honestly I look at templars like the police or any type of law enforcement... They are necassary because yes most mages are good people... but there will always be evil mages wanting more because man is easily corrupted by power.

On the other hand templars are people too which means they are also easily corrupted by power. This is why the issue isn't mages or templars but the chantry itself failing at it's job of teaching templars, keeping templars in line, ect.

I usually side with templars and show compassion for mages pushing my choices towards reforming the chantry because if you only treat the symptoms the disease will continue to fester. The chantry in it's current form is the main issue not the mages or the templars... but you need the templars to manage rogue mages. The circle i count as part of the chantry problem because it's often treated as a prison and not a school! Like in my personal perspective the circles shouldn't be so isolated, they should be close to cities and towns, they should have jobs with their magic to help cultivate agriculture, save lives in disasters (like fire fighters), and so forth so the wall between the average person and the mages crumbles and gets rid of a lot of the hate and fear which in turn helps cultivate the templars into a guardian role rather than a warden role emotionally.

I will say mages ruling happens to usually be a bad idea due to how easy it is for them to use magic not just blood magic to secure a longer life and position of power as a tyrant than an average person... but I do feel mages should be allowed to help rule like have a say so and so forth to further get rid of discrimination and hatred.

This would also be good because if you had a kid who was a mage you could live near a circle instead of loosing your child forever which would allow a much healthier process for the young mages growing up which would make becoming a circle mage more of an honor than a cruel fate.

[Firehawk]

Mages, obviously. Anybody who's been in a similar position would understand how it feels to be treated like cockroaches - with Meredith going to the logical end of that mindset. What Anders has done was extreme, but he was also right in saying that without drastic actions nothing would change. There is no such thing as a bloodless revolution. History has, or should have, taught us that.

The Templar side also doesn't have anything that even comes close to the mage side, like the quest In Hushed Whispers.

[Arlen]

Originally posted by Firehawk:

Mages, obviously. Anybody who's been in a similar position would understand how it feels to be treated like cockroaches - with Meredith going to the logical end of that mindset. What Anders has done was extreme, but he was also right in saying that without drastic actions nothing would change. There is no such thing as a bloodless revolution. History has, or should have, taught us that.

The Templar side also doesn't have anything that even comes close to the mage side, like the quest In Hushed Whispers.

Interesting. So, the risk of Bood mages, and Power lusting mages is worth the risk of no Templar order.

[Firehawk]

Nice strawman argument.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman

[Arlen]

Originally posted by Firehawk:

Nice strawman argument.

The risk of bloodmages, demons let loose, and power hungry mages is more then a mere straw man, The Templars were formed specifically to combat those types of mages, and power is seductive. The lore of Dragon Age speaks of a time of unchecked mages, and what that meant to the general populace. Hell, your hero in all 3 games, deals with just that scenario. One could eliminate all the current mages in the world setting, and still more would be born, you cannot prevent that, what you CAN do is better train the Templars, and have oversight of their actions. to bring about some form of equity.

I can just point to one significant Mage you encounter in the first Game, Flemeth, and how she was able to have immortality. Would you want YOUR daughter to have her self be stolen? Think how powerful she was, and then imagine a coven of Flemmeth's, and what they can do to unpowered folks.

[Firehawk]

Thank you for admitting you have no arguments. You didn't even try to address any of my points and went straight for ad hominem attacks instead. Then again, I didn't expect more from you.

[Abyss]

I won't speak on any of the actual choice you make in game. But comparing the real world to a game is very problematic. I completely understand you for the record, Firehawk, but I also don't think this kind of "argument" can be made for a video game. The magic of the real world is that IF this was a real situation, you don't HAVE to pick a side, you can pick both or neither too. Improving both sides or completely neglecting the issue as a whole.
AKA it's a video game. It shouldn't cause anyone to base an opinion on someone based on their choice in it, when the only choices are A or B.

[Arlen]

Originally posted by Firehawk:

Thank you for admitting you have no arguments. You didn't even try to address any of my points and went straight for ad hominem attacks instead. Then again, I didn't expect more from you.

dude or dudette - I can rebut your shallow argument - but that would require me to go the real world route you took, and quite frankly, I play video games to escape from that.

So to simply rebut your argument - what the third reich did in the 1930's and 40's has no bearing on modern National Socialists. Not all of them are violent.

It's a video game, made up of fictitious fantasy tropes, no one in the chantry, wardens, or governments has the power to raze a city by themselves, if one of them goes mad, they can be dealth with. Mages have the innate power to raze a city at their fingertips, if one of them goes off the deep end, they are not easily dealt with. Get a few of them together, and countries could be overthrown. a mage is the equivalent of a nuclear weapon, governed only by their whims.

Without Templars, there is nothing stopping the mages from ruling the world, nor preventing possesed mages from wreaking havoc on the populace, except themselves. In this world that was created, Mages have to be checked, because that is the only way non mages can compete in the world.

[Firehawk]

Originally posted by Abyss:

I won't speak on any of the actual choice you make in game. But comparing the real world to a game is very problematic.

The fact that none of you are even attempting to address any of the points I made and instead are trying to single out one specific point's nature is much more problematic. It proves neither of you had any interest in actually countering the points I made or simply can't, because if you could, you would have.

You also seem to "forget" the fact that he called me out on my support for the mage's side, putting words in my mouth and pulling strawman arguments. This one sidedness brings your post into question.

I've provided both ingame and real life examples why billy's way of thinking is wrong. He admitted he could only argue back if he brought real life issues into the thread. That's as good as an admission that he has lost this "debate".

Originally posted by billybobtexan1000:

Without Templars, there is nothing stopping the mages from ruling the world, nor preventing possesed mages from wreaking havoc on the populace, except themselves. In this world that was created, Mages have to be checked, because that is the only way non mages can compete in the world.

Good day to you, my name is Slippery Slope fallacy! Pleased to make your acquaintance! You are very good at making logically flawed arguments. Keep it up!

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope