I really like how you can decide your viewpoint for your background and sort of set up your own tale (ex: you could state you barely knew enchanter Lydia as a mage or say she was one of your instructors or one of your most dearest teachers.), they did a really spectacular job with this game, just wish it wasnt as much tedious farming.
It was cool, but not something amazing either, and it's one of the few things this game did well, as meaningless as it is. Most of your dialogue in this game is meaningless and has the same responses. Inquisition is a mediocre game at best.
I disagree with Vivienne's politics, but I understand why she has the views that she has. She was the lover of a duke, who gave her freedom outside of the Circle. She turned the position of Court Enchanter in to a fully-fledged advisory position, despite the ban on mages having political power. She has never really known any of the limitations imposed on typical mages, so of course she doesn't think there's anything wrong with the Circles.
Yeah, I agreed with you. At least, Vivienne wasn't in Kirkwall. The ancient system of Circle is clearly not the solution. The abuse of Tranquility, even Ameridan knew it.
Hey, if you take time to talk to her, she recognizes that the Circle had its problems and if elected as Divine she does reform the circle. She's not unsympathetic to the plight of Kirkwall's mages. She just felt that breaking from the Chantry immediately after the worst attack by an apostate in years was a pretty poor decision.
I don't really think its about her not knowing the limitations imposed on mages but rather the idea that through perseverance and dedications, one can overcome those limitations. Her line that exemplifies this form of reasoning is during a party conversations when she says 'A leash can be pulled on both ends'. From that, you can imply that while she seems unsympathetic for a mages plight, its doesn't come from actual obliviousness or ignorance but a form of anger or maybe distaste of actions taken. She rose to power even with all the limitations placed upon. She is distasteful that many didn't or try the same before taking that specific course of action.
Vivienne was one of those characters that I didn't like, in the sense of I didn't like her as a person. But it bugs me when people say she was a "bad character" - she was well written, well acted and provided a perspective we haven't been shown before with eloquent reasoning that, as much as you might disagree with her, you can't deny she has a point. I doubt I could ever count her as an actual friend like I could so many other companions in Dragon Age, but she was interesting to talk to, it makes sense that mages like her would exist and she added to the story. Inquisition was also the perfect place to introduce a character like her, since she wouldn't be caught dead with the Wardens and her interest in Hawke would have been limited even after they became the Champion (not to mention she'd have turned in/attempted to kill Merril and Anders within 2 minutes of meeting them). I'd quite like to see her talk to Fenris at some point though, I think it would be interesting - she is, at the same time, the mage who's views most align with his and EXACTLY what he hates about mages (a manipulative and opportunistic social climber who'd gladly walk across the backs of ten thousand peasants in high heels if it got her something she wanted).
@@aecides3203 I also never saw her as a real friend. Even though I did her mission and stuff. I think I would describe her as a valuable political connection.
No. She doesn't. Everything she says is to further her selfish goals. She has no point to make, she only says what she says and does what she does to amass power for herself, because she believes it is the only thing that justifies her existence. She has a deep inferiority complex, born out of her self-loathing as a mage. She believes that, as long as she can have power to lord over others, while simultaneously be a Chantry apologist, she can satisfy both her self-loathing and her need for superiority. She's a torn person at war with herself and the world, and no single sentence ouf of her mouth comes from any knowledge or empathy. If you want a more realistic view of mages, try Wynne or Niall. They knew better and had valid points about the dangers of magic.
@Umut Işık Taghiyev Because, while I believe Anders was completely in the right, he does have a tendency to downplay the dangers of magic, which can also be problematic. It's also not correct to act as if mages can't abuse their powers to a hilariously destructive degree. The problem is that it comes down to the individual. A murderer with a sword is bad, but a murdering mage is sadly worse, because magic is just that much more powerful. Anders was correct in destroying the Chantry and wanting freedom for all mages, but I'm against downplaying the very real (in Thedas) dangers of magic, too.
@@DraculaCronqvist - Right. All those in-game, in-universe, canon stories of mages being dangerous and murdering people for their own power, well, it was just Vivienne the entire time. That country that runs on blood magic and actual slavery? Pish. The ruling class of mages and only mages are the obvious victims. Because everything is black and white and you, of course, know best.
@Umut Işık Taghiyev - Yep. Absolutely no difference between a physical confrontation and... boiling someone alive from a distance with a snap of your fingers. No difference at all! And mind control? You can totally do that with a sword, everyone knows. Because a sword is the same thing as magic, of course!
I feel like Vivienne's comments about a Vashoth inquisitor are a little off...I've never seen a Qunari in circle robes if you know what I'm saying. I'm pretty sure Templars just straight up kill them rather than haul them off.
I think she's feigning knowledge on the Vashoth, as you say she would never have encountered any in the Circle. Especially with what she says about Vashoth mages having their tongues cut out - we have no evidence of this happening and Vashoth aren't any more vicious than humans and elves when it comes to their mages. I'd wager she's confusing Vashoth mages with Tal-Vashoth, some of whom might well still suffer that as a remnant of Qunari attitudes.
@@Max-qb2rw You remember Kirkwall where the sarabass had his mouth sewn shut and his chest impaled by chain links? I wouldn't put it past the qunari to cut out someones tongue. The circles thought their own treatement was bad.
@@xell6834 The Qunari do, at least sometimes? Cause Sten will bring it up as well I think. I imagine what Vashoth do varies from person to person, and Adaar's family did not.
Another example would actually come from Meredith. I always play a pro Templar hawke in DA2 (or side with templar's for self preservation). Meredith's instability actually comes from a really sad place. Basically her family tried to hide her sister from the circle only to be possessed and go on to kill seventy people before the templars could put her down. Those killed included Meredith's own family. I heard that story and thought: "no wonder she was so heavy fisted to put it lightly". I always also found it weird how people justified Ander's or even other blood mages by saying how bad they had it the circle and yet say Meredith's own story wasn't an excuse? She legit saw the worst case of what uncontrolled magic can bring and she probably feels as though the death of all those people and her sister are on her hands. Of course she went mad trying to prevent it again. And like with Connor, it all started with good intentions. They just wanted to protect their sister/daughter.
Tho, I always side with the Mages in DA2 (mostly because my Hawke would never side against Bethany) I agree with this. But one of the reasons could be because many do not read the Codex, and Meredith's backstory is only mentioned there, it's never mentioned in-game.
@@SeventhheavenDK It's after the mission when you have to find the mages who escaped the circle in the third act. I don't know if you have to side with Meredith in the begnnig. But I do recall even hearing the story on pro mage hawke playthrough
*"You are not the first to forget that the walls of our towers kept the wolves out as much as they kept us in."* This is the kind of line that I wish more people paid attention to in the Dragon Age fandom.
Except that do we ever see an example in the games of a templar protecting a mage from the mobs Viviene seems to be so afraid of? One could argue that Evangeline does try in the books, but that seems to be the only instance.
@@sunnyhill7919 "Minaeve was born into a Dalish clan. At the age of seven, she was cast out into the wilderness after displaying magical ability as her Dalish clan kept a limit on mages to avoid attracting too much attention. Shaken and malnourished, she eventually came upon a human village, but when the humans discovered her using magic to repel woodland predators, they attempted to kill her. The templars stepped in and she was taken to a mage Circle." dragonage.fandom.com/wiki/Minaeve
@@sunnyhill7919 The same thing almost happened to Wynne and Cole and the Templars saved both of them.. btw Mary Kirby herself said to me on Twitter that Vivienne is Pro-Circle because the Circle saved her from poverty/hunger. Cole even describes Vivienne as a child arriving the Circle of Magi for the first time: "A breath-caught smile from the Enchanter as the candle lights. *The walls are safe; she will never be hungry again* " " *The walls are safe.* " And let's not forget one of the first conversations we have with her: Vivienne: " *In MY OWN experience, nothing is more deadly to a young mage than a lack of knowledge.* " The Templars saved her from an angry mob too.
@@sunnyhill7919 I get the argument you're trying to make but this quote is talking about the common people not Templars. We see in nearly every game the reaction thst the commonfolk have to mages is usually suspicious at best and hostile at worst. Vivienne sees the Templars as the necessary vanguard against the outside world, which is has not treated mages very kindly in general.
I love the debates still persisting over mages and Templars. Honestly I think Cullen had the best idea, Cassandra too. And I do love Leliana’s ideals, but keeping mages safe while allowing them freedoms is good. I’m mostly pro mage myself but not tear down the circles completely kind. More like all of it needs reform.
@@ninethreefivesix Right? The word "Freedom" is not even mentioned on Cassandra's epilogue. That's why she leaves the Council and says that Vivienne is a tyrant, because Vivienne is a mage giving freedom to mages.
@@barbiecore_ that’s not why she says Vivienne is a tyrant, it might be part of it but Cassandra never really liked Vivienne, disagrees with her on just about every non-mage choice in the game, they are polar opposite people so of course she would hate her It wasn’t like Cassandra woke up and saw Vivienne giving mages the ability to be nobles and saw her as a tyrant JUST because of that
@@barbiecore_ No she calls Vivienne a tyrant due to her zero tolerance of mages outside of the circle making her a hypocrite as a divine when she oppresses those not protected by the circle and uses her political power to make less of influential people that aren't mages, she ends up coming off as a bit like a Tevinter magister with her policies, so of course the Nevaran would see her as a Tyrant.
I generally choose the ones that show that the Human Mage Inquisitor did not have special privileges in the Circle due to his nobility but was more bookish and close to his instructor. He also would prefer to see Mages in the ranks of the Chantry as well. Generally Pro-Circle but more in line with Cassandra than Vivienne.
Similar to how I'm playing my human mage. She's very much Andrastian and saw the circles as part of her works and a way to protect mages. Unfortunately, corruption on both sides and an unwillingness by mages to acknowledge people's fears about magic have caused it to rot in some places. She wants it restored and Cassandra at shows herself to understanding of the problems before and willing to help start over.
@@tylerwade3498 Vis is always right. I'm as much Pro-Circle as she is. Lol Mages need surveillance, but they also need their own space and both Viv and Wynne know that Viv is my fav character, and I love Wynne too.
I hate how the framing of this comes out that Vivienne is always right at the end. The game gives you such limited and bad dialogue that it makes you come off looking bad if you disagree with her. Trevelyan mage can't say they want a mage organization that trains mages but doesn't persecute them and is not under the Chantry and Templars. (i.e the College of Enchanters). The Dalish suddenly have the only three mages rule that was never said before this game and now abandon mage children. You know what was said before in past games about the Dalish? That they pretty much love their mages and that magic is dying out among the clans that there is never enough mages. Also, maybe the Dalish would have a better system if their country wasn't destroyed by Orlais and the Chantry forcing the Dalish into being nomads. Oh, and apparently Vashoth cut out the tongues of mages. Except here you are, a Vashoth mage who still has their tongue. I don't even think Vashoth actually have a distinct culture, do they? They just aren't a part of the Qun, so the Vashoth aren't a monolith.
As far as the Dalish go, the "three mages" thing has actually been in the game since DA:O (it's more implied than stated, but I get the impression it was in the writers minds to some extent from the start) - Lanaya mentions competing to become Zathrian's First and Merril talks in DA:2 about how Dalish mages are sent to another Clan if there's no need for one in their own. Up until Inquisition, the lore is just vague on what happens to Dalish mages if there's no need for them in ANY Clan, or if they don't earn a place as the Keeper's First/Second (for someone who faced rather stiff competition, Lanaya is notably the only other Mage in Zathrian's clan that we know of, though I guess you could blame the werewolves for that). All of that said, the games are also very consistent with the idea that the Dalish are *not* a united culture - they all consider themselves to be the "True Elves" and have some common customs like the gathering of the Clans and their Gods, but that's pretty much it. So, even if Vivienne had personally witnessed the Dalish slaughter a mage child because they already had a Keeper and 2 apprentices, that wouldn't mean the other Clans would do the same or even that they wouldn't be appalled by it. As for the Vashoth - yeah, the Vashoth are a people who have abandoned a specific culture, not created a new one. They could still follow the Qun to a greater or lesser degree, they could be Andrastian, atheistic or just not have given it any thought. They're essentially just small tribes/mercenary bands/lone individuals and the only reason they're grouped together is because the Qun gave them all a mean label. It's entirely possible (even likely) that many of these groups still cut out the tongues of mages like the Qunari do, but much like the Dalish applying what you see from one group of them to ALL of them would be like meeting a French person and assuming everyone in Europe is identical in customs, language, religion and philosophy.
The Herald already has the power to carry out whatever agenda they have. Vivienne, like all companions, are simply there to be an influence on the decisions the Herald/Inquisitor makes. The ability for companions to get their points across, uninterrupted, is crucial. Giving options to invalidate the companion ideals you don’t like defeats the purpose of them even having them in the first place.
@@illumicharlieno it doesn't, you can still be told different points of views and still knock them down. In Mass Effect 1, Bioware gets Ashley to explain why she has a bias against aliens, or at least the ones on the ship, and we can still knock her point down. There is no benefit to the player being sat down like a child and talked at while not being given ways to knock down another point of view. The writers and designers can't let their want to show a character's point of view completely run over the player, this just creates hate, which is why I blame bad design for why Viv and even Sara are hated.
@@SeventhheavenDK except for the part where none of that is correct....at all. His ONE big mistake is the one he seeks to undo. Not once does he ever indicate he intends to anything comparable to repeating it.
Whether you agree or disagree with her, the fact that the game always frames her as being right and never giving you the chance to point out flaws with her or her reasoning is a flaw in this games writing. This is probably the reason many people can't stand her.
What flaws in her reasoning? She dismantled every point she was approached with a smug but succinct and ultimately correct way. You can disagree with her, sure, but that's worlds different than "flaws in her reasoning." Honestly, this is a flaw in people's criticism of Vivienne. They think a good character is one that agrees with you or that represents a strawman of an argument you dislike. Vivienne is genuinely one of the best written characters in Inquisition, and her Orlesian ethnicity and unique background is a large part of it.
@@RashidMBey give me one time where the game actually lets you argue with her as a equal instead of making your character sound like a idiot, won't let you counterpoint her, or makes them present easily countered strawman arguments for more mage freedom. You can't. The only people who actually poke flaws in her and her logic are your companions. I could go on and on about how she and her points are wrong, such as her saying death is the only way to cure a abomination, or how she blames the mages for the rebellion when they only rebelled when they templars tried to kill them all in one of the dragon age books. But as I said above that's not actually the problem with Vivienne. The problem with Vivienne is that the game gives you no real way to disagree or counter any of her points (which are not as flawless as you claim), it will almost always present her as right and you as wrong and unreasonable despite the fact their are many things to say to counter point her but the game dosent let you. This is compounded with the other problem where, unlike every other optional companion, you can't kick her out what so ever. Once you recruit her you are stuck with her until the end of the game. If bioware had actually let us kick her out or take her down a peg, people wouldn't hate her as much. But as she is in inquisition, it makes people feel like she is a self insert for bioware to say what the correct opinion of the mage war is. It's one thing when you have companions not agree with you, it's another when the game makes you unable to insert influence on them, the core tenant of rpg's.
Other companions have convictions that they don’t fold on like spirits being people with Solas, slavery in Tevinter with Dorian, Sera’s views on elfyness, Blackwall with wardens, & Cassandra with the Chantry. The companions are meant to be their own people with their own perspectives. If the game gave dialogue options where the player can easily dismantle companions’ fundamental beliefs in order enforce their own opinions as correct, it would only lead to cheap, poorly written characters. Vivienne’s dialogue, like all companions’, exists simply to add another unique perspective to enrich your gameplay & establish these characters’ place in the world.
@@illumicharlie i see what both of y'all are saying and i agree a lot with ur sentiment! i love vivienne and appreciate her different perspective as a mage, but i also feel like there were ways bioware could've made the inquisitor seem more intellectually competent in their arguments against vivienne. it makes sense that she'd be easily prepared to counter pro-abolishment viewpoints because of her position as a politician and player of the orlesian game, but i don't feel like pro-mage inquisitors who have more nuanced, stronger reasons behind their advocacy get that much of a chance in debates with her.
@@illumicharlie The problem isn't that you can't change their mind, it's that the Inquisitor is never allowed to say anything in argument. Solas, Vivienne, and Dorian all say things I very much would've liked to argue about and had things to say, but the game gives me no option to. The biggest example of this is Dorian saying: "I've never been a slave, but neither have you" and the game doesn't let you say any more on the topic. It's infuriating, especially if you're an elf.
Love how Viviene is an expert on everything when by her own account she has "thridhand" sources. I get where she comes from but for someone who prides herself has a master of Royal intrigue she has a ratter ruder and insufferable attitude most of the time.
Vivienne is ambitious and devious. Unfortunately, she’s also wise, and has the most realistic plan to improve mage lives. Mages are powerful but vulnerable, hopelessly outnumbered by non-mages. Divine Vivienne gets mages *political* power. Remember, she killed a noble with magic at her party, openly, not in self-defense, and no one batted an eye. That’s political power. And it’s her ambition that empowers her to cultivate a system to get political power for mages. “Kill that mage! Oh wait, she’s a priest.” “Kill that mage! Oh wait, he’s a deacon.” “Kill that mage! Oh wait, (s)he’s a court advisor/researcher.” “Kill that mage! Oh wait, (s)he’s a healer with the Templars.” Until political power makes “kill the mages” an unattractive option for mobs, they need a system of protection - to teach them how to resist possession and to keep mobs at bay. As Sera says, the Circles provide meals and training so mages don’t starve or get lynched, and she’s seen both.
Actually she killed the marquis in self defense. the moment he touched his sword he was gonna fight the inquisitor. She just stopped him after he touched it. If vivienne just killed him before he touched his blade she would have been in trouble. Just like in the winter palace. (not gonna spoil it for anyone)
@@xell6834 She definitely set the Maquis up, but it wasn’t self-defense. The Maquis was challenging the Inquisitor, not Vivienne. She still killed a noble who was not threatening her. That is political power.
@@captmoroni She set the Marquis up because it was speculated that he made a racist comment to her. Also you can choose not to kill him. She also openly stated why she won't be implicated if someone accused her of killing him. Its not really political power it's just being intelligent in The Grand Game. So long as you don't get caught you can do as you please.
I hate how Vivienne goes from saying she doesn't know much about the Dalish or Vashoth Traditions to stating things as fact if you mention the Dalish nor Vashoth have templars. they really turn her into a puppet for the writing in that moment but thankfully it's just at Haven so the player can be contradicted when they're anti-templar.
She and Wynne are my favorite mage companions. I always thought it was a huge waste that the dangers of magic are not as well shown in gameplay and story as they are established in the lore of the franchise. Conner is one of the best examples. DA2 has good examples as well, but they are more sidelined. The circle is a much needed institution in a world that has magic. It’s a pity how the “community” often blindly go the route of anti-everything that has to do with the chantry, the templars, the circle etc. for being oppressive. They are in need of reform, but abolition is such an un-immersive way of dealing with the situation. Of course everyone can have their own little head-canons, but the fact of the matter is that magic poses a great danger for mages and non-mages alike. The circle, even in need of reform, ensures that people with the ability to spontaneously combust or calling forth demons are not only taught how to control their abilities, but also are kept from doing harm to a world that has next to no way of dealing with it. I don’t understand how a situation like the one with Conner isn’t an obvious example how mages are in need of special attention. And he wasn’t mistreated or abused in any way, his ordeal was the result of good intentions. The topic can be long and I understand that there are many ways to look at it, but the general opinion of “mages good, templars bad” is such a simplified, lackluster way to look at it.
I reject on principle every solution that aims to "protect people from themselves" and is "for the greater good", because the utilitarian ideology that espouses that line of thinking is, in my opinion, pure evil and always used to justify the very worst of atrocities. So yes, I *_DO_* say do away with the Circles.
@@BestWayKilla Well as they say, it’s not just to protect the mages from themselves and those who would hurt them out of fear, but to protect others too. I usually quickly get behind the idea that limiting people’s freedom for safety is a bad course. In the world of Dragon Age, I see the point though. Not that there aren’t any other possible solutions. But I do see the point. It’s not hard to see why they would establish a way of dealing with people who have power over random and possibly extremely destructive energies which often can’t be controlled willingly. It’s actually one of the most realistic ways to depict a world where magic is a thing.
@@Hawaiian_Pizza_Enjoyer Pro-Mages players are the worst part of the fandom. They are too emotional and 0 rational, they see everything as black and white, right or wrong, good or evil. The same people who support the full freedom for mages are the same people who would want them locked in a tower after seeing an abomination in real life.
@@BestWayKilla But that's because in the real world we've never had people who could at any moment of weakness, turn into the equivalent of a walking nuke, so the idea of "for the greater good" is rather hollow. In the Dragon Age universe, even if a Mage initially passes the harrowing they can still become an abomination at a later point in time. There's no if a mage screws up bad things will happen, its a matter of when and how many, and how much damage will they cause before anyone can stop them if all are allowed to walk freely.
@@insertname3977 That sounds like a justification for genociding them since you seem to think it's an inevitability that they'll all become abominations. So unless you're prepared to put every magic-attuned child to the sword the moment their affinity becomes apparent, you will never eliminate the risk. The "for the greater good" argument is always the same utilitarian justification for evil and denial of rights as it's always been, and yes, it does apply here.
I hate that people hate Vivienne. She is THE embodiment of the most rational perspective a mage can POSSIBLY have, regardless of any flaws associated with her or the Circle/Chantry/Templars/etc.. Look, for what it's worth, I DO wish for Mages to be free, but not without reason. Vivienne is the perfect foil to idealists without sense like Anders who would see Mages free, reason and caution be damned. I REALLY valued her warnings and advice, which simply ENRICHED my choice to support Fiona in this particular game, keeping in mind what could go wrong AND go right. I wish MORE people saw that Vivienne was hardly perfect, but she was a DAMN good, contextual foil to the average mage sympathizer..
YES! I love how her character is written, and that she has the viewpoint that she does because she's very intelligent and actually does think of the greater good for everyone, not just the mages. Talking to her and having her in my party made me see her side of it, and like you said it does make that whole aspect of the game so much richer. It isn't just a black and white issue, like everything there are grey zones where you sort of have to decide yourself what you value the most, freedom or safety. People get stuck on the fact that she has more of a snooty and eccentric personality, but to me she's an incredibly well-written example of a success-story! She started out as nothing, working her ass off in the Circles to get where she was before the mage/templar war, and to me that kind of warrants a little bit of entitlement, to a degree!
People who hate Vivienne just see the surface of things and can't look at the big picture. I myself don't hate her, but I do disagree with her on several aspects. Likely because I'm an idealist myself, especially when it comes to mages. Though I can also understand why mages must be viewed with caution and unfortunately scrutiny as well. There's a very good reason why her greatest fear is irrelevance. She's struggled so much to gain the position she has, despite the fact that she is a mage. She is treated with respect and fear, and utilizes both to their utmost effect to ensure she still has the place she's put so much of her very existence into preserving. Hence why she's also so ambitious. She doesn't want everything she's worked for in life to be rendered meaningless. She doesn't want to be some name that fades into nothingness as the world goes on. The thing I disagree with her most on is her ideas for the Circle. She's got far too much focus on the status quo when it was a great deal of what led to the uprising in Kirkwall. True, not every Circle was as horrible as Kirkwall's and not every Templar Order was as uncompromising as Kirkwall's, but from what we saw in Origins when the Circle fell because of Uldred, the whole system was a powder keg waiting to blow. Bringing it back may just end up causing more problems down the line. And it's thought provoking moments like this which make me appreciate Vivienne all the more. The fact she doesn't smile and nod with every pro-mage comment or statement just because she herself is a mage. She has her own thoughts and opinions on the matter and many of them have merit and truth, even if it is largely a painfully sad truth.
Really? They have Circles in Tevinter but only nominal Templars... And rampant blood magic, most often powered by the sacrifice of slaves, aka "mundanes" - those with no magic. Templars abilities were created for a reason.
@@givensurname1296: magic is magic and bad people are everywhere, vivienne is a bad person, hawk is a bad person, the inquisitor is a bad person, leliana is a bad person, Cassandra is a bad person. Everyone is a bad person. Look Morrigan she's must powerful that vivienne . The don't have problems with abomination because templars servant the magic and protec the mages
@@alejandroevl5890 - Um... Nothing you said applies to... Anything, really. "Templars are the problem because everyone is a bad person" ?? That's an opinion out of left field, dude.
@@givensurname1296 ; I don't say that. I say templar are the problem because they exist to protect humans against magic that make them a sword of damocle, you can't be keeper of mage and humans against mage . Look Meredith , look lambert , even cullen want to kill mage in origins . It was you how star to speak about slave sacrifice, mundanes and blood magic , I said there evil person everywhere
"In my experience...." yes, Vivienne, I'm sure all the mages who suffered in the Kirkwall Circle are soooo happy that you think you know what life is like in every Circle. It's pretty damn clear that your arrogant ass has never been at risk from creepy rapey templars *looks at Ser Alrik*
Vivienne couldn’t even attend the vote in Asunder while she lives in the same Empire it takes place. The First Enchanters from Antiva and the Anderfels made it.
Vivienne has no idea what circle mages endure. She may have grown up in a circle but it’s very clear that she hasn’t been in one in years. She’s a political advisor so she doesn’t have to be cooped up in a circle, and yet she thinks she can dictate if the circles are good or not.
She does know, that's why she tells you the biggest problem is that you're asking her about the circle when EVERY MAGES EXPERIENCE IS NOT THE SAME. I only find it stupid that she prefers the circle restored just because she had a good experience in it, though as divine mages get more freedom within the circles. Divine Leliana all the way 🤣
@@xell6834 That's like an example of a false dichotomy you'd hear during a lecture and go "nah, no way anyone would actually say that unironically, the professor's just overexaggerating". Like wow, I'm hoping I'm being wooshed right now.
@@mrmcawesome9746 Vivienne isn't as free as you would think. Any mage given permission from their first enchanter allows them to be outside of the circle. She was although free before she became first enchanter but she still needed first enchanters permission to do so. Connor is what happens when a mage doesn't receive proper training and passing the Howerring test. You can argue that the dalish mages don't have to but they also go through training to be a keeper. If not and they become possessed they will be killed.
Игры
I really like how you can decide your viewpoint for your background and sort of set up your own tale (ex: you could state you barely knew enchanter Lydia as a mage or say she was one of your instructors or one of your most dearest teachers.), they did a really spectacular job with this game, just wish it wasnt as much tedious farming.
It was cool, but not something amazing either, and it's one of the few things this game did well, as meaningless as it is.
Most of your dialogue in this game is meaningless and has the same responses.
Inquisition is a mediocre game at best.
I disagree with Vivienne's politics, but I understand why she has the views that she has. She was the lover of a duke, who gave her freedom outside of the Circle. She turned the position of Court Enchanter in to a fully-fledged advisory position, despite the ban on mages having political power. She has never really known any of the limitations imposed on typical mages, so of course she doesn't think there's anything wrong with the Circles.
Yeah, I agreed with you. At least, Vivienne wasn't in Kirkwall. The ancient system of Circle is clearly not the solution. The abuse of Tranquility, even Ameridan knew it.
Hey, if you take time to talk to her, she recognizes that the Circle had its problems and if elected as Divine she does reform the circle. She's not unsympathetic to the plight of Kirkwall's mages. She just felt that breaking from the Chantry immediately after the worst attack by an apostate in years was a pretty poor decision.
I don't really think its about her not knowing the limitations imposed on mages but rather the idea that through perseverance and dedications, one can overcome those limitations. Her line that exemplifies this form of reasoning is during a party conversations when she says 'A leash can be pulled on both ends'. From that, you can imply that while she seems unsympathetic for a mages plight, its doesn't come from actual obliviousness or ignorance but a form of anger or maybe distaste of actions taken. She rose to power even with all the limitations placed upon. She is distasteful that many didn't or try the same before taking that specific course of action.
Vivienne was one of those characters that I didn't like, in the sense of I didn't like her as a person. But it bugs me when people say she was a "bad character" - she was well written, well acted and provided a perspective we haven't been shown before with eloquent reasoning that, as much as you might disagree with her, you can't deny she has a point. I doubt I could ever count her as an actual friend like I could so many other companions in Dragon Age, but she was interesting to talk to, it makes sense that mages like her would exist and she added to the story. Inquisition was also the perfect place to introduce a character like her, since she wouldn't be caught dead with the Wardens and her interest in Hawke would have been limited even after they became the Champion (not to mention she'd have turned in/attempted to kill Merril and Anders within 2 minutes of meeting them).
I'd quite like to see her talk to Fenris at some point though, I think it would be interesting - she is, at the same time, the mage who's views most align with his and EXACTLY what he hates about mages (a manipulative and opportunistic social climber who'd gladly walk across the backs of ten thousand peasants in high heels if it got her something she wanted).
@@aecides3203 I also never saw her as a real friend. Even though I did her mission and stuff. I think I would describe her as a valuable political connection.
Love her or hate her, she has valid points.
@Umut Işık Taghiyev - Tells me all I need to know about you 😂
No. She doesn't. Everything she says is to further her selfish goals. She has no point to make, she only says what she says and does what she does to amass power for herself, because she believes it is the only thing that justifies her existence. She has a deep inferiority complex, born out of her self-loathing as a mage. She believes that, as long as she can have power to lord over others, while simultaneously be a Chantry apologist, she can satisfy both her self-loathing and her need for superiority. She's a torn person at war with herself and the world, and no single sentence ouf of her mouth comes from any knowledge or empathy. If you want a more realistic view of mages, try Wynne or Niall. They knew better and had valid points about the dangers of magic.
@Umut Işık Taghiyev Because, while I believe Anders was completely in the right, he does have a tendency to downplay the dangers of magic, which can also be problematic. It's also not correct to act as if mages can't abuse their powers to a hilariously destructive degree. The problem is that it comes down to the individual. A murderer with a sword is bad, but a murdering mage is sadly worse, because magic is just that much more powerful. Anders was correct in destroying the Chantry and wanting freedom for all mages, but I'm against downplaying the very real (in Thedas) dangers of magic, too.
@@DraculaCronqvist - Right. All those in-game, in-universe, canon stories of mages being dangerous and murdering people for their own power, well, it was just Vivienne the entire time. That country that runs on blood magic and actual slavery? Pish. The ruling class of mages and only mages are the obvious victims. Because everything is black and white and you, of course, know best.
@Umut Işık Taghiyev - Yep. Absolutely no difference between a physical confrontation and... boiling someone alive from a distance with a snap of your fingers. No difference at all! And mind control? You can totally do that with a sword, everyone knows. Because a sword is the same thing as magic, of course!
I feel like Vivienne's comments about a Vashoth inquisitor are a little off...I've never seen a Qunari in circle robes if you know what I'm saying. I'm pretty sure Templars just straight up kill them rather than haul them off.
I think she's feigning knowledge on the Vashoth, as you say she would never have encountered any in the Circle. Especially with what she says about Vashoth mages having their tongues cut out - we have no evidence of this happening and Vashoth aren't any more vicious than humans and elves when it comes to their mages. I'd wager she's confusing Vashoth mages with Tal-Vashoth, some of whom might well still suffer that as a remnant of Qunari attitudes.
Omegamax tal vashoth tend to be bandits and savages, but vashoth grow up pretty civilized
@@Max-qb2rw You remember Kirkwall where the sarabass had his mouth sewn shut and his chest impaled by chain links? I wouldn't put it past the qunari to cut out someones tongue. The circles thought their own treatement was bad.
Also, here you are, a Vashoth mage, without your tongue cut out.
@@xell6834 The Qunari do, at least sometimes? Cause Sten will bring it up as well I think. I imagine what Vashoth do varies from person to person, and Adaar's family did not.
Vivienne never met wynne then
Another example would actually come from Meredith. I always play a pro Templar hawke in DA2 (or side with templar's for self preservation). Meredith's instability actually comes from a really sad place.
Basically her family tried to hide her sister from the circle only to be possessed and go on to kill seventy people before the templars could put her down. Those killed included Meredith's own family. I heard that story and thought: "no wonder she was so heavy fisted to put it lightly". I always also found it weird how people justified Ander's or even other blood mages by saying how bad they had it the circle and yet say Meredith's own story wasn't an excuse? She legit saw the worst case of what uncontrolled magic can bring and she probably feels as though the death of all those people and her sister are on her hands. Of course she went mad trying to prevent it again.
And like with Connor, it all started with good intentions. They just wanted to protect their sister/daughter.
Tho, I always side with the Mages in DA2 (mostly because my Hawke would never side against Bethany) I agree with this.
But one of the reasons could be because many do not read the Codex, and Meredith's backstory is only mentioned there, it's never mentioned in-game.
@@SeventhheavenDK Not in codex, she does actually reveal her backstory in game. Even my pro mage hawke heard it.
@@ugan2. I don't remember she mentioning that.
When does she do it?
@@SeventhheavenDK It's after the mission when you have to find the mages who escaped the circle in the third act. I don't know if you have to side with Meredith in the begnnig. But I do recall even hearing the story on pro mage hawke playthrough
*"You are not the first to forget that the walls of our towers kept the wolves out as much as they kept us in."*
This is the kind of line that I wish more people paid attention to in the Dragon Age fandom.
Right?!
Except that do we ever see an example in the games of a templar protecting a mage from the mobs Viviene seems to be so afraid of? One could argue that Evangeline does try in the books, but that seems to be the only instance.
@@sunnyhill7919 "Minaeve was born into a Dalish clan. At the age of seven, she was cast out into the wilderness after displaying magical ability as her Dalish clan kept a limit on mages to avoid attracting too much attention. Shaken and malnourished, she eventually came upon a human village, but when the humans discovered her using magic to repel woodland predators, they attempted to kill her. The templars stepped in and she was taken to a mage Circle."
dragonage.fandom.com/wiki/Minaeve
@@sunnyhill7919 The same thing almost happened to Wynne and Cole and the Templars saved both of them.. btw Mary Kirby herself said to me on Twitter that Vivienne is Pro-Circle because the Circle saved her from poverty/hunger. Cole even describes Vivienne as a child arriving the Circle of Magi for the first time: "A breath-caught smile from the Enchanter as the candle lights. *The walls are safe; she will never be hungry again* "
" *The walls are safe.* " And let's not forget one of the first conversations we have with her:
Vivienne: " *In MY OWN experience, nothing is more deadly to a young mage than a lack of knowledge.* " The Templars saved her from an angry mob too.
@@sunnyhill7919 I get the argument you're trying to make but this quote is talking about the common people not Templars. We see in nearly every game the reaction thst the commonfolk have to mages is usually suspicious at best and hostile at worst. Vivienne sees the Templars as the necessary vanguard against the outside world, which is has not treated mages very kindly in general.
I love the debates still persisting over mages and Templars. Honestly I think Cullen had the best idea, Cassandra too. And I do love Leliana’s ideals, but keeping mages safe while allowing them freedoms is good. I’m mostly pro mage myself but not tear down the circles completely kind. More like all of it needs reform.
Vivienne reforms the circles though. She also gives them more freedom and political power. Cassandra does the least reforming of the 3.
@@ninethreefivesix Right? The word "Freedom" is not even mentioned on Cassandra's epilogue. That's why she leaves the Council and says that Vivienne is a tyrant, because Vivienne is a mage giving freedom to mages.
@@barbiecore_ that’s not why she says Vivienne is a tyrant, it might be part of it but Cassandra never really liked Vivienne, disagrees with her on just about every non-mage choice in the game, they are polar opposite people so of course she would hate her
It wasn’t like Cassandra woke up and saw Vivienne giving mages the ability to be nobles and saw her as a tyrant JUST because of that
@@barbiecore_ No she calls Vivienne a tyrant due to her zero tolerance of mages outside of the circle making her a hypocrite as a divine when she oppresses those not protected by the circle and uses her political power to make less of influential people that aren't mages, she ends up coming off as a bit like a Tevinter magister with her policies, so of course the Nevaran would see her as a Tyrant.
Loved your fashion mod's on PC version?
I love her so much. Even if you disagree with her, there is much wisdom behind her façade. Even Solas admits this.
A.J. Hero yeah... that she is MADE OF PURE 100% GRADE BITCH!
***** *yawn* 2/10 If you hate her so much just don't recruit her. Simple.
She has a charm to her,But She is rude to Cole,No one should be rude to Cole
A ridiculously gay guy agreed. That’s part of my problem with Sera.
@@aj.hero33 I hate her too, but its one of those you love to hate her type of character if that makes any sense
Wow were did you get that amor?
I generally choose the ones that show that the Human Mage Inquisitor did not have special privileges in the Circle due to his nobility but was more bookish and close to his instructor. He also would prefer to see Mages in the ranks of the Chantry as well. Generally Pro-Circle but more in line with Cassandra than Vivienne.
Similar to how I'm playing my human mage. She's very much Andrastian and saw the circles as part of her works and a way to protect mages. Unfortunately, corruption on both sides and an unwillingness by mages to acknowledge people's fears about magic have caused it to rot in some places. She wants it restored and Cassandra at shows herself to understanding of the problems before and willing to help start over.
Vibe Checking Gods is every mage's responsibility. Gotta keep those bastards on their toes.
Shes right
Loosely shes right wynne is really right
@@tylerwade3498 Both of them are really right.
@@barbiecore_ no mages need surveillance sorry
Listen closely vivienne is right and wynnes my favorite character
@@tylerwade3498 Vis is always right. I'm as much Pro-Circle as she is. Lol
Mages need surveillance, but they also need their own space and both Viv and Wynne know that
Viv is my fav character, and I love Wynne too.
Vivienne told them the truth and they hate her for it.
I hate how the framing of this comes out that Vivienne is always right at the end. The game gives you such limited and bad dialogue that it makes you come off looking bad if you disagree with her. Trevelyan mage can't say they want a mage organization that trains mages but doesn't persecute them and is not under the Chantry and Templars. (i.e the College of Enchanters). The Dalish suddenly have the only three mages rule that was never said before this game and now abandon mage children. You know what was said before in past games about the Dalish? That they pretty much love their mages and that magic is dying out among the clans that there is never enough mages. Also, maybe the Dalish would have a better system if their country wasn't destroyed by Orlais and the Chantry forcing the Dalish into being nomads. Oh, and apparently Vashoth cut out the tongues of mages. Except here you are, a Vashoth mage who still has their tongue. I don't even think Vashoth actually have a distinct culture, do they? They just aren't a part of the Qun, so the Vashoth aren't a monolith.
Yeah, I thought that was really bizarre.
One word: RETCON.
As far as the Dalish go, the "three mages" thing has actually been in the game since DA:O (it's more implied than stated, but I get the impression it was in the writers minds to some extent from the start) - Lanaya mentions competing to become Zathrian's First and Merril talks in DA:2 about how Dalish mages are sent to another Clan if there's no need for one in their own. Up until Inquisition, the lore is just vague on what happens to Dalish mages if there's no need for them in ANY Clan, or if they don't earn a place as the Keeper's First/Second (for someone who faced rather stiff competition, Lanaya is notably the only other Mage in Zathrian's clan that we know of, though I guess you could blame the werewolves for that).
All of that said, the games are also very consistent with the idea that the Dalish are *not* a united culture - they all consider themselves to be the "True Elves" and have some common customs like the gathering of the Clans and their Gods, but that's pretty much it. So, even if Vivienne had personally witnessed the Dalish slaughter a mage child because they already had a Keeper and 2 apprentices, that wouldn't mean the other Clans would do the same or even that they wouldn't be appalled by it.
As for the Vashoth - yeah, the Vashoth are a people who have abandoned a specific culture, not created a new one. They could still follow the Qun to a greater or lesser degree, they could be Andrastian, atheistic or just not have given it any thought. They're essentially just small tribes/mercenary bands/lone individuals and the only reason they're grouped together is because the Qun gave them all a mean label. It's entirely possible (even likely) that many of these groups still cut out the tongues of mages like the Qunari do, but much like the Dalish applying what you see from one group of them to ALL of them would be like meeting a French person and assuming everyone in Europe is identical in customs, language, religion and philosophy.
The Herald already has the power to carry out whatever agenda they have. Vivienne, like all companions, are simply there to be an influence on the decisions the Herald/Inquisitor makes. The ability for companions to get their points across, uninterrupted, is crucial. Giving options to invalidate the companion ideals you don’t like defeats the purpose of them even having them in the first place.
@@illumicharlieno it doesn't, you can still be told different points of views and still knock them down.
In Mass Effect 1, Bioware gets Ashley to explain why she has a bias against aliens, or at least the ones on the ship, and we can still knock her point down.
There is no benefit to the player being sat down like a child and talked at while not being given ways to knock down another point of view.
The writers and designers can't let their want to show a character's point of view completely run over the player, this just creates hate, which is why I blame bad design for why Viv and even Sara are hated.
Dirthara-ma. May you learn.
🙄yes I remember who says that, that one narrow-minded elven egghead who hasn't learned from his mistakes and repeats them again and again.
@@SeventhheavenDK Lol Solas did not invent "dirthara-ma"
@@SeventhheavenDK except for the part where none of that is correct....at all.
His ONE big mistake is the one he seeks to undo. Not once does he ever indicate he intends to anything comparable to repeating it.
Whether you agree or disagree with her, the fact that the game always frames her as being right and never giving you the chance to point out flaws with her or her reasoning is a flaw in this games writing. This is probably the reason many people can't stand her.
What flaws in her reasoning? She dismantled every point she was approached with a smug but succinct and ultimately correct way. You can disagree with her, sure, but that's worlds different than "flaws in her reasoning."
Honestly, this is a flaw in people's criticism of Vivienne. They think a good character is one that agrees with you or that represents a strawman of an argument you dislike. Vivienne is genuinely one of the best written characters in Inquisition, and her Orlesian ethnicity and unique background is a large part of it.
@@RashidMBey give me one time where the game actually lets you argue with her as a equal instead of making your character sound like a idiot, won't let you counterpoint her, or makes them present easily countered strawman arguments for more mage freedom. You can't. The only people who actually poke flaws in her and her logic are your companions.
I could go on and on about how she and her points are wrong, such as her saying death is the only way to cure a abomination, or how she blames the mages for the rebellion when they only rebelled when they templars tried to kill them all in one of the dragon age books. But as I said above that's not actually the problem with Vivienne.
The problem with Vivienne is that the game gives you no real way to disagree or counter any of her points (which are not as flawless as you claim), it will almost always present her as right and you as wrong and unreasonable despite the fact their are many things to say to counter point her but the game dosent let you. This is compounded with the other problem where, unlike every other optional companion, you can't kick her out what so ever. Once you recruit her you are stuck with her until the end of the game.
If bioware had actually let us kick her out or take her down a peg, people wouldn't hate her as much. But as she is in inquisition, it makes people feel like she is a self insert for bioware to say what the correct opinion of the mage war is. It's one thing when you have companions not agree with you, it's another when the game makes you unable to insert influence on them, the core tenant of rpg's.
Other companions have convictions that they don’t fold on like spirits being people with Solas, slavery in Tevinter with Dorian, Sera’s views on elfyness, Blackwall with wardens, & Cassandra with the Chantry.
The companions are meant to be their own people with their own perspectives. If the game gave dialogue options where the player can easily dismantle companions’ fundamental beliefs in order enforce their own opinions as correct, it would only lead to cheap, poorly written characters. Vivienne’s dialogue, like all companions’, exists simply to add another unique perspective to enrich your gameplay & establish these characters’ place in the world.
@@illumicharlie i see what both of y'all are saying and i agree a lot with ur sentiment! i love vivienne and appreciate her different perspective as a mage, but i also feel like there were ways bioware could've made the inquisitor seem more intellectually competent in their arguments against vivienne. it makes sense that she'd be easily prepared to counter pro-abolishment viewpoints because of her position as a politician and player of the orlesian game, but i don't feel like pro-mage inquisitors who have more nuanced, stronger reasons behind their advocacy get that much of a chance in debates with her.
@@illumicharlie The problem isn't that you can't change their mind, it's that the Inquisitor is never allowed to say anything in argument. Solas, Vivienne, and Dorian all say things I very much would've liked to argue about and had things to say, but the game gives me no option to.
The biggest example of this is Dorian saying: "I've never been a slave, but neither have you" and the game doesn't let you say any more on the topic. It's infuriating, especially if you're an elf.
Love how Viviene is an expert on everything when by her own account she has "thridhand" sources. I get where she comes from but for someone who prides herself has a master of Royal intrigue she has a ratter ruder and insufferable attitude most of the time.
Vivienne is ambitious and devious. Unfortunately, she’s also wise, and has the most realistic plan to improve mage lives. Mages are powerful but vulnerable, hopelessly outnumbered by non-mages. Divine Vivienne gets mages *political* power. Remember, she killed a noble with magic at her party, openly, not in self-defense, and no one batted an eye. That’s political power. And it’s her ambition that empowers her to cultivate a system to get political power for mages.
“Kill that mage! Oh wait, she’s a priest.”
“Kill that mage! Oh wait, he’s a deacon.”
“Kill that mage! Oh wait, (s)he’s a court advisor/researcher.”
“Kill that mage! Oh wait, (s)he’s a healer with the Templars.”
Until political power makes “kill the mages” an unattractive option for mobs, they need a system of protection - to teach them how to resist possession and to keep mobs at bay. As Sera says, the Circles provide meals and training so mages don’t starve or get lynched, and she’s seen both.
Actually she killed the marquis in self defense. the moment he touched his sword he was gonna fight the inquisitor. She just stopped him after he touched it. If vivienne just killed him before he touched his blade she would have been in trouble. Just like in the winter palace. (not gonna spoil it for anyone)
@@xell6834 She definitely set the Maquis up, but it wasn’t self-defense. The Maquis was challenging the Inquisitor, not Vivienne. She still killed a noble who was not threatening her. That is political power.
@@captmoroni She set the Marquis up because it was speculated that he made a racist comment to her. Also you can choose not to kill him. She also openly stated why she won't be implicated if someone accused her of killing him. Its not really political power it's just being intelligent in The Grand Game. So long as you don't get caught you can do as you please.
@@captmoroni she literally asked the inquisitor if he wanted the marquis dead. She didn’t just kill him, she acted as the inquisitor’s blade
@@xell6834: soo the mages have 3 options be a prostitute of the noble or be a slave, or a priest in the circle. Beautiful, that's simply beautiful
I hate how Vivienne goes from saying she doesn't know much about the Dalish or Vashoth Traditions to stating things as fact if you mention the Dalish nor Vashoth have templars. they really turn her into a puppet for the writing in that moment but thankfully it's just at Haven so the player can be contradicted when they're anti-templar.
She and Wynne are my favorite mage companions. I always thought it was a huge waste that the dangers of magic are not as well shown in gameplay and story as they are established in the lore of the franchise. Conner is one of the best examples. DA2 has good examples as well, but they are more sidelined. The circle is a much needed institution in a world that has magic. It’s a pity how the “community” often blindly go the route of anti-everything that has to do with the chantry, the templars, the circle etc. for being oppressive. They are in need of reform, but abolition is such an un-immersive way of dealing with the situation. Of course everyone can have their own little head-canons, but the fact of the matter is that magic poses a great danger for mages and non-mages alike. The circle, even in need of reform, ensures that people with the ability to spontaneously combust or calling forth demons are not only taught how to control their abilities, but also are kept from doing harm to a world that has next to no way of dealing with it. I don’t understand how a situation like the one with Conner isn’t an obvious example how mages are in need of special attention. And he wasn’t mistreated or abused in any way, his ordeal was the result of good intentions. The topic can be long and I understand that there are many ways to look at it, but the general opinion of “mages good, templars bad” is such a simplified, lackluster way to look at it.
I reject on principle every solution that aims to "protect people from themselves" and is "for the greater good", because the utilitarian ideology that espouses that line of thinking is, in my opinion, pure evil and always used to justify the very worst of atrocities. So yes, I *_DO_* say do away with the Circles.
@@BestWayKilla
Well as they say, it’s not just to protect the mages from themselves and those who would hurt them out of fear, but to protect others too.
I usually quickly get behind the idea that limiting people’s freedom for safety is a bad course. In the world of Dragon Age, I see the point though. Not that there aren’t any other possible solutions. But I do see the point. It’s not hard to see why they would establish a way of dealing with people who have power over random and possibly extremely destructive energies which often can’t be controlled willingly. It’s actually one of the most realistic ways to depict a world where magic is a thing.
@@Hawaiian_Pizza_Enjoyer Pro-Mages players are the worst part of the fandom. They are too emotional and 0 rational, they see everything as black and white, right or wrong, good or evil. The same people who support the full freedom for mages are the same people who would want them locked in a tower after seeing an abomination in real life.
@@BestWayKilla But that's because in the real world we've never had people who could at any moment of weakness, turn into the equivalent of a walking nuke, so the idea of "for the greater good" is rather hollow.
In the Dragon Age universe, even if a Mage initially passes the harrowing they can still become an abomination at a later point in time. There's no if a mage screws up bad things will happen, its a matter of when and how many, and how much damage will they cause before anyone can stop them if all are allowed to walk freely.
@@insertname3977 That sounds like a justification for genociding them since you seem to think it's an inevitability that they'll all become abominations. So unless you're prepared to put every magic-attuned child to the sword the moment their affinity becomes apparent, you will never eliminate the risk. The "for the greater good" argument is always the same utilitarian justification for evil and denial of rights as it's always been, and yes, it does apply here.
Vivienne burn and points
What about dwarves?
Yeah but I doubt that she just doesn't talk to them here.
sgtpaintbrush These are only mage Inquisitors
Ah okay, I Dany does this with dwarves to.
Lol
I hate that people hate Vivienne. She is THE embodiment of the most rational perspective a mage can POSSIBLY have, regardless of any flaws associated with her or the Circle/Chantry/Templars/etc..
Look, for what it's worth, I DO wish for Mages to be free, but not without reason. Vivienne is the perfect foil to idealists without sense like Anders who would see Mages free, reason and caution be damned. I REALLY valued her warnings and advice, which simply ENRICHED my choice to support Fiona in this particular game, keeping in mind what could go wrong AND go right. I wish MORE people saw that Vivienne was hardly perfect, but she was a DAMN good, contextual foil to the average mage sympathizer..
YES! I love how her character is written, and that she has the viewpoint that she does because she's very intelligent and actually does think of the greater good for everyone, not just the mages. Talking to her and having her in my party made me see her side of it, and like you said it does make that whole aspect of the game so much richer. It isn't just a black and white issue, like everything there are grey zones where you sort of have to decide yourself what you value the most, freedom or safety.
People get stuck on the fact that she has more of a snooty and eccentric personality, but to me she's an incredibly well-written example of a success-story! She started out as nothing, working her ass off in the Circles to get where she was before the mage/templar war, and to me that kind of warrants a little bit of entitlement, to a degree!
People who hate Vivienne just see the surface of things and can't look at the big picture. I myself don't hate her, but I do disagree with her on several aspects. Likely because I'm an idealist myself, especially when it comes to mages. Though I can also understand why mages must be viewed with caution and unfortunately scrutiny as well. There's a very good reason why her greatest fear is irrelevance. She's struggled so much to gain the position she has, despite the fact that she is a mage. She is treated with respect and fear, and utilizes both to their utmost effect to ensure she still has the place she's put so much of her very existence into preserving. Hence why she's also so ambitious. She doesn't want everything she's worked for in life to be rendered meaningless. She doesn't want to be some name that fades into nothingness as the world goes on.
The thing I disagree with her most on is her ideas for the Circle. She's got far too much focus on the status quo when it was a great deal of what led to the uprising in Kirkwall. True, not every Circle was as horrible as Kirkwall's and not every Templar Order was as uncompromising as Kirkwall's, but from what we saw in Origins when the Circle fell because of Uldred, the whole system was a powder keg waiting to blow. Bringing it back may just end up causing more problems down the line. And it's thought provoking moments like this which make me appreciate Vivienne all the more. The fact she doesn't smile and nod with every pro-mage comment or statement just because she herself is a mage. She has her own thoughts and opinions on the matter and many of them have merit and truth, even if it is largely a painfully sad truth.
The problem is not the circle , the problem are the templars
Really? They have Circles in Tevinter but only nominal Templars... And rampant blood magic, most often powered by the sacrifice of slaves, aka "mundanes" - those with no magic.
Templars abilities were created for a reason.
@@givensurname1296: magic is magic and bad people are everywhere, vivienne is a bad person, hawk is a bad person, the inquisitor is a bad person, leliana is a bad person, Cassandra is a bad person. Everyone is a bad person. Look Morrigan she's must powerful that vivienne .
The don't have problems with abomination because templars servant the magic and protec the mages
@@givensurname1296 : vivienne think Meredith was right in kill everyone in is the circle
@@alejandroevl5890 - Um... Nothing you said applies to... Anything, really.
"Templars are the problem because everyone is a bad person" ?? That's an opinion out of left field, dude.
@@givensurname1296 ; I don't say that. I say templar are the problem because they exist to protect humans against magic that make them a sword of damocle, you can't be keeper of mage and humans against mage . Look Meredith , look lambert , even cullen want to kill mage in origins .
It was you how star to speak about slave sacrifice, mundanes and blood magic , I said there evil person everywhere
"In my experience...." yes, Vivienne, I'm sure all the mages who suffered in the Kirkwall Circle are soooo happy that you think you know what life is like in every Circle. It's pretty damn clear that your arrogant ass has never been at risk from creepy rapey templars *looks at Ser Alrik*
Vivienne couldn’t even attend the vote in Asunder while she lives in the same Empire it takes place. The First Enchanters from Antiva and the Anderfels made it.
Vivienne has no idea what circle mages endure. She may have grown up in a circle but it’s very clear that she hasn’t been in one in years. She’s a political advisor so she doesn’t have to be cooped up in a circle, and yet she thinks she can dictate if the circles are good or not.
She does know, that's why she tells you the biggest problem is that you're asking her about the circle when EVERY MAGES EXPERIENCE IS NOT THE SAME.
I only find it stupid that she prefers the circle restored just because she had a good experience in it, though as divine mages get more freedom within the circles. Divine Leliana all the way 🤣
@@decim3515 It because the circles also protect mages.
@i dont get people like how can you be so stoopid Either that or you get Connor from redcliffe in DA:Origins all over the place.
@@xell6834 That's like an example of a false dichotomy you'd hear during a lecture and go "nah, no way anyone would actually say that unironically, the professor's just overexaggerating". Like wow, I'm hoping I'm being wooshed right now.
@@mrmcawesome9746 Vivienne isn't as free as you would think. Any mage given permission from their first enchanter allows them to be outside of the circle. She was although free before she became first enchanter but she still needed first enchanters permission to do so. Connor is what happens when a mage doesn't receive proper training and passing the Howerring test. You can argue that the dalish mages don't have to but they also go through training to be a keeper. If not and they become possessed they will be killed.
Vivienne was my Divine. Stern, authoritative