The Circle Tower? Templars? Really? (May contain some spoilers)

Remove all ads!

I'm beginning to become more annoyed by the whole Circle Tower/Templar establishment. Who are the Templars to declare that all with the gift of magic must be forced to live out their lives in the confines of the tower, where templars are watching day and night like policemen?

I understand the concern that an unchecked mage can be, but really, just because I was born a mage I shouldn't be allowed to live with my family? And moreover, the expectation that any and all mages should "turn themselves in" to become a permanent resident of the tower is preposterous. There is no way to govern this rule, because the templars don't have eyes in all places. The Dalish are a perfect example of a people that can easily escape the notice of the templars.

So I ask you? Are the templars/chantry the good guys? Or are they inappropriately trying to force their views upon the rest of the world??

 

Someone has just made a new character, I see.

They simply have no other choice. Although I personally am not a fan of the Chantry and their "Exalted Marches" (and they are inappropriately trying force their views upon the rest of the world), as far as magic goes mages are lucky that the templars even exist at all. You already know how much destruction just one abomination is capable of doing (consider Connor). There's simply no way of preventing mages from becoming abominations without killing every mage outright.
As far as good templars like Gregoir are concerned, if anyone could only offer a better alternative to this then they would probably lessen their vigil, given time. No one has, so far.

The Dalish are simply too difficult to track down and the Templars have difficulty dealing with them directly. And since no mention has been made of a Dalish abomination so far, I guess the Templars are content to just let them be for the time being.

Edit:

Spoiler

One thing that does strike me as outrageous is that both Templars/Mages actually deal with demons. They will place one on every apprentice who undergoes the Harrowing, as a last test. Now wonder good spirits abhor contact with mortals.

 

I think that the whole point is about moral ambiguity. Mages are dangerous so they need to be monitored but that also means depriving (powerful) individuals of their rights to a normal life and forcing them to live by strict rules in a closed environment.

Don't forget about Tranquil Mages who have an even worse fate but are rid of the demons and don't overlook the fact that Templars also poison themselves with lyrium getting addicted to it and ultimately losing their lives to that addiction.

Still, when you consider the alternative that is Blood Magic and the danger that Maleficars and Apostates may represent (it would be very naive to dismiss that they are indeed dangerous) you may wonder what other solution could be viable.

At least Templars don't act like Qunaris who are said to kill all Mages.

 

The other point is that the Templar's enforcement of their law appears not to be working very well. Apostate mages are a dime a dozen in the game. Every badguy seems to have a battallion of mages at his disposal (perhaps that has a lot to do with making combat interesting, but it's still there). Even the non-badguys have mages (banns, and so forth are known to have them).

And one need not be a mage to be dangerous. Determined non-mages can, and do, become plenty powerful, and wreak their share of havoc in Ferelden.

So why not judge people based on their actions, rather than deny those who've proven themselves responsible the right to pursue the life they wish?

Regarding the tranquil -- well, apparently the chantry doesn't protect people from cruel and unusual punishment, which is exactly what making someone tranquil is.

 

I think you summed pretty well the moral conundrum that magic users represent in the game. It's a very interesting topic and the game is much more interesting because of all the dilemmas that are thus introduced.

Think about the guild's quests. There are many quests in which you can take a middle road like the one in which you are to warn blood mages relatives.

Templars at best can be a reppressive law enforcement organization and at worst a facistic fanatical religious force. The fact that they use Mages, fear them and want to control them at the same time makes it all the more morally ambiguous.

 

The problem with trying to justify what the Templars do as ambiguous or a moral conundrum (or anything other than plain outrageous, really) is that it falls apart about 5 minutes into the Mage origin. Sure, there's this whole yadayada about there being no other way to contain mages, to make sure they don't become evil, to ensure demons don't control them, because dealing with demons is EVIL etc...

Oh wait. The Templars themselves are dealing with demons. Oops.

What really annoyed me is that this little nugget is never brought up again. You can't confront the Templars with it. You can't confront the chantry with it. You can't confront any of the top mages with it. In the face of all the accusations of Being Evil that they throw at Jowan (and at the PC for that matter) I found this very irritating. Jowan may have made a lot of very stupid decisions, but he's not evil at heart and he makes it pretty clear in the Redcliff segment. Consorting with demons in order to root out and kill any apprentices that also deal with demons, on the other hand...

 

(I'm going to side with the Templars but that is really for the sake of argument).

They have to subject new Mages to demons so they can know that they will in turn be able to resist the temptation that demons represent when the time comes. It's a sort of baptism of fire. There is no other way for them to find out what stuff apprentices are made of without subjecting them to the Harrowing.

It is indeed cruel but it serves a purpose according to their logic. Templars are all about justifying things in the name of the greater good. Hence they'd rather seal the tower and kill all mages than try to rescue the ones who didn't turn into abominations. It's a lot like the old phrase: "kill them all for god will know his own."

That being said if Mages had a free reign they would certainly create chaos and destruction and threaten Fereldan society as a whole. Without the Chantry and the Templars it could even be argued that Mages would be fighting each others for power over the land (certainly unleashing countless demons in the process).

 

It's not the cruelty so much as the hypocrisy that got to me. "We're going to test you to make sure you don't succumb to the temptation because dealing with demons is EVIL... but if we do it's alright! in the name of the greater good! but YOU are never allowed to do it! Ever! Not even for the greater good!"

It just doesn't work for me. Rather than coming across as "we'll do anything for the greater good" I see them as "we'll do whatever the hell we please". And there's hardly any ambiguity in this.

Also, "kill them all for god will know his own" is something I'd associate with fanaticism, not moral ambiguity

 

Oh yeah, but I had to type it anyway. I guess that planning to kill all the mages trapped in the Tower is a case of textbook fanaticism.

To be honest I can't stand those self righteous pompous templars so I shouldn't have tried to defend their point of view.

Man, I'd be a terrible lawyer.

 

On the contrary, you had me fooled for a minute. I thought you actually approved of all the stuff they do

 

Thanks, I must have done a pretty good job if I had you fooled for an entire minute!

I must roleplay a fanatical Templar like character some day, that should be entertaining.

 

I think Templars are needed, I'd just rather that they use their abilities to subdue the mages that actually "create chaos and destruction." The circle tower is where those mages should be held... as true prisoners. While good, Maker-fearing mages should be allowed a lot more options in how they live their lives.

When you consider that there are more mages roaming Ferelden rather than in the tower (at least, as far as I can tell there are), the current framework arguably isn't working. AND... with all those mages running around Ferelden, the level of chaos and destruction being sown by them doesn't seem to be out of control (keeping in mind that Ferelden is a generally chaotic place to begin with). So, let the tower imprison those who use their power in naughty ways. Let someone like Wynne get married if she so desires, have children, etc.

The chantry, with their templar underlings, is really a glorified cult if you ask me -- one that just happens to prevail throughout nearly all the land. Chanters who can speak nothing except the Chant of Light?? Who thought that was necessary.

 

To me the Chantry reminds me so much of the Catholic church and the Templars are its the Crusaders of sorts.

 

Munchkin, I think that was very much on purpose.

Marceror has a good point

Let me throw this general question out there. Is it actually likely that humans would create a fascist organization in response to a crisis and that his organization would carry on through the years as the Templars supposedly have?


The real world Crusades were started by an actual crisis-the Byzantine Empire loosing the "Holy Lands" to Islamic invaders and said Empire's request for aid from the Pope. So I guess it is possible....

But the theme terrible events happened in the past and in response society turned fascist strikes me as a bit contrived/used too readily for movies and games. Possibly because I've seen it used so often.

Without the Great Depression it is arguable Hitler would have become a minor, and ignored, political figure in Germany. So crisis can give fascism a chance. But, as FDR and the New Deal showed as a response to the same Great Depression, that doesn't mean fascists will automatically become the ruling group that will take power.




About the dangers that Mages may pose as individuals.... there are people in society that, if they want to be, can be much more dangerous in some fashion that other people. People who are highly skilled in combat (military veterans) are freely integrated into society and martial artists (the really capable ones) are too-though the latter is required to register their hands as dangerous weapons with the local police in at least some areas. Hackers that have been caught may be banned from using electronic devices for ____ number of years.

This may mean that it is possible people capable of greater than average destruction can live alongside other people in the real world-though I'll admit the power difference may be different between someone who could potentially kill other people in hand to hand combat and the average person and someone who can become an abomination and the average person.

 

It's pretty clear that it's the source of inspiration for the Chantry and the Templars. Still, in Thedas magic is real and demons do exist so the comparison has its limits.

Templars don't act because of faith alone. Although the Maker doesn't intervene (so much so that its existence can be doubted) the presence of demons threatening the material world is indeed real in Thedas.

 

As a side note, the way they implemented the Chantry makes it a very realistic religion.

1) The Maker is never seen working directly. The only miracle that we get to witness in the game is the curative power of the sacred ashes. However, its source isn't clear and it can still be dismissed as magic. There are also numerous fake artifacts or relics that people try to pass off as real.

2) The Chantry is involved in politics. It is also capable of both charity (offering shelter to refugees) and atrocities (persecuting mages). The templars are sometimes outright fanatics.

3) The Chant of Light contains myths about how the darkspawn came to be. However, the myths aren't confirmed by history and only serve to demonize the mages.

4) The Chant of Light, although presumably divine in origin, has been revised by church authorities at least once (a chanter in Denerim mentions this). Also, rather than being unambiguous and clear, it's open to interpretation (see the cult of Andraste).

That's all that comes to mind right now. There's a stark contrast between the Chantry and all the the one-sided religions in D&D.

 

First off, woot new gem and 1k posts! Finally.

A single abomination of is capable of killing off an entire village. That's only the weak ones - stronger ones, like Connor, can possibly wipe out cities. How would you react if you lived near someone who knew how to build a bomb that could possibly destroy everything in a 20 mile radius? Would you not fear that someone might try force that info off of him? Would you not fear that he might react to a situation by building such a weapon? You would be concerned for yourself and your family. However innocent or genuinely kind that "someone" is, you'd probably suggest that he be "kept somewhere safe for the good of all" anyway. That's what's happening with Ferelden and its mages.
Such drastic consequences simply require that drastic means be taken to prevent them. Unless someone comes up with a better idea.

 

What I said is because during my current play through I'm actually paying attention to everything everybody says. I noticed that some of the greeting by the reverned mother and blessing are so Catholic like. In fact one of them I almost fell off my couch becuase it was literally a Catholic prayer where the word God was replaced by "The Maker".

To me it is a good idea as more people could relate to it than the Gods of the FG Realms D&D games.

 

I think it's kind of cool to have a monotheistic fantasy setting if for no other reason than the fact that you really don't see that anywhere else. It's almost like creating a pantheon of deities is a requirement. How refreshing that Dragon Age has chosen to break that mold (even if the alternative didn't require a whole lot of creativity).

Even the Dwarves are created by the Maker, although they really don't pay him any homage (except for that one fellow in Orzammar who starts a chantry... and his handful of converts). The Paragons have really come to replace the role of a god in a lot of ways, although they are clearly not gods, just amazing and exceptional Dwarves. Or in the case of Branka, perhaps just a dwarf who had some revolutionary ideas, but was otherwise completely off her rocker.

 

The Templars don't deal or consort with demons, they merely expose the initiates to them. I know it can be argued that there's not much difference but I think there is morally. Mages are going to have to deal with demons at some stage so it's best if it happens in a controlled environment. Once you're happy that a mage can handle himself you can then think about sending him away from the tower, say to assist a bann.

I don't get the impression the templars make the rules. It seems to be the bishops/pope (equivalents) that decide things, the templars just carry them out. In modern times you could say the templars are the police/army and the main body of the Chantry is the government.

The Chantry is Christianity basically. I'm amazed Bioware hasn't had to put up with protests from the usual American zealot mob it's so transparent. It really emphasises a lot of the ambiguities with the religion. The lack of evidence and the reliance on documents that are known to be altered especially. Given that DA2 is probably going to be set in Orlais (it has far more detail given to it than anywhere else and is next door) I'm wondering how much more we'll see of the Chantry. After all, one of the two popes lives there.