Not sure if I should make a separate comment or reply to this one, but I do have a character in mind with a similar issue. (At least for me.) Thoughts on Blackwall? I see a lot of people online that like him and his romance, but I just don't. He is fine enough if you don't romance him but if you do then he sleeps with Inky before he even tells you his real name. Sure, he takes you out and tries to tell you but just bring himself to do so. I don't know, it rubs be the wrong way. Then after the deed, he runs away to Orlais to turn himself in because he feels guilty about lying to you... Like dude, tell her ...THE... TRUTH!
He's an interesting case. Honestly with him I really think it's up to interpretation. Solas does the same thing and (if you choose to) will sleep with Inky without telling her, and will even take her valaslin without telling her what he is, which idk the valaslin I feel has some context considering he has a bias about it's past. It depends on how much you're personally willing to forgive from a partner about lying.
@@Kreetin7 Well Solas is a whole other issue, but does he sleep with you in game? If I remember correctly there is no "bedroom scene" with Solas, unlike every other romancable character. (With the exception of Josephine I think.) So whether or not they did is left up to interpretation, unless I'm forgetting a scene. Which is possible. Solas might be a monster hell bent on destroying the world and everyone in it and he might break your character's heart before it gets too serious between you, but at least respects you and he doesn't leave you naked in a barn and run off to basically commit suicide because he feels guilty lying. Blackwall isn't an ancient elf or a god of trickery and lies, he's just a man. Maybe that's why I'm harder on him, because while he has done bad things in is past my character would have forgiven him if he had just told her. I don't agree with Solas, but I get why he lies. There's no good why to say, "Hey, I want kill everyone in this world to bring my people back. You cool with that?" =3
I think Logain, I think I spelled that wrong, counts under this if you read the books and hear how others speak of the situation. Unless it was a peek at Solas’ character when he spoke about Ostegar.
I don't know, I actually love his whole character arc. Makes total sense to me. It's like a 13 year old boy who see's police/military as pure heroes and doesn't have the mental capacity to realize that it's much deeper than that. Then you get to origins and he's a young man clearly conflicted with what he wants to believe as the truth and the actual truth. He sympathizes with the mages in the circle and knows that he himself is not a bad guy and by proxy wants to believe that the templar's hes looked up to are not bad people either. His response after the traumatic event is both normal and unsurprising. He becomes an extremist but eventually through meredith's actions starts to question his beliefs again. By the time we get to inquisition there appears to be a sizable time jump and he has clearly extricated himself from any specific groups. IMO by this point Cullen is finally a full grown man with both the life experience and maturity to make his own decisions. I can't knock him bc he ultimately lands on the truth, which is that both groups are flawed and all people have the capacity to be good, bad, or inbetween. I think it's clear he see's himself as the inbetween and punishes himself for it repeatedly. He has left the templar order by his own volition and is willing to accept any consequence that brings including the withdrawals and potential death. He is willing to die for what he believes is right, just like that 13 year old boy who just wanted to be a hero. This is very apparent when you romance him. Cullen expresses several times that he feels undeserving of that hero title as well as the inquisitors love. He's still punishing himself for what he's done. When he pushes for a templar alliance I saw it more so as a chess move being that he knows them much better and finds them more predictable than the mages, and not any sort of declaration that he still supports them in anyway. I always choose the mages and in the end he really doesn't care. All that to say, I think he was a very well done morally grey character, and I'm probably biased bc well.. thats my man 🤣 But! I really liked your video, you have compelling arguments and are well spoken. I would definitely watch more.
Cullen is a guy who was tortured by a group, and then grew hatred for that specific group of people. While we know why he had those feelings(Even in the prologue as a mage warden he seems pleasant), it obviously doesn't justify his actions. In DAI he is a man dealing with addiction, and also trying to redeem himself. He supported going to the templars, because obviously he's gonna go to the group where he knows what they can do. He doesn't outright say he deosn't trust them, but more that he believes adding magic to the mark may worsen it then fix it, which honestly is a reasonable assumption to make.
In da2 he admittef he beieved mages needed a "softer touch" but then the circle screwed him up and Meredith basically encourged his fear. In DAI, naturally he sides with templars because at the end of the day they also have burdens (addictions that can eventually kill them, being on the frontlines when you do gave legit issues with mages, etc.) And they know how to deal with magical issues. When you do recruit the mages, his fear is basically guaranteeing safety for both the mages and the rest of the inquistion (because as much as no one wants to admit it, therr is legit concerns about mages dabbling in something they shouldn't even when free or losing control). Hell, even Meredith had an understandable paranoia as basically her entire family plus 70 people died due to her sister becoming an abmonination after they hid her from the circle.
I don’t think Cullen in DAI deserves redemption or a happy ending. To be redeemed or seek atonement you have to realize you fucked up. I’m sure sure Cullen ever did
@@detrik01 Doesn't he admit he was wrong about how he saw mages in DAI? He doesn't fully trust magic, but he doesn't believe the oppression of mages is right anymore. That's why he quit the Templars and joined the Inquisition in the first place.
@@VexdinLord Tell me where he says that the oppression of mages is where he draws the line. In DA2 (and the events leading up to it) he supported the wholesale annulment of Kirkwall's circle, and only objected to the attempted execution of Kirkwall's Champion.(Keep in mind, Cullen didn't want the Champion to be free ---- he still wanted the champion arrested). He repeatedly says that he views mages as threats, mocks the ideas of autonomy, and repeatedly supports the Templars, talks about how Meredith wasn't wrong, etc. The only thing he drew the line on --- the only fucking thing --- was lyrium addition, because it affects him personally. And his abandonment of the Order has left to do with its ideals, and more about "a convenient last minute turn of heart"
@@detrik01 I might be wrong, I just could have sworn at some point in Skyhaven he talked about how his opinions of mages have changed a bit. I might be wrong that he doesn't say it, but I think he's mellowed out on the mages as of recent. Plus, I can't blame him for being more sympathetic towards the Templars since he's seen how the Chantry uses them and is all too willing to throw them away when they can't be useful.
It was touched on, but some may not know: It's pretty much implied that some Templars do and have gone with their... baser instincts at times, at least to some extent. I remember some dialogue from a female mage NPC talking about how the Templars are always watching them, even in very private ways (like during baths, changing, etc). It could have been a codex entry? I just remember that, which I saw before talking to Cullen. The Templars being like prison guards/wardens is apt in every way, including that there are instances of guards in the real world doing... certain bad things to inmates. And that's on top of the physical and verbal abuse they already get from all sides. There are stories of "a guard and inmate fell in love", but as was touched on here, one person having all the power even in a consenting relationship has some serious moral quandaries attached to it. Oh and I TOTALLY feel the "love/hate relationship with Bioware". I'm there too! I mostly blame EA for certain things (like Inquisition coming with that lame online mode for example), but I'm almost certain Bioware has full control over the writing, so yeah. They can be blamed for some of the writing disasters that have happened in the DA series.
Mhm. It’s during the broken circle questline, plus Anders also has a banter with i think fenris where he specifically states he himself was not (insert thing youtube wont let me say here) but he KNEW others who were.
There's also that one boy from the Starkhaven Circle, in Dragon Age 2, who makes a comment when you walk past him that a Templar comes to visit him every night, but has warned the boy not to tell anyone.
There are legit elements of Dragon Age writings that I really love the nuance they give to certain characters; like Chancellor Roderick, where they give him that small redemption arc, where he dies leading everyone out of Haven. Compared to how 1 note a character like Udina is written in the Mass Effect Trilogy, where he was an ass the entire time, and then dies, suprise, as a badguy. But with the Mage/Templar conflict, you can tell they really want it to be more of a gray and difficult moral decision than it ever turns out to be. We can feel the opression of the mages. But we can't feel the fear of mages, in the way they want us to. Because we only ever play as the main character; so evil mages, demons and abominations, we just fight and kill them, everytime. Meanwhile the game tells us about how you can't really know if a mage is possesed or not. And the damage they can do is unfathomable. It just doesn't stick. Not even in DA2, where literally every other mage you come across, is a blood mage doing some evil shit, because they're all super obvious and easy to kill. The Ludo-narrative, is just dissonant as shiit. Ironically, I think, Vivienne is the only character that has ever come close to presenting valid reasonings and scenarios, on why templars are needed. But she's such a fucking hypocrite and I hate her. Of course they also have the issue where each game retcons characters and the epilouges from the prior game, cuz they didn't have a plan for the follow-up at the time. But specifically to the points about Cullen, I think your assesment of his character in DA2 is completely fair. He should have done more to challenge Meredith to earn the position he gets; but then again, I think it's another point where character agency is limited by the ever present game design of Bioware, where the Player Character must have final say in all decisions. (A big reason why I always leave Hawke in the fade. Because the Champion makes his/her own damn decisions!) I do really like the idea that there should have been some consequences for him working with the Inquisition. But I don't think it's valid to criticize him in DA Origins, for the hypothetical that he could have abused his power; when we know that he didn't, and he even defied a demon literrally tempting him with it. It's a valid and fair critique of the power structure of the templars as a whole, but in that aspect, his character isn't even in question. Sorry for the ranting comment. I've been replaying DAI; and I have thoughts.
Oooo. I like your take! As for your last point, I’d argue that sometimes you are the villain in someone else’s story whether or not you intend to be. Surana/Amell would live under the threat of Cullen’s crush whether or not he would ever act on it.
tbh I thought the circles/templars were unambiguously necessary in Dragon Age Origins, which didn't really shy away from that fact. A lot of reasonable, likeable characters are pretty much moderate pro-circle/chantry people, like the head mage guy, wynne and alistair. Particularly considering that stern, sometimes cruel necessity vs. corruptible or ineffective humanity was a pretty clear theme in that game, it makes sense to have a group of people for whom a lack of discipline or even oversight could essentially wipe out a village or, in fact, the world. A lot of the harder decisions in that game aren't really between moustache twirling evil and good, they're between sacrificing some part of your humanity to prevent an apocalypse, and the mages are basically walking symbols of that trade off. One thing I was a bit uncomfortable about in the later two games is that the case for the circles was, if anything, exaggerated, but they seemed to start leaning into the whole "minorities are actually walking nuclear bombs" motif of fantasy, which never really made sense to me as something that's supposed to seem sympathetic and seems thematically one dimensional(like for example collapsing the binary of the Force in Star Wars from "because negative emotions feed off of the dark side and fuel the dark side, it is a vicious cycle that is difficult to escape. decisions form habits and habits form personalities, and so there is ultimately a trade off between erratic emotion and serenity, violence and peace, nature and its destruction, particularly for people, like those with BPD, who have to worry about very dark vortexes of emotion" to the fan-favourite grey jedi trope of "people can have one emotion sometimes and another emotion sometimes", presented as being very profound). Especially after some of the things we learn about magic in Inquisition(and what we knew about the magisters, demon possession and blood magic), the continued existence of Thedas borderline seems like a stroke of insane luck. But most of the likeable characters don't seem to care? Solas in particular is strangely laissez faire about it all, which is odd, considering, well, you know. The benefit though is that the later games are still somewhat ambiguous about the whole thing. It's not exactly unrealistic that a group of people with power over another would lead to fucked up shit, and that the people on the receiving end would get upset, regardless of the finger wagging of their Aequitarian elders
@@spencerhahn1635 man, DA:O was just a whole other league in writing compared to later games. A true dark fantasy with realistic and grim worldbuilding, main story, sides even. Always trade offs, never solutions, everything feels not right and hecked up until you make it right as a character. Later games turned the world and its stories into a generic wannabe one-session DnDland, nothing truly unique and special. I remember when starting as a mage in DA:O, if you just run around the tower talking to other mages, you get the chance to learn about internal Circle politics, different factions like libertarian mages who want to live on a secluded island, or revolutionary mages, or just greedy corporate mages, etc., and it immediately presents the situation as much more complex than 'mage demon freedom templar bad' vibe. And then it all plays out in Circle quest when you learn that the reason everything went south was actually due to power struggle between the mages themselves. Uldred doesn't even pretend to be some kind of civil rights leader. Still I think even in DA:O the danger of mages isn't properly reflected in-game. I mean, you get a Codex note about abomination, for instance, when a templar describes how entire legion of his brethren was wiped out by just one ab. Now that's a truly horrifying enemy, right? And then you get to the Tower and the first abominations you encounter are complete low-level pushovers. Yes, Uldred is strong, and Sleepy Demon is the absolute worst but it's those low-level junkies that kill all suspense related to abominations and demon possession. Also the hidden possession Cullen is so freaked about never plays out in game too. Like there's never some kind of meaningful twist of events when a mage supposedly good and trusted turns out to be possessed. That's why final dilemma in Orinigs in Circle story is no dilemma at all. Game gives no stakes or reasons to back up Cullen and kill the rest of the mages because we never actually see the consequence of supposed hidden possession (every possession like with Connor or Uldred is always very obvious in-game).
@@Diofill37 Personally I think that might be because the circle was suppose to be the first place you go to. Easier enemies (at least compared to the other areas) and quicker to beat (even with the fade part). Would make some sense since they drop serious hints of the circle going out of control early on so maybe it would put urgency on the player to check it out so you don't loose your mages.
@@ugan2 I think the Broken Circle quest is so short relatively speaking is because you're encouraged to do it during the Urn of Sacred Ashes as though it's a side mission. The game quite heavily pushes you to go to Redcliffe first and then suggests going to the Tower when put between a rock and a hard place and that's probably, if I had to guess, the route most players took the first time.
I always kinda hated the decision between the Mages and Templars. It's almost framed as if you have to choose the "lesser" of two evils. The mages are not inherently evil. I don't believe the Templars are either, but they are kinda like police officers in the real world; enforcing unjust laws in an unjust system and routinely brutalizing people while convinced that they're doing the right thing...okay maybe I think they're evil. It seemed to me like every NPC that wanted to recruit the Templars wanted them simply because of deep-rooted prejudice and tradition. But to me, it's about choosing to recruit a group that is historically(and in actuality) the oppressor, and the group that has been historically(and in actuality) oppressed. The mages endure being demonized(no pun intended) for simply existing, and then are imprisoned and brutalized, also for existing. The choice was always easy to me.
It also always struck me as weird how if you DO recruit the templars most of the characters who have pushed you towards it insisting that the order is noble but they have "lost their way" disapprove if you directly take control of the order by taking them directly under the Inquisition (with this being right after they've been left leaderless because they cant keep themselves in check at least at that time too, like it's not even a powergrab they have no head). Like, ok so they *want* the order and just think they need *new and different* guidance but when you actually *try* to use your power to fundamentally change the corruption and problems inside they are no longer on board? Makes it seem like they didnt have that much of a problem with their methods after all and they were just worried about the "bad rep" the overt way they were running at that time was more of the thing they took issue with.
@@sedmikrasky. That's exactly how I feel about it. One of the reason I was pretty much an acquaintance with Vivienne at best. Her solution to the chaos that unfolded is: Everything should go back as it was. She's like, yeah the system in place that resulted in the rebellion in the first place should be reinstated. I never understood it. Although I guess she wanted the system that she was used to navigating to be back in place, so she could go back to making power grabs
@@mp5enthusiast Vivienne is such a weird case for me because like you said she is obsessed with returning to the status quo but she only held as much power as she did back then because of social connections from her time playing the game, if the status quo returned but she no longer had those connections (which could happen rather easily because of any number of reasons) what was her plan? Is she just *that* confident in her ability to either stay on people's favour or network back from scratch? If she ever fell from grace in a big way I doubt people would be receptive to her scheming as a has-been leashed back in a Circle again but despite how easy it would be for her to find herself in that position she seems to never look at things from a perspective that is not her current privileged position, for me it borders delusion sometimes (Not to mention her petty antagonism if you don't go along with her wishes despite how easy it would be for the Inquistion at its peak to ruin her?)
@@sedmikrasky. Again, your comment pretty much perfectly sums up my feelings about Vivienne. I tried to not dislike her when she was introduced, but I pretty much dislike people in positions of privilege that comes from wealth. And she absolutely holds it over anyone and everyone.
@@mp5enthusiast I don't necessarily but most of them also have no clue and no empathy for what it's like for people without them - a rare few make it their responsibility to acquire them to the best of their ability but some to probably most do not and that's what's dispicable.
When you talked abt how if he was told to do so he'd kill the warden during the harrowing I remembered that every other storyline happens as you go through yours but the difference is the story you pick you survive while every one else dies. So if you don't pick the mage prologue Cullen most likely starts off killing some one he either liked or love
And that’s if they fail on the off chance they pass and make it to smashing Jowan’s phylactry then they would be a tranquil which isn’t much better considering all the stuff that happens to them too
I don't think that's true! Yes, the origins do all happen simultaneously, but imo what determines whether said origin survives is whether Duncan is there. Duncan isn't needed for an Amell/Surana to survive the Harrowing, that's only when the rest of the story with Jowan happens. Still: it is interesting to think of that as an option.
The massive problem with dragon age two is that every mage you meet in a side quest or actually get to talk too is always evil and or a blood mage. They try so hard to make the conflict have two sides that the over correct and it becomes almost comical. I remembered a quest (I haven't played in probably a decade) where you help a escaped mage meet up in a cave with their lover, but don't worry he's totally not evil but wouldn't you know it 5 seconds later blood magic. It was about the 6th time by that point It made me throw up my hand and give up on the whole main narrative of the game.
@@indigocrayon520 They are not in dragon age two. Dragon age origins had quite a few mages that were trying to just live their lives. Two and Three is where they lost the plot IMO
Yeah I think a big issue with Cullen is that he was meant to be a sad story of radicalisation but he was so popular they kept bringing him back. I have a lot of issues with the way the games handle mages and also elves though. I've been in the fandom a long time and I remember how many people supported the templars/hated mages and also hated the Dalish. I think because Bioware always wants to have grey areas and make choices seem more complex they have demonised Thedas's minority groups too much. Even in Inquisition, the mages sided with tervinter and the Templars got tricked into being corrupted with red lyrium. This choice was made so they can do the whole mage/templar choice at the end of act 1. However to do that they had to character assassinate Fiona and railroad the whole mage rebellion plus the Templars got tricked into it. So instead of a story about how oppressive the templars and the chantry are we have them being tricked into doing bad things and we have Mages once again making bad choices. It just makes the mages look worse. As I said the Dalish get a lot of sinmilar treatment in the first two games.
@@berilsevvalbekret772 he is right though to "both sides" the conflict in DA2 and DA3 bio ware make over 90% of all the mages you meet and interact with evil it's almost comical. DA2 ending is the worst Meredith is obviously wrong. But oh wait the head mage IS a blood mage oops...
@@berilsevvalbekret772Thats because thoes minorities are the anti status quo factions, and anti status quo factions are allmost allways better narratively. Mages have a miles long advantage compared to templars in regard of narrative appeal. It's kind of sad how BW insead of owning that tries to agressively make it a "grey" conflict by making every second mage a crazed blood mage. It's an uphill battle, they wont even it out, all they are doing is making things fustrating.
Idk if someone has commented this already but I saw recently that the father of Wynne's child was heavily implied to Gregoir but she never told anyone.
Enjoying the deconstruction so far. Quick correction, there is a bigger timegap, between the end of DA2 playable timeline, and the start of DA:Inquisition. It's about 4 years from the Rebellion kicking off in Kirkwall, to the conclave trying to restore peace as the lead up to the 3rd game. I believe the 1 year time gap is from the actual in game narration in DA2, where Cassandra is interrogating Varric. But theoretically, it does provide much more time for him to reflect, during the relief/rebuilding efforts stated to have taken place during the time inbetween.
Hey! I see where you’re coming from! But I will say that Tresspasser I believe takes place in 9:42, and since Kirkwall finishes sometime in 9:38 and the whole of Inquisition is said to take place over four years then there can’t have been more than a few months to a year between The Chantry blowing up and Cullen leaving Kirkwall.
@@Kreetin7ase game Inquisition takes place from 9:41-9:42 with a 2 year gap to Trespasser which happens in 9:44. As you said Kirkwall final battle is in 9:38. There’s roughly 3 years between the battle and the start of Inquisition. Varric and his interrogation by Cassandra does happen in 9:40. Over all I found your essay very interesting though! It’s well thought out and you layout everything in an easy to follow way.
@@Kreetin7 I don't know where you got that information because you only have to look as far as the timeline on the wiki or at what happened with Cole at the white spire to know Inquisition starts in 9:41, 3 years after the Kirkwall Circle.
I completely agree with everything you say about the Templars as an institution being completely evil, and they are. However, I disagree with the argument that Cullen recommending the use of Templars muddles his redemption arc. Templars possess abilities that can be used as strategic advantages when approaching problems such as the closure of the breach. All Cullen has ever known are the tools of the Templars, so it makes sense that he would recommend using the Templars as another tactical approach based on his in-depth knowledge of solely their abilities, not their political purpose. At this juncture in the story, we have very few resources to work with, so all options are on the table as long as the breach is closed. We were given two approach methods: 1. Use the Mages to power the anchor so that the Inquisitor had more magical strength to close the breach, which has a high potential of corrupting the mages into abominations since it would obviously be a giant party beacon for everything residing on the other side of the Veil according to the convos we have with other characters. (Which never actually happens as a consequence in the game, and would have been worth exploring.) 2. Use Templars to suppress the breach and weaken it so that the Inquisitor can use what power they can muster from the Anchor to close the breach. This puts Templars in the line of fire instead rather than the mages. (Another decision in which maybe something could have gone partially awry since the tactic is “pure speculation,” but is also never explored in-game.) From a purely tactical perspective, using the Templars is the “minimal risk” option in theory. However, in practice, the game never explored the repercussions of either choice; which could have been a landmark moment to really show how either decision can lose lives, it just depends on the manner in which the player is willing to pay the moral cost behind them. I don’t think recommending the Templars on Cullen’s part weakens his potential redemption arc. If anything, it’s a logical option based on who he is, what he knows, and the extremity of the breach situation at that point in the story. And by recommending to put the Templars in the line of fire against the breach rather than the Mages, with his newfound albeit flawed perspectives put into consideration, I would argue that this is a potential step in the right direction for him. Giving the Templars a newfound purpose of protecting everyone against a greater (non-sentient) threat, rather than the Chantry’s definition of only using them to keep mages in check. EDIT: I forgot to say that I really enjoyed this video essay! I apologize for my comment being predominantly a counterpoint argument.
i’ve played the games MANY times but ig i’ve just always glossed over the fact they named the mage “solution” the FINAL SOLUTION. interesting choice they made there
The problem is the chantry tbh, because templars would still be needed to keep order in public, specially if we allow mages to live freely among people. If circle towers became open/more like just schools, definitely would be a progress. But towers and Templars would ultimately still be necessary, as there will always be a maniac plotting terrible acts.
The Chantry is the issue they persecute the mage and they raise young children into addicts to guard them since Templar training takes years. And while templars can leave (they really can’t) they face lyrium withdrawals once they are cut off from their dealer/enabler it’s a giant mess
I appreciate that you bring up how the Chantry and Templars often times create the problems they say they're trying to solve. People assume free mages IMMEDIATELY turn into the Imperium when we don't even have all the details on how that built up into a total mage-ocracy outside of some small stories in codexes. And even then they still take a lot of care to tell you the Imperium is wasting away and that even all their magic isn't enough to take on the Qunari or even the 'White' Chantry. We know there was a lot of deceit and back stabbing in the founding but no indication that magic in and of itself was the cause of their turning into a bunch of dicks. This slippery slope argument is annoying to hear especially when we haven't even gotten to see Tevinter yet and our only direct accounts are: a former slave, a magister (he becomes one later but yknow), and a soldier from the class right above slaves. We get little on how mages NOT in already established families live and survive in the Imperium. Meanwhile we get a good dive into how the Templars were ALWAYS mage hunters even from their inception as the Seekers and the old Inquisition. Sure a lot of them end up addicted to lyrium...but most of them still actively decided to join the group of armored mage killers with the intent of harming mages for one reason or another. Some were forced in and all were influenced by the Chantry's propaganda which I think are important points to remember, but they still have a LOT more agency in where they stand in this conflict than mages or even just innocent bystanders do. Anyway, great video and as much as I love Cullen and find him to be interesting, I do tend to get mad at him when he's acting all anti-mage even into Inquisition. I will say I think if they had intentionally made Cullen go kind of back and forth in his radicalization it could have worked as that's fairly realistic when radicalizing or deprogramming and it would have made his differing actions more understandable than just jarring.
This exactly! Even the mages in the imperium don't automatically turn into the common view of the imperium. I mean, Fenris may (I can't remember but it seems likely given his survival of the lyrium tattoos) have been a mage, his sister certainly was. Crem and Dorian tell the PC that weaker and poorer mages are still enslaved in Tevinter. It's hardly the case that "every" teventer mage is a "Magister" and a blood mage. Even if they were all blood mages, it's the mage that does the evil with it, not the magic itself. Merril was certainly not a monster OR an abomination and she used it. Even in the Imperium, most mages are just people trying to survive. Like with mundane psychopaths and killers, it seems like the worst magic transgressions are born of extreme ends of the spectrum where one extreme is sheer desperation, the other is a perfect combination of privilege and greed. The same could be said of destructive rulers and desperate killers with no magic at all. As far as I can see, the only Mages who have caused the terrifying damage that everyone is SO scared of are Fenris (a god by all accounts, not really a Mage anyway) and Coryphius (also arguably a demigod). If we're judging all ppl by the acts of gods then the Maker and Andraste caused just as much destruction and bloodshed with their founding and promotion of religious zealotry.
I agree with many things you said, especially the lack of consequences he faces. However, as someone who has overcome indoctrination I know that it takes VERY long for your heart to actually feel what your mind understood to be the truth at some point. You have to be very vigilant or you will fall back into old thought patterns, you will - especially in times of stress or uncertainty- miss the days when everything was crystal clear and you knew what to do in order to be a "good person". Letting go of old believes is a constant struggle and I chose to see that represented in Cullen's back and forth about mages.
@@theatlantean8036 Ok right, but they don't know that. Most Dalish really think they are doing the right thing and are just trying to save what little culture they have left. Solas is just a bitch.
I really like your essay and even though Cullen is one of my favourite characters in DA I have to agree with all your points. I always saw him in Inquisition as being on the way to see mages differently, definitely not all the way there, amybe not even halfway there. Since I romanced him with my female mage character it was easier to accept the changes in his character as organic and see them partially as a result of that romance helping him to see mages in different light. He even admits it in one of the romanced scenes, how it sickens him now, the way he saw mages and that he wouldn´t even care for you much before with the way he saw them all. In my opinion Cullen leaving templars and joining the Inquisition was never about him changing his opinions of mages, it was his way of taking back control of his life. Of breaking free from his leash, leash made out of lyrium, chantry propaganda and templar doctrine. What both his circle experiences have in common is being betrayed and controled - first by mages, than by templars. His changes for the better were based on him trying to kick his lyrium addiction and breaking free of blind obedience of the templar order. It was very telling for me, how different , cold emotionless and regresive he became if you pushed him to keep taking lyrium. It always made me wonder how much that addiction "helped" him to become more and more radicalized hand in hand with his trauma. And how much it has influenced all the other templars, made them more susceptible to commit bad things, to instill in them the chantry doctrine about dangers of magic. Propaganda and drug addiction working together to instill and enforce the chantry doctrine in templars makes the Chantry as an organization evil and your comparison with antisemitism is chillingly accurate for me.
I think the fear and uncertainty of mages is a lot more complicated than you're making it seem here. You have to keep in mind that the chantry was founded after Ferelden won it's independence from the Tevinter Imperium. The more you read about the Imperium and the absolute atrocities that were committed, it makes a lot more sense how the fear and condemnation of mages ended up happening. That's not to say it's RIGHT, and I always play the series as a staunch supporter of mages, but I feel like you are trying to put historical events from the real world that are not one to one comparisons here and it's clouding your judgement a bit. The villain of DAI is LITERALLY an ancient Tevinter magister who is trying to dominate humanity using magic, and whose magic might have created the blight in the first place. Everything in Thedas that has happened is because a group of VERY powerful mages went too far and nearly destroyed the world. Solas created the veil for a reason, and although he is an advocate for magic within the game he is also very outspoken about how magic is corruptible and used for selfish gain. I think the games writers have created a very interesting plot where they want you to side with and empathize with the mages, but they also want to show you that the fear isn't coming out of nowhere and magic in the wrong hands could literally destroy the world. The game designers gave you Anders as a way to really empathize with the rebellion just as much as they gave you Fenris to show what magic in the wrong hands is capable of. As far as Cullen goes, he's a very interesting and multidimensional character, and I really like romancing him as an elven mage. I do think there could have been more done with him for sure, but I personally like that the writers have given us a character that we can also empathize with in a visceral way that isn't a mage.
You also see the flip side with both characters - Anders becomes a monster and his antipathy for Fenris is vicious and immoral, Fenris too is willfully blind to the abuse of mages and gratiously cruel to Anders and Merrill. Both of them approve of some decisions many would consider to be utterly despicable.
Absolutely agree! its a lot more complicated than "Templars bad, mages good". The templars and the circles are not the right way to deal with mages, but within the context of the games, its a very understandable solution.
Really good video! Im genuinely shocked that bioware were confused as to why people weren’t siding with the templars more. They tried so hard to “both sides” the issue.
@@reffa2858 well yeah but like I cant see anyone siding with them like morally. Im down to side with the templars in a playthrough so I can experience calpernia
Honestly for BW to think that they should be completely out of it, not in touch with reality. Which they arent, obviously. They live in their own world of make-belief. I noticed it a long time ago. And writing for DA2 in particular was soooo bad when it comes to Anders and mage/templar issues, like so bad its not even funny.
@@CommanderNamI side with them morally. I dunno how everyone focuses on templars with bad attitudes and completely ignores mages mass murdering people constantly. In Dragon Age if a lot of people are dying then it’s mages who are doing it. In DA:4 we are going to Tevinter where mages religiously perform sacrifices and yet I can still see people being all like “but the templars tho!”
this is a great essay, and thank you for putting all this work into it. cannot imagine how demanding this video was. you've got a nice flow of speech that's very easy to listen to, and it's a cool thing when it's about video essays. well done!
Cullen admits himself he should have questioned and acted against Meredith sooner but you dealing with traumatized individual who was idealistic. Also he was kept in the dark about some of the worst stuff because she knew he wouldn't approve at first. To me it's a strength of BW's storyteller that they show someone getting sucked into the orbit of a dangerous extremist and then coming to see how unhinged and toxic they are and actually it isn't too little, too late it's at the 11th hour but it still matters and it makes a difference because it still gives Hawke the chance to defeat Meredith. Anders loses himself, Fenris's views don't never radically shift it's good that we get SOMEONE who does prove capable of growth in a good way.
I wish we got to see Meredith more in Act 1 and Act 2 of DA2. From the talk and what you can read, she didn't go full over the line until getting ahold of the red lyrium relic. I feel like you would have more of a whiplash of personality change going into Act 3 if you actually knew her before. She didn't agree with making all mages tranquil, and it looks like she used to keep the peace with Orsino.
I loved this! The Chantry's suppression of mages (and the way they goes about it) only really makes sense if they actually want mages to procreate. Without mages having babies, the Chantry looses most of their next generation of Templars, Seekers and Chantry Sisters/Mothers. If a mage births a child that grows up to be a mage, that child already feels indebted to the Chantry and has been indoctrinated to believe that their magic is scary, so to protect everyone, they must go to a Circle. The Chantry has more political power within Thedas than the rulers and nobilty do. The Chantry has enough land (or could demand it) to make sure that each country has two Circles, so that female mages are only watched over by female Templars.
I think BioWare did touch on other circles and the wealthy being able to see their mage children again and also letting mages out? Idk. I didn’t think this was possible in DAO, but after talking to Vivienne and exhausting the human mage dialogue in DAI, it seemed as if the other circles were less strict? Idk seemed like a Ret-con but also possible that we only saw the worst circles.
I feel like Bioware failed in DA 2 to show several characters growth over a period of years because of the friendship rivalry system that was used. It greatly limited the potential for these characters to grow. I hated it. Why couldn't Hawke have actually had some effect on his/her companions over the years? Perhaps Cullen's opinion of mages could have been shown to change more during the different stages of DA2? It was a really dumb system. It's like Hawke really wasn't even present. For instance, if I was a companion of Hawke and I was constantly rivalled by this person, my opinion would either change or I would leave. I couldn't stick by someone I basically hated. The friendship/rivalry system was so unrealistic it was laughable. (BTW I loved Fenris as a character, but Bioware really missed out on a chance to have him grow as a person, and I hated that.) I loved the Cullen in DAI but it's like he's a newly created character and not one that has evolved over time.
While yes the circles were not always good, neither were the mages. As with any story you have the good, the bad and the in-between. as a longtime Cullen fan, I can actually understand his story, his character progression and I can understand his PTSD in a unique way as I also have it. The changes in his character can actually be attributed to growth and yes his stopping the Lyrium. In the first game he's more like he is in the third game. In the second you can see he's almost flat, even unfeeling when on Lyrium. He rarely shows emotion save for a couple times, One is with Wilmod on the coast. Mind you during 2 he's also dealing with Meredith who has gone off her rocker and he is her second in command meaning he dealt with her more than any other Templar, The second emotion showing time is during the end, where no matter the side you choose he will stand against her with you, he will back down even if you are not made Vicount. In DAI he's dealing with coming off more than a decade of Lyrium use, PTSD as well as what he perceives as the end of the world, yet he will still make concessions towards mages, and if you are a mage and a love interest still fall in love, something he's always avoided as he chose to dedicate his life to the Chantry. While he's made mistakes, he's been unkind to mages and has a past he comes full circle, he tries to undo his past as well as deal with his present and actually look toward a future (if romanced), none of which are easy when you are haunted with PTSD, when your sleep is a constant flash of bad memories, fears you harbor and deeds you've endured. At their core most Templars aim to serve the maker, the chantry and Thedas, some let the power get to them, some get lost in the politics, the games and the rhetoric, and some attempt to remain true to why they joined. Cullen is flawed, he's scarred, he's battered but he's still standing, if you do not make him take Lyrium in DAI he actually is one of the first Templars, (non-seekers) to break the Lyrium addiction, one of the first to have a life beyond the order, and to change the image of Templar, to aid the ones coming off Lyrium after end game, and he is no matter what people think the one who trains the Inquisition army, without his training the Mark and the Inquisitor could only do so much. When you talk to him in Detail he reveals he joined the order at 13, took lyrium at 18 and served through the blight, through the siege of Kirkwall and left Kirkwall and the order to Aid Cassandra, Cassandra being a hand of the Divine, a seeker as well as a hero in her own right is better suited to judge him than any other character in game. (watch the anime "Dawn of the Seeker" it tells her early story).
I’m not as convinced on your DA2 take, there was a lot of messed up stuff being done by mages in Kirkwall, a lot of which was done with Orsino’s aid, including that serial killer who was stitching women together and then we have Orsino himself becoming an uber abomination, all without red lyrium to drive him mad. As you said, DA2 is great with its politics, but I don’t think DA2 is as clear cut on who you should be supporting as DA:O
I mean, at the end the response is to... kill every circle mage? Even if some of them are murderers, a good amount of them are straight up children. Meredith even wants you to kill Bethany. I don't see a grey area here. It wasn't, "kill Orsino". It was "kill Orsino and every other mage in Kirkwall."
Ok so far it's a critique of circles - yup ok I'm cool with that but I do think the solution is probably having something more like Hogwarts an academy or a mixed system of more smaller schools so closer to the mage's family and for some very sensitive or independent minded mages like Anders something like home schooling. The Harrowing sucks though. Cullen does not act on his crush even if the mage in question actually tries to get him too. This is important because yup the system that places them both in that situation is flawed and facilitates abuse but he knows this and describes his resistance of it as it being inappropriate because of it.
@@mlpfan-id1np Actually no - I suppose you wouldn't know this because you've never flirted with him but if you ask in DAI then he says both that templars are not required to take such a vow and he never has - so actually he doesn't mean that at all.
Great analysis but I think a lot of what you have said as being a Cullen issue is mostly a Templar issue. His virtues should include every time he has not let his experiences cause him to do bad things also. Trauma is destructive and can compound with time as much as people think time can "heal all wounds". The system is so normalized that most people, specifically Chantry following people, do not realize the power imbalance unless they become a victim. You said that Cullen never receives any consequences for his actions but we forget that he has been tortured equally by himself and while we as players may not accept it as enough it is more than we see from any person who is anti-mage. The core of his character is that he Is a Chantry Templar...a person that has fully believed and lives by the Chantry and has no clue how to live outside of that propaganda. So even the fact that he has questioned things at all and grown in any capacity is a huge thing. You are calling for him to give more than that because you see the story from many perspectives specifically from being able to see the inhumanity of the entire system. When we think about how he changes in context of being a member of Chantry life, he has had major changes against what he has been told is morally just. Which, IMHO, is justification enough to be trustworthy in inquisition at least. The whole "Cullen doing something against Meridith too little too late" is basically asking a military man to commit insubordination against their CO for them doing what is lawfully correct. There are huge ramifications for Templars that go against their superiors (themselves going to the mage prison for example other than being slain for being a sympathizer). While Meridith is indeed terrible, she only becomes lawfully wrong in the end where Cullen, true to character, opposes her. His flaws are that he is lawful in a system that is unjust and that is possibly the hardest thing to turn against. Yet, he still does. While I agree as a player there should be more consequences or displays of making amends from him in game, I think that from within the system that he lives, the small steps in the right direction make total sense.
This is a brilliant comment. I was trying to think of a way to word what I was thinking when watching the video, but you have managed to do it far better than I ever could.
Ok going in I don't think I'm going to agree with this but I really like Cullen's arc as it is it shows how a decent person can be broken by trauma and how they can recover themselves. I think he does end acknowledging the power imbalance saying circles should rule themselves and mages could serve outside them under supervision.
39:00 To me, this point is kinda moot due to the fact that he's not talking about morals or virtues. He's talking specifically about ABILITIES here. I honestly can't blame him for wanting to go to the Templars for help with the Breach. Think about it. This is a magic mark that almost nobody understands and it's also related to the GIANT MAGICAL EXPLOSION that caused a DEMON-SPEWING HOLE IN THE SKY. Remember, Templars aren't just knights in fancy armor. They're specially trained to nullify magic. If I had to choose between powering up something that nobody understands that is DEFINITELY related to an explosion or weakening the giant hole in the sky causing demons to appear, making it easier to control, and making it less likely to cause something else to go ary, I'd choose the latter. I agree on most everything else, but that point bothered me.
Honestly, Cullen made amazing full circle growth in his character arc by going from the mess he was after the demons used the warden’s image to torture him with since he was in love with her in the first game. To running straight to Meredith since she was super strict but then realizing what a monster she was too and siding with the mages at the end of DA2 ti then falling in love with a mage again and yeeting his inner (and outer) Templar for good in DAI. It was one of the best character developments I’ve ever seen and the way he was able to grow and become a good man after all that trauma makes me love him. Is he still a little militarized in his ear table missions yes. But that’s not related to the whole Mage thing. That’s just his military training kicking in. And honestly sometimes that is needed. But for most missions diplomatic or subterfuge works better.
Bioware's attempt at morally grey storytelling in the mage and templar conflict just falls so very flat. They try to equate violence of oppression with violence against oppression, and blame mages for their own oppressions at points. I find it interesting that you mention antisemitic connections to the conflict because I have always equated it to my own experiences as a gay and trans person, and have seen other equate it to their experiences with racial oppression. In a way, I think the mage vs templar conflict can reflect a lot of real world experiences while being its own thing entirely, and I think making a video essay examining that is a very interesting idea!
Idk how you can say the conflict between mage and Templars isn't grey. Mages are Literaly possible weapons of mass destruction. Mages can get posesses without wamting it. That does not mean the templars are right, thats why its grey
Because it isn't, the end. It isn't grey. The game mostly fails showing the danger the avarage mage can posess. We see exceptional cases that have the powers of gods, but the avarage mage is defeated by a dagger. The avarage abomination is defeated by a low level mercenary. The player can be a bloodmage and deal with demons and fuck all happens. "But gameplay segregation" I hear you cry, no. It's part of the game, it should support the lore. No amount of "but, but, mage dangerous, Templars needed" changes that. If mages are so much more capable to do damage than everyone else, maybe nerf warriors.
It's important to remember that magic has widely been used as an oppressive force in Thedas. From the elves of Elvhenen to the Tevinter Imperium, magic was used to conquer, control, and enslave others. The Templar Order doesn't just exist to be an "oppressor", it exists to prevent that from ever happening again. Think about it, would you be okay if people who could casually wipe out a town had absolutely no oversight? That just because they were having a bad day, they might end up killing thousand of people. Would that be okay with you? This is absolutely not to say that the Templars themselves don't need oversight, because they very much do and have on many occasions abused their power. But they exist for a reason. It infuriates me that Bioware went with the Mage/Templar duality, where either the Templars brutally oppress the mages or the mages have complete freedom (all the while not so subtly pushing the latter choice as the "correct" one). The obvious answer is that BOTH the mages and templars need extensive oversight, yet we have to go with one group triumphing over the other. The only thing that can come from this is disaster.
I guess Cullen feels better to me in 2 because my Hawke is a mage who sided with the mages. I'll admit I tend to have my characters push him further and further from his harsh views, Anni Surana was his crush and while there was definitely some struggle in there I get the feeling he wants to apologize to her in inquisition, Lynn Hawke challenged him every chance he got while being both a mage and a man most recognize as a good person, and Rose Trevelyan who ultimately becomes his wife is herself a mage, she's ment to be a relatively soft-spoken and gentle woman, she's the most andrastian of my mages, and it just feels cute for her to push that last little bit that Lynn couldn't get at. I mean I feel like he could have been written better, but it helps for me that my characters all push against this for him.
I thank you for this video as I get into arguments with my friend that is a great guy (and he can be, he's fine-ish), but everyone seems to forget that he hasn't really redeemed anything. He says that he has, but nothing to show for it makes me not like him and not trust him with anything magical related. Thank you for this video, it informed me of information I overlooked in judging his character, but also brought up to light arguments I didn't think of that show what he is like that people like to ignore.
My almost full Templar supporter inquisitor with the templar specialization that took almost all templar options looking at this video: Is that a Demon i hear possesing you?
I guess this is just the consequences of EA rushing out DA2. So many retcon, seriously leliana can die in origins but is alive in inquisition. I expect dreadwolf to have more retcons.
Gurl listen, okay, we would be friends. About dragon age if nothing else. I think about these very things all the damn time. Bioware, imo, always gets a few feet away from sticking the landing, from saying something strong story-wise, from making a powerful point. And then at the last moment, they back out, they fuck it up, they just don't hit. And it infuriates me. I love so many of these characters, Cullen included, for what they're suppose to be, for what potential I can see in them. But they ain't it, honey. I have to do most of that character work in my own head for Bioware.
I totally agree with Bioware missing the mark with the "moral dilemmas" they create. They did the same with so many of their games, and it's taken playing similar games like DOS2 to realise that you can have similar dilemmas that ACTUALLY mean something if it's just executed properly. I mean, sure, have your moral dilemma, but make damn sure that the player KNOWS they're CHOOSING to be an extremist 'knight' who's a glorified slave trader and murderer. Don't pretend it's a "grey" area, it's not. It's a choice. I still adore the bioware games since they introduced me to this kind of RPG, and I'm still really looking forward to the next game... But the older I get and the more comparable games I play from other companies, the more I realise how overly simplistic and tokenistic BW's moral choices really are.
i wasn't even that big a cullen fan but ever since seeing someone suggest he and samson swap places i haven't gotten it out of my head. especially if we got to see samson get used to being in command and grow into a leader vs just let cullen have his villain arc goddammit ps. love the video btw, insta subscribed! hope theres more essays, dragon age has.... a lot
I love this video mainly bc it exactly points out all the faults with the templar's order and why it legitimizes Leliana as next Divine. We need to let people be who they are, punish those who use power in the wrong way for what's possible in a fantasy medieval-renaissance world and make it better. I never understood why there even was a choice between templars and mages when the difference is so clear. Support the mages, they're oppressed as f*ck, templars are nothing more than bigotted soldiers lol
I just discovered dragon age and all the fandom stuff i've come across so far has been either uncritical cullenites or people who absolutely hate him, so it really means a lot to me to have this video by someone who likes him like I do but also sees the flaws in the writing.
Okay the dragon age inquisition first point is kinda iffy. Think about it, your dealing with an unknown magic and you have the choice between risking causing an unknown magical reaction using the mages or risk using the templar magic negation and doing nothing. Because it felt like he was the only one at that table thinking about the possible consequences, that could have been caused.
I understand your points but disagree in some areas. I can’t believe I’m acting as an apologist for a religious institution, even a fictional one. Labeling The Templars as a hate group is a little extreme, given that blood mages and abominations are a thing. The Chantry’s line about being born with magic being a sign of sin to be ashamed of is BS, but you have to keep in mind that Andraste founded the religion to rise up against the slaver mage lords of Tevinter. Their doctrine is going to have anti-magic undertones(Andraste being a mage herself is still just a fan theory). Also, untrained mages are a danger to themselves and others, so it’s not a one-to-one god hates gays allegory. If memory serves, even Wynne accidentally lit a boy’s hair on fire when she awakened to her power. Yes, The Circles are the more evil institution and needed to fall. However, templars are still victims of religious indoctrination and addiction to a substance that The Chantry, up until DA:I, possessed a monopoly on the trade of. Your argument about Cullen in DA:O leaned way too hard on a hypothetical abuse of power. Besides that, Gregor runs a tighter ship than Merideth. He’s not going to approve the rite of tranquility for something so petty. I feel like a lot of Anders’ stories about templar brutality come from Kirkwall. Then again, maybe not. Now I recall how in Awakening, they were ready to label him a blood mage so that they could execute him after so many escape attempts. PTSD aside, Cullen's whole arc in DA2 really is a case of how rushed that game was. It’s the same reason you have to fight Orsino and Meredith, no matter who you side with. Still, canon is canon, even if the game went from concept to gold in only a year. I mean, if you really want Curly to face consequences, you could just keep him addicted to lyrium and disband The Inquisition. In that ending, he becomes a mind-addled junkie begging on the streets.
Ya, it feels like she dislikes the templars not so much because of their in game actions but because of real world parallels that we understand but these characters obviously aren’t aware of. The mages are not a 1:1 insert of 1940s Jews as she seems to believe, the situation in thedas is complicated and has histories spanning thousands of years that need to be taken into account. You cannot go into a fictional world only to find whatever is “close enough” to real world events to fit your preexisting worldview. Parallels can exist, intentionally or otherwise but you need to be able to see the broader story and narrative beyond just “so who is this universes Hitler?”
The video is amazing, but I noticed some inconsistencies with the lore: 1. Lyrium is not a drug. It can, however, be used as a drug if prepared correctly. Templars prepare lyrium in a very different way than the lyrium potions are created, making it into a drug that is highly addictive and inhibits templar's thinking. 2. Revka Amell didn't have 8 children. She had 5 children. It's never stated if the man she had them with was secretly a mage or not, but it's said he was her husband. It's possible that Amell family just simply has magic genes running through them. Still, considering that from all Amells only children of Revka and Leandra are mages, it's very probable that both Revka and Leandra had babies with mages or people with magical heritage. Warden Amell is also not the youngest of all of Revka's children, but the oldest. Leandra says that all of them were taken to the circles, but World of Thedas says that her husband just took the rest away and left Kirkwall. It's an inconsistency that is often explained as "husband took the children from Kirkwall and then all of them were found to be mages and taken". ~nitpicking lore issues ends here~ Outside of that I find it funny that Uldred is always the one blamed for the Broken Circle, while he did it as a deal with the main antagonist - Loghain. Uldred did the worst possible thing to win the freedom for the mages, and that's also Loghain's fault. Uldred is a bad guy, and Loghain is the guy who knows how to use him. In Kirkwall the situation is even worse because that place is basically a second Aeonar. The Veil is so thin there that I wouldn't be surprised if regular people also heard demons, like Lily claims she can in Aeonar. With Anders it may feel like tricking the player because we have no knowledge of this world, so we couldn't know what Anders was creating, but from the perspective of a mage Hawke or someone who knows some stuff about Thedas, I think that trick could very easily be a way in which Hawke got plausible deniability in helping to take down the symbol of oppression that this huge golden church was. (I'm not going to cry over that building). Speaking of the game's ending: *mourning the fact that Hawke was not allowed to just team up with the terrified nobles to stand against Meredith and become the Viscount simply because of the false gray morality dichotomy that this game is trying to push* BTW Meredith seeing Hawke as an enemy would make more sense if Hawke teamed up with nobles to take her down and become the new Viscount. It'd be at least logical, but let's be honest, she wasn't logical at this point in the story. Idol was singing too much of a banger. I mean, it still makes sense still, because of Hawke's influence, but it'd be supported better if there was an opportunity to strengthen that position by chosing to ally with the nobles who were terrorized by Meredith at that point in time. If you chose not to, you'd still be an influential figure that threatens Meredith's position, but if you do, you are a confirmed threat this time around, so Meredith's obsession with you is a bit less maniacal then. I remember that the first time I played DA2 I sided with the templars because I thought it will be the same kind of situation as when Warden was cleaning the Circle Tower from abominations. Well, it felt kind of the same when I could spare some random mages, but with years (and the help of people on tumblr) I realized how fucked up that choice is. Which brings up how people who were raised as christians since birth, even if they were somewhat rebellious, are very susceptible to this game brainwashing you in the same way that the Church does. It convinces you that locking up the mages is a necessary thing, and people like me, raised in Christian homes, don't even blink at how fucked up this idea is until years later, when we finally deal with all the crap we were fed as kids. Another reason why it's easy for me to identify with Cullen, when I myself believed stuff that are simply morally bad. The retcons also annoyed me a bit. Especially the one that took away Ander's happy ending. I mean, at least as much of a happy ending as a Warden can get in this dark fantasy world. And when it comes to DAI, I also think it were his first steps, very clumsy ones on the road to the de-radicalization, and it's annoying that the game treats it as a full de-radicalization redemption when Cullen still didn't deal with his shit and if you romanced him, you are once again, just like Amell and Surana, an exception from all the other mages. The special one. I like Cullen as a character, but if he were Alistair 2 as many fans see him, he would be less naive and less susceptible to Chantry's bullshit, because that's the biggest distinction between them. Alistair wanted to leave his templar training because he never wanted it in the first place but also because he saw through the bullshit (even though he hates blood mages, but well, Anders does too, so... what can we do), which Cullen never did (and damn, this is another thing I relate to Cullen so much. I wish I were as smart as Alistair to see through bullshit when I was young, but I was not, and I believed in a lot of shitty stuff). As a huge fan of de-radicalization as a story to be told I stand behind you wholeheartedly. I wish we had more stories that showed de-radicalization right. That showed to all the bigots that there is actually a different path than radicalization and hatred. That they can change. The false dichotomy in DAI is even more stupid, because we could simply do both quests. Both are vital to understanding what is happening in the world right at that time, so splitting them like that for some false sense of dichotomy just felt like a stupid decision whatsoever. Not to mention that when we recruit templars in the Champions of the Just they're not treated the same as mages are. With mages, you either choose if they're your allies or prisoners, but with templars we don't have the same choice. As if they had no culpability in what was happening. As if the highest-ranking ones weren't feeding everybody red lyrium with zero consequences, with nobody ever noticing. How is it different from what happened in the Broken Circle? And yet, templars are the heroes that withstood horrific things, while mages are the bad guys who dared to be manipulated by the Tevinter Magister and submit. Cullen stating that he is feeling bad but then advocating for the templars is so bonkers. Especially when you have Jaws of Hakkon where he proposes to leave one of the Avvaran abominations under templars watch. And I'm here, like, no, go away; this is a bad idea. I agree that he will never be a redeemed man if he doesn't stop seeing the whole issue as "templars suffer too", which is true, but it doesn't make them less complicit. It just means they are not the greatest evil there is, because Chantry obviously is the main bad guy for recruiting kids into the service (kids that they often raised into thinking mages are evil) and also letting bigoted adults join the order, and then giving them all a drug that inhibits their judgement. Especially considering that Alistair can use templar abilities without the lyrium. The lack of any consequences for Cullen, especially all the possible situations the game could account for but didn't that you have mentioned yourself, also drives me nuts. He is never confronted by the game, even though Leliana does peck him a lot whenever he opens his mouth during the War Table meetings (she shots down some of his more pro-templar ideas as simply stupid and ridiculous and makes digs at him about him being oversensitive about the threat that mages possess (Mage will sneeze and someone will scream "blood magic"). And I still stand by my assertion that this dichotomy is no longer needed. Why go "choose either mages or templars" when you can force templars to abandon being templars and put them under Inquisition and then put both mages and templars to work on the Breach? Or better, just mages, while templars are put on the front line to fight demons that will surely pour out of the Breach when the Inquisitor re-opens it. That's a better strategy, tbh. They suck at suppressing magical threats, but they're good with swords, so let them use them on demons. The mere distinction of choosing between them feels like a subtle message that those games will never allow the conflict to settle. Will never allow templars to realize the system is broken and needs to be dismantled and that templars need a fundamental re-evaluation as individuals, because tons of them are bigots that have to either try to change or be held accountable for what they were doing.
I really like this discussion! I remember when the characters for DAI were announced before the game came out and not wanting Cullen & Cassandra in the game (Which I mostly backslid on after the game came out, more so with Cassandra.) because of how they were in DA2. Like most, my DA2 Hawke was a mage and yea he stands against Meridith at the very end (Like you said about him in DAI, it was to little too late.) and he is the first Templar to lay his sword down after the fight and let you go. That moment didn't feel like he was letting you go because he respected you or mages now, it felt like now that Meridith was dead, he was afraid of you so he ends hostilities. In short, I didn't feel like he was redeemed enough to warrant me wanting him to be in Inquisition.
Honestly, its hard to criticize a guy that had been through as much trauma as he did. Think about him living with the abomination outbreak in the circle during DA:O. Seeing everyone you know be turned into an abomination or killed. Being tortured. That kind of thing would stick with someone their whole life. If that wasn't enough he had to survive the blight that was still ongoing. If THAT wasn't enough then we move into DA:II where his superior was slowly losing her mind with power. Also there was a sect of blood mages inside the city also turning templars into blood mages and the lot (here we go again in his mind right?) it is very possible that initially he thought what Meredith was doing was justified up until the end when he realized she was actually crazy and wanted to take thing way too far. If THAT wasn't enough we roll into DA:I where either you deal with Corypheus a teventir magister (mage) either convinces all remaining Templars to take red lyrium and posses them OR Corypheus turns all the mages evil and here we go all over again for him, right? How could a dude who survived and saw all that actually trust a mage again? of COURSE he is going to tell you to side with the Templars.
An issue with the video for me is that you can't discount the fact that any power will corrupt people. The Templars and the Chantry have a lot of power and they are quite corrupt themselves. The same will happen with the mages in a long enough time scale. May not be immediately but when there are people in the world that can literally shoot fireballs from their hands power will get to their head and corrupt them. I can see the argument of Dragon Age making the Templars seem too good or justified but I can't see how they aren't justified. What did the elves in Tevinter do when they became slaves to the Tevinter mages. Nothing. Because there was no way to resist them. It required other nations and the Imperium weakened for them to lose. I am not saying what the Circle does to mages is a good thing. What I am saying is that mages have to be taught how to handle their power and be given the basic morals of not killing people. And to have systems in place to deal with mages who are evil. I don't think it is the devs fault for making a game that doesn't have easy answers or has people on either side being evil. In DAI I like making Leliana Divine because what she does for the Circle is better. Making it more of a school you go to, to learn how to use magic and make the Templars a force to deal with mages gone bad and not as watch dogs.
Cullen went from a young naive templar wanting peace and fair treatment for mages to being mind f*cked for days possibly for a week by blood mages. He is kinda scarred for that but that does not make him a villian when he obviously sides with a mage (because its canon) to take down Meredith
Cullen went from a young naive templar wanting peace and fair treatment for mages - Thats debatable at best because even in DAO's beginning he was on the same path as most other templars. The writers explicitly said they wrote him creppy and borderline r-pey in DAO seeing how he was all but stalking your mage female character
I could never bring myself to support the templars, and it's honestly not surprising that a majority of players support mages. No matter what Bioware do, how they try to humanize templars and show them as victims as well, they are the obvious oppressors. I mean, come on, Bioware games are very popular with female and LGBTQIA+ gamers , did anyone think they'd go ahead and support the oppression of an innocent minority, hated due to religious-based prejudice? Didn't think so.
Cullen's story arc could have been better. I think he is really trying to change and it's only addressed as him trying to kick lyrium. After you ally with the mages; after the cut scene, he doesn't hate the mage's. He doesn't totally trust them, but, doesn't throw a hissy fit either. There is some growth if not for just accepting the main's decision. There is only two mains who want total freedom for the mages and that's Leliana and Solas. Dorian even expresses sceptisim. Ambassador M wants the mages help but never expresses their freedom. Leliana does. She is the only one who has lived a more rounded life in this series and is given no romance possibilities or is a more main side character than anyone else. All other characters have lived a more linear life than Leliana. All the side kicks less Cole are sided one way or another. Cole is the only character that just wants to help. Even Sera is sided (poor is power and conscript whoever, no freedom) and she's crazy. Cullen is still all templar. Cassandra is all templar. Solas is all mages. Vivennne is all templars. Amb. M is all mages (not give if she wants them to be free or not.) Iron bull is all templar. Varric is sided with whatever you Hawke character is. Dorian is all mages. Blackwall is even as long as he believes in the Inquisitors goal. Grey Wardens don't get involved in the mage/templar drama. The nuance is there with each and it's a moral issue, but, if you want to get right down to it, you make people like you or mad at you. Cullen has had time to grow. It's actually been 3 years since kirkwall and he is still all templar. Even though trying to kick lyrium, he's still all templar. In this whole game, no one mentions Lysette in any video. She states that the templars are supposed to protect the mages. Also, she's a recruit and hasn't been brainwashed yet. I like your take on the Cullen situation and agree on most. Cullen is still all templar either way. He may or may not hate mages, but, loves templars. I think he realizes that lyrium is a drug and really wants to kick it. I think he just still doesn't like mages. Despite what happened in DA2 at the end, he still doesn't like mages.
well dragon age 2 does good job showing what happends when mages left uncheked too... hawks mom comes to mind andres blowing chantry tavinter magistrate hunting fenris or even redcliff from dao where one child gets possesd by demon if conor would be send to mage tower redcliff never happends... So if there is no templars you get tavinter on your hands... If I remeber corectly before Wayne was brought to tover she burned child as kid. So you have to teach mages how to use their power you cant just let them get hang of magic by themself. Is circles best way to do it? Not realy. Are templars necesary? yes they are. culen saw first hand what happends when mages get possesed by demons. By the way in your view all templars are evil by same logic in chantry view all mages are evil because of what tavinter empire was... in this story there is no black and white but lots and lots of grey.
Two things: 1: I think he joined the templars to help support his family. You hear about his siblings but not his parents. At 13, he probably had to make a choice of being an apprentice being paid a little, going home where there isn't much food or space. Or joining the templars, where they probably gave his family some coin, he goes off so they have more food and space, plus they feed him, and he can send them money over time. 2. He gets a lot of sympathy because of how his story plays out. But he can still grow up to be a creep if Leliana romances the warden with a mage background. He'll ask about her two ways: one friendly to Leli and sexual by runner. He never actually finds anything good in mages unless you romance as one, but that's flawed because he is getting something out of it, and it's just that one mage.
Cullen's character arc is REALISTIC, whether you personally LIKE him as a person or not. You're not expected to LIKE him. The goal of Bioware is NOT to make characters likable, the kind of people you'd like to be friends and have coffee with. It's to make characters who are realistic - i.e. could be actual people you know. The problem here is not the writing around Cullen. Rather, it is your assumption that characters should not be problematic.
thank you SO much for this video, ive been saying this for a long time but its great video. his "redemption" did not happen in inquisition and im massively annoyed that the inquisitor didn't get to judge him. i played origins first and then inquisition (back in my bad internet days, i couldn't download 2) and i was SHOCKED when i finally played 2 and the things he said made me despise him, and i had romanced him many times. i get he had 3 different writers but its like they didn't go back to his character in each game. the only thing i'd disagree about is cullen being alistair 2.0. alistair from the get go tells warden that mages are terrorized (basically) by templars and he was glad that duncan recruited him for the wardens bc he didn't want to join. he's a great (silly) lovable character and one of the best of bioware's characters.
I still feel like the writers had to go out their way to make kirkwall a complete and utter disaster. Like you can do everything "right" be diplomatic and shit still hits the fan in the most bombastic way. You confide with the templars meredith still goes made, you confide with the mages Orsino still turns into a grotesque monster, you confide with Anders and he still blows up the Chantry. Like things were just meant to go wrong around here I guess! And it shows because I get in Inquisition and people were like, yeah kirkwall was the worst our circles are nothing like that...
My favourite thing about Kirkwall as a setting is that in universe it is known to be a Bad Place. And not just because huge wealth gap we see, it is cosmically Bad. It started as a center of slave trade, the Sundermount is an old battlefield and a resting place for ancient elves. The city is built in a strange pattern implying that it was made for some sort of big ritual. The veil is thin and the mines are cursed. The place is fucked and it cannot be unfucked
I know this videos a year old but the stories and discrimination against mage’s and elves remind me so much of Indigenous peoples treatment in Canada, where BioWare is from. I doubt it’s intentional but I would suggest looking up residential schools, you’d be shocked at the similarities to circles.
i saw someone once say that it should have been reversed, samson as the advisor and cullen as the one fooled by corypoo.... they were right and the more time goes on especially since the voice actor makes it harder and harder to forgive the flaws in his character arc..
@@emapple8298 okay 👍 my issues with Cullen as a character are only compounded by the voice actor. even if the actor was a literal angel I would still have issues with Cullen. regardless of that, every person is different and it is within my rights to have my personal feelings towards a character further tainted by the actions of the actor. and more to the point my comment was discussing the concept of switching Samson and Cullen because their characters suit that switch so much better.
I always thought that mages are indeed *dangerous* and they do need some kind of *help/protection* against demons and temptation, not zealous vigilance. Because what the Templars do... God, it's like trying to stop a fire in a forest by freezing the entire world and then blame people for lighting campfires to avoid freezing. The Templars present themselves as the solution to the "mage problem", a problem they are not only amplifying, but maybe even creating in the first place. I do think Cullen does have flaws as a character, mainly because the production problems that Dragon Age II had and because of how his "redemption arc" had to be rushed into Inquisition's beginning, but every time you asked rhetorically "why Cullen doesn't do anything against Meredith? why does he realizes that she crossed the line just now?" I do also ask myself "why would he?". I mean, they never gave any sign of such redemption arc during Dragon Age II and he had no plot-wise reasons to do so (like a mage making him change his mind and make him realize he was getting brainwashed by Meredith). It would have been a groundless plot-twist, why fight against everything you believed when you never showed any sign of sympathy for Mages since the game started? And don't get me wrong, I would have LOVED to see Cullen standing up for the Mages, being the first real stand of a non-mage ally for the Mages (besides the hypothetical decisions that Hawke can make during the game). But as much as I love Dragon Age II... I don't think we could really judge him for what he didn't do and what he allowed, because he didn't had any other choice on his fanatical zeal, a blame which again, I push to the big bosses of EA for rushing the team on finishing the game as soon as possible. Anyways, I did loved your review, you made me see things very differently
it's a great video. For Missing information's about Cullen during his time in Kirkwall, I would suggest to read "Dragon Age The world of Thedas Vol.2" They Give more background information that we don't have in game. (Pages 223-227) I quote from the book: "With Meredith gone, the templars were leaderless and, as he was forced to admit, potentially dangerous. He rallied the templars to begin repairs on the Gallows and ensure protection of the loyalist mages who continued to reside within. He coordinated with the city guard, lending aid to relief efforts throughout the city. For over two years, Cullen effectively ran the Templar Order in Kirkwall, bringing some stability in the struggling city." I think these actions is the reason why people respects him so much, but the lack of background in DAI is confusing.
Crazy that I randomly watch a old video (noah cg) and randomly searched it and found this; I honestly never actually noticed him until inquisition. It’s funny that he really played a much bigger role, if anything I figured he was just another dude with the same name.
Karl Anders's friend isn't made tranquil by Meredith but by a creep called Alrik who the exact sort of abusive Templar you say there's a danger of DA:O now Meredith isn't innocent what she does to Maddox is equally abusive in a different way and does exactly what you accuse her of doing with Karl but that's an unsanctioned abuser and he's a different kettle of fish - narcissistic and sadistic. Yes her regime and beliefs blindside her to that abuse but she WAS not the direct cause in that case. Also yup Alrik is definately a fascist but that doesn't mean the templars and chantry are. Act 2 - Cullen's views on tranquility are bad but he's advocating for more widespread use not universal use. Not curtailing Meredith - he talks about this in DAI - she didn't tell him things at the start then she shut down any concerns he did have as she became more unhinged and if you side with the templars in the final battle he objects to killing the mages who surrender and then tells his objections are 'noted but ignored' - only really Thrask and if he remains recruited Keran stand up to her physically and they get played by Grace with Thrask dying only Hugh stands up to her verbally and he gets ostracized by everyone else. Agatha also if you side with templars stands up a more extreme Templar Mettin. The point is a)what Cullen could have done was limited b) he was not unique in failing to realise that Meredith was out of line and not doing anything about it. Also you're like he doesn't go the whole way and save those mages - you're asking someone to turn against their own leader who they've followed for years AND the city's saviour and hero with should have done better. Do you KNOW how unrealistic that would be to expect someone to do that? Even people who abuse you people often don't turn against over one thing but after many and a lot of questioning it takes a long time to realise someone you looked up too is toxic and it takes a lot of insight and courage often over time. I don't think Meredith just selected Cullen because of skills and some matching extremism but because she saw someone young and to an extent naive she could mould. I think he turns when Hawke is treated because he sees it the point that he CAN because a city's hero is threatened who can help him stand against her. If he challenges Meredith before and both Hawke and the rest of the order turn on him he dies and achieves nothing. No good general attacks at the wrong moment before they are sure of enough support no matter how idealistic they are - I'm sorry but you're being naive to think otherwise. Also I'm not entirely convinced Anders is right - Fenris does have some legit concerns which Anders's dismisses the logic that could be applied to him too and Anders admits he is responsible for Vengeance at least partly. Re: Dragon Age Origins what Cullen supposedly in the epilogue can be dismissed as rumours. You don't see it happen and it's not something that you can't explain away by that retcon. In legal terms it's inadmissible as evidence except as proof of rep which is kinda damning not to the same extent. Also deradicalisation doesn't happen overnight, as someone stated it's been three years and he does express regret that he didn't stand up to Meredith sooner or see her for what she really was. He also says her fear of mages resulted in madness. The templars are NOT a state sanctoned hate group although Meredith's ones probably were. Again the templars are NOT evil as a group sorry not down with ATAB - nuance sadly missing from that vp. He does say that circles should run themselves - that's a pro mage position. Red lyrium isn't just powerful lyrium it's corrupted - so no you're off base then. Also asking an extra Templar to go ATAB is like asking a cop who stepped away from the force to go full on ACAB and go full on drug legalisation or prisoner rights baby steps. Not as many consequences as you'd like isn't no consequences. Again you're pushing ATAB even if you're right then it's unrealistic. Also there isn't effing time to put all the dialogue in that will fully tell you everything about them - I have the books that DO flesh out ok the Fiona lines would have nice. I'm sorry but believing in ATAB is NOT a requirement and I disagree about his redemption being a failure. Sorry not sorry - I stand by what I've said before. You have points but you've annoyed me - you ask too much and I can't follow you. Peace out.
Always seeing people defend the fear of magic because of Tevinter, abominations, ect., but that’s not an excuse to enslave mages for something they MIGHT or theoretically COULD do. Templars are evil. Period. The Chantry is evil. Period. There’s no “nuance” or “justified reasons” behind enslaving and abusing a group of people for something they were born with. Circles should be I institutions of magical education, not gloried mage prisons. Magic shouldn’t be feared, but studied and understood. This education should also be open to the general public. Templars should properly protect the masses from dangerous magic, but being mage jailers is not the way. At all.
Thank you for this. Really coherent, reasonable and well thought out. I honestly can't fathom anyone siding with the Templars and not think it's an "evil" playthrough. I love Cullen by the end of Inquisition because my characters are ALWAYS pro mage if not Mages themselves (yes, I will forever be salty that my character couldn't help Anders actively with that bomb, because you better efffing believe I'd bomb the head office of Auschwitz). When he has a supportive Mage influence all the way through he's tolerable and it's possible to sympathise. He was essentially indoctrinated from birth and believed the Templars were needed and good. He was a child when he was "allowed" to join the Anti-Mage army. A effing plus parenting... but I digress. I can sympathise if he's "softened" by the DA protags. But yeah, he's essentially - Ethically and morally - a Nazi who turns coat and starts helping the prisoners he's been trying to genocide from his early teens. It's very difficult to suspend disbelief and think he's actually legitimately changed in that small sliver of time. The only thing that helps, is the chaos he saw in the Meredith fight mirroring the horrors of the Ferelden tower, and the fact that he's detoxing from their semi-self aware mind control drug. Incidentally, this is also why I have absolutely no time or respect for Hawk's brother. He's a lost cause and I can't deal with him. It pisses me off that I can't play a mage character and keep Bethany instead.
I don't think the Templars should be compared to the Nazis since the situation is a bit more complicated than just saying "Mages good Templars pure evil." The mages tower in DAO is a great example of mages not all being purely helpless victims of oppression. Templars can abuse their power and do monstrous things to mages, but mages can do the exact same against Templars if enough of them fall to demons and blood magic. DAO even shows how one mage being possessed can cause far more destruction and damage to the world than any single corrupt Templar (I'm talking about Redcliffe.) I do think that Bioware did a poor job at balancing the two factions and made mages a lot more just and sympathetic, but I don't think we can ignore that blood magic and possession doesn't just come from Templar oppression, and can happen with or without Templars. If that happens, like with Redcliffe, what are none magical people supposed to do?
I was so betrayed because I played Inquisition first so I thought "oh he disliked mages and wants to change" but when I realized the "Mages cannot be treated like people" line came from him I immediately thought he didn't do anywhere near enough to even cancel that bit out. He is not redeemed and faces no consequences unless you make him keep taking lyrium and even then it's not even a 1 to 1 punishment.
for you point on inquisition, I feel this is a bit of a black or white point of view of him still being cautious about magic, saying that it completely negate any redemption (personally, i would just call it character developpement now after he experienced the horrors of abominations and the horror of templar's power abuse). I feel he is now more we need to be prepare for abominations but we can't treat all mages like abomination in coming. We see many abominations who kills innocents through the games. That said, i strongly dislike the mage romance with Cullen, the dialogue is terrible, it feels like inky is always apologizing to be a mage it's really wrong. I also agree it would have indeed very interesting if there had been someone reacting negatively to him bc having been a part of the abuse in Kirkwall, tho he did turned on Meredith at the end so it might have sway opinions Overall, I think if he had done a complete switch to being loudly v pro mage would have been strange i believe.
I really feel like Dragon Age Inquisition struggled with making the Mage/Templar a grey area. Mainly with how the lord seeker approaches us talking smack. Then we meet grand enchanter Fiona who's shows us more respect than the lord seeker. [Spoiler] I feel we should've seen the lord seeker struggling more with his possession of the greed demon acting odd instead of a complete arse. Or should've put a different character in his place instead of making him the bad guy twice later down the road in Cassandra's personal quest.
I chain played all 3 games so I too found his arch to be a little off putting. they really should have had him have a come to maker moment at the end of act 2 or the very beginning of act 3 and do everything he can to help the mages. and then make him pro mage in DAI. given that he was prone to radicalization, and being disillusioned with the templars, it makes sense that he would over compensate and become super pro mage in the 3rd game.
Great video! One thing though. The Chantry is evil, not the Templars. The Templars are just as much victims of the system put in place by the Chantry as the circle mages. Most Templars are conscripted as children, put through rigorous training, and forced to battle addiction for the rest of their lives all because of the Chantry's "anti-mage" rhetoric. At the time of Inquisition, there is nothing inherently evil about the Templars considering that, after the Conclave, the Circle of Magi no longer exists. They are simply just an order of lyrium powered soldiers who no longer serve a purpose with no circles to police. I personally choose to go to the templars for aid in most of my playthroughs of Inquisition considering that if you don't, most of the templars either die or become corrupted red lyrium slaves like Meredith.
The problem is that by default in order to let you make your own decisions and for them to have impact they sort of have to have a middle line. Otherwise other people couldn't find a way of being what they wanted to be. Also I agree you're showing why the other side believes what they do. I've heard plenty of people argue that the games push you to side with mages and there are good reasons why they might be right and it's for a good reason.
I have always been a mage player from my very first time playing Origins at 12. Always play a mage, always will. But i 110% appreciate how perfectly morally grey the Templar mage issue is. If you every start to think the templars go too far in oppressing mages, try to imagine the equivalent of mages in our world, could be a bunch of people at random in every day life, including 12 year old kids in the same schools your kids go to, all have machine guns stuck permanently to their hands at all times, there fingers tapped to the trigger and it can't be removed. You can get rid of the gun, you can have faith that most of them would never use the guns they always have in the literal palms of their hands, but could you really expect society as a whole to just shrug and accept having people this dangerous and only a second away of taking the lives of potentially hundreds of innocents, sometimes just on accident? It's absolutely understandable why the templars, and even Cullen, feel the way they do - And this is coming from a Mage Player.
Horrid analogy, horrid. Imagine mages being a thing irl forever, we would just get used to it, like we get used to all manner of dangerous things in our everyday life. We as a society shrugged off worse things. In your house there are perfectly mundane substances that you likely can accidentally mix and make poisonous gass. There is high voltage electricity innyour walls and can but your hands in the socket, silos and the like can compust spontanously. Cars are conceptually terrifying, and electric cars more so. There are people willingly wearing jewelry they know is radioactive. You live with that kind of danger day to day and don't even notice. If mages were real, they would be the same.
The only problem I have with Cullen is that he's a fictional character. Sexy authority figure with tough exterior, who has all these internal struggles including his addiction that only I can fix? Yes, please!
@@zilazilazila “severe PTSD” does not excuse being aggressively pro-genocide (the Rite of Annulment) and pro-Tranquility (lobotomisation, enslavement, and rape). “Severe PTSD” does not excuse dehumanising attitudes like “mages are not people like you and me” and being pro-systematic torture and imprisonment. “Severe PTSD” does not excuse being a card-carrying member of the fantasy Gestapo who never actually acknowledges that those opinions and actions were wrong or rejects them (and in fact continues to speak in favour of them all through Inquisition). “Severe PTSD” does not excuse active participation in and support of systemic oppression - especially when he expressed those attitudes and actively participated in the torturing and beating and killing (and according to his original writer, probably raping) *before* the trauma ever occurred. Hope that helps.
I always felt the templars were pretty morally black but the choices you make in the game were not there because it's morally grey and you don't know what is right but rather that you can choose to be good or evil. That may just be my perspective now cuz I haven't played in a long time but it felt very on the nose when they call it the Tranquil Solution. Templars are nazis. I'm surprised to hear people actually liked Cullen for that reason. Inquisition did skip over it a lot and I don't think I realized he was even the same character from the previous two games. The focus always needed to be on the player's agency yet keeping important characters around for a through story which is why Cullen probably stood by in DA2 until your life was at threat. Kinda annoying but might have been some scope issues there. Same with Inquisition. Focusing on Cullen's past and atonement may have been an issue if players hadn't played the previous 2 games. Anyway fantastic video! Your points and examples were excellent and I was able to follow along despite forgetting most of the Dragon Age narrative altogether.
Templars are NOT Nazis they're police with all of the nuance and grey that invokes - some police are indeed bar stewards but I'm not a subscriber to ACAB and most of those who are think the system is wrong not necessarily ALL of the people.
Whenever we talk about the mage and Templar conflict, I like to bring up this quote by Vivienne. "My dear, what a world you must live in. Do you know how mages are found? A little girl has a nightmare, and in her sleep, she burns her house down. A teenage boy has a fit, and lightning rips his mother to pieces. Imagine your own childhood and what would have happened if the darkest corner of your heart had a will of its own. People don't learn the fear of magic at chantry services, my dear. They learn it from us." I really like Dragon Age and I want to see the conflict like the Gray moral dilemma they want it to be so I've done a lot of thinking about it. In the end, I do not see it as white and black Templars are simply evil. Because I do also agree with Fenris in that if Mages are given the same freedoms as everyone else, its inevitable that every none-mage will become a second class citizen. Like in the Tivinter Imperium. It's like if superpowers were real. The ones with superpowers - magic - will naturally move to the top of society. For their to be equality, Mages need to be restricted, because Mages just naturally have so much power by themselves. I just see too many good reasons for the Circles to exist to see the Templars as an unambiguously evil organization. It badly needs reform, definitely, but its purpose isn't inherently evil. I still side ally with the mages more often than not in DA:I, but I don't feel terrible if I make any of the other choices.
That's the reason i like Vivienne so much. I may disagree with her at some points, but she still makes sense. Just like her quote about magic being like fire (I don't remember it correctly), not being bad on its own, but in wrong hands of a wicked person. And there's truly no way to tell if a person is bad, or not. So yeah, i agree that circles are important as schools where you are allowed to leave back home (just like every normal school), and templars as independent guards in cities (not jailers).
@@GhostInTheCogs yeah this is much better. But lets not forget Vivienne doesn't know as much as she pretents she does. She is more politican then a mage.
Anyone else think of other Dragon Age characters or even Mass Effect ones with a similar issue? Let me know!
Not sure if I should make a separate comment or reply to this one, but I do have a character in mind with a similar issue. (At least for me.) Thoughts on Blackwall? I see a lot of people online that like him and his romance, but I just don't. He is fine enough if you don't romance him but if you do then he sleeps with Inky before he even tells you his real name. Sure, he takes you out and tries to tell you but just bring himself to do so. I don't know, it rubs be the wrong way. Then after the deed, he runs away to Orlais to turn himself in because he feels guilty about lying to you... Like dude, tell her ...THE... TRUTH!
He's an interesting case. Honestly with him I really think it's up to interpretation. Solas does the same thing and (if you choose to) will sleep with Inky without telling her, and will even take her valaslin without telling her what he is, which idk the valaslin I feel has some context considering he has a bias about it's past. It depends on how much you're personally willing to forgive from a partner about lying.
@@Kreetin7 Well Solas is a whole other issue, but does he sleep with you in game? If I remember correctly there is no "bedroom scene" with Solas, unlike every other romancable character. (With the exception of Josephine I think.) So whether or not they did is left up to interpretation, unless I'm forgetting a scene. Which is possible. Solas might be a monster hell bent on destroying the world and everyone in it and he might break your character's heart before it gets too serious between you, but at least respects you and he doesn't leave you naked in a barn and run off to basically commit suicide because he feels guilty lying. Blackwall isn't an ancient elf or a god of trickery and lies, he's just a man. Maybe that's why I'm harder on him, because while he has done bad things in is past my character would have forgiven him if he had just told her. I don't agree with Solas, but I get why he lies. There's no good why to say, "Hey, I want kill everyone in this world to bring my people back. You cool with that?" =3
@@Kreetin7 Solas also decided that to help the elves the world needs to burn
I think Logain, I think I spelled that wrong, counts under this if you read the books and hear how others speak of the situation. Unless it was a peek at Solas’ character when he spoke about Ostegar.
I don't know, I actually love his whole character arc. Makes total sense to me. It's like a 13 year old boy who see's police/military as pure heroes and doesn't have the mental capacity to realize that it's much deeper than that. Then you get to origins and he's a young man clearly conflicted with what he wants to believe as the truth and the actual truth. He sympathizes with the mages in the circle and knows that he himself is not a bad guy and by proxy wants to believe that the templar's hes looked up to are not bad people either. His response after the traumatic event is both normal and unsurprising. He becomes an extremist but eventually through meredith's actions starts to question his beliefs again. By the time we get to inquisition there appears to be a sizable time jump and he has clearly extricated himself from any specific groups. IMO by this point Cullen is finally a full grown man with both the life experience and maturity to make his own decisions. I can't knock him bc he ultimately lands on the truth, which is that both groups are flawed and all people have the capacity to be good, bad, or inbetween. I think it's clear he see's himself as the inbetween and punishes himself for it repeatedly. He has left the templar order by his own volition and is willing to accept any consequence that brings including the withdrawals and potential death. He is willing to die for what he believes is right, just like that 13 year old boy who just wanted to be a hero. This is very apparent when you romance him. Cullen expresses several times that he feels undeserving of that hero title as well as the inquisitors love. He's still punishing himself for what he's done. When he pushes for a templar alliance I saw it more so as a chess move being that he knows them much better and finds them more predictable than the mages, and not any sort of declaration that he still supports them in anyway. I always choose the mages and in the end he really doesn't care.
All that to say, I think he was a very well done morally grey character, and I'm probably biased bc well.. thats my man 🤣
But! I really liked your video, you have compelling arguments and are well spoken. I would definitely watch more.
Cullen is a guy who was tortured by a group, and then grew hatred for that specific group of people. While we know why he had those feelings(Even in the prologue as a mage warden he seems pleasant), it obviously doesn't justify his actions. In DAI he is a man dealing with addiction, and also trying to redeem himself. He supported going to the templars, because obviously he's gonna go to the group where he knows what they can do.
He doesn't outright say he deosn't trust them, but more that he believes adding magic to the mark may worsen it then fix it, which honestly is a reasonable assumption to make.
In da2 he admittef he beieved mages needed a "softer touch" but then the circle screwed him up and Meredith basically encourged his fear. In DAI, naturally he sides with templars because at the end of the day they also have burdens (addictions that can eventually kill them, being on the frontlines when you do gave legit issues with mages, etc.) And they know how to deal with magical issues. When you do recruit the mages, his fear is basically guaranteeing safety for both the mages and the rest of the inquistion (because as much as no one wants to admit it, therr is legit concerns about mages dabbling in something they shouldn't even when free or losing control). Hell, even Meredith had an understandable paranoia as basically her entire family plus 70 people died due to her sister becoming an abmonination after they hid her from the circle.
I don’t think Cullen in DAI deserves redemption or a happy ending. To be redeemed or seek atonement you have to realize you fucked up. I’m sure sure Cullen ever did
@@detrik01 Doesn't he admit he was wrong about how he saw mages in DAI? He doesn't fully trust magic, but he doesn't believe the oppression of mages is right anymore. That's why he quit the Templars and joined the Inquisition in the first place.
@@VexdinLord Tell me where he says that the oppression of mages is where he draws the line. In DA2 (and the events leading up to it) he supported the wholesale annulment of Kirkwall's circle, and only objected to the attempted execution of Kirkwall's Champion.(Keep in mind, Cullen didn't want the Champion to be free ---- he still wanted the champion arrested). He repeatedly says that he views mages as threats, mocks the ideas of autonomy, and repeatedly supports the Templars, talks about how Meredith wasn't wrong, etc.
The only thing he drew the line on --- the only fucking thing --- was lyrium addition, because it affects him personally. And his abandonment of the Order has left to do with its ideals, and more about "a convenient last minute turn of heart"
@@detrik01 I might be wrong, I just could have sworn at some point in Skyhaven he talked about how his opinions of mages have changed a bit. I might be wrong that he doesn't say it, but I think he's mellowed out on the mages as of recent. Plus, I can't blame him for being more sympathetic towards the Templars since he's seen how the Chantry uses them and is all too willing to throw them away when they can't be useful.
It was touched on, but some may not know: It's pretty much implied that some Templars do and have gone with their... baser instincts at times, at least to some extent. I remember some dialogue from a female mage NPC talking about how the Templars are always watching them, even in very private ways (like during baths, changing, etc). It could have been a codex entry? I just remember that, which I saw before talking to Cullen.
The Templars being like prison guards/wardens is apt in every way, including that there are instances of guards in the real world doing... certain bad things to inmates. And that's on top of the physical and verbal abuse they already get from all sides.
There are stories of "a guard and inmate fell in love", but as was touched on here, one person having all the power even in a consenting relationship has some serious moral quandaries attached to it.
Oh and I TOTALLY feel the "love/hate relationship with Bioware". I'm there too! I mostly blame EA for certain things (like Inquisition coming with that lame online mode for example), but I'm almost certain Bioware has full control over the writing, so yeah. They can be blamed for some of the writing disasters that have happened in the DA series.
Mhm. It’s during the broken circle questline, plus Anders also has a banter with i think fenris where he specifically states he himself was not (insert thing youtube wont let me say here) but he KNEW others who were.
There's also that one boy from the Starkhaven Circle, in Dragon Age 2, who makes a comment when you walk past him that a Templar comes to visit him every night, but has warned the boy not to tell anyone.
There are legit elements of Dragon Age writings that I really love the nuance they give to certain characters; like Chancellor Roderick, where they give him that small redemption arc, where he dies leading everyone out of Haven. Compared to how 1 note a character like Udina is written in the Mass Effect Trilogy, where he was an ass the entire time, and then dies, suprise, as a badguy.
But with the Mage/Templar conflict, you can tell they really want it to be more of a gray and difficult moral decision than it ever turns out to be. We can feel the opression of the mages. But we can't feel the fear of mages, in the way they want us to. Because we only ever play as the main character; so evil mages, demons and abominations, we just fight and kill them, everytime.
Meanwhile the game tells us about how you can't really know if a mage is possesed or not. And the damage they can do is unfathomable. It just doesn't stick. Not even in DA2, where literally every other mage you come across, is a blood mage doing some evil shit, because they're all super obvious and easy to kill. The Ludo-narrative, is just dissonant as shiit.
Ironically, I think, Vivienne is the only character that has ever come close to presenting valid reasonings and scenarios, on why templars are needed. But she's such a fucking hypocrite and I hate her.
Of course they also have the issue where each game retcons characters and the epilouges from the prior game, cuz they didn't have a plan for the follow-up at the time.
But specifically to the points about Cullen, I think your assesment of his character in DA2 is completely fair. He should have done more to challenge Meredith to earn the position he gets; but then again, I think it's another point where character agency is limited by the ever present game design of Bioware, where the Player Character must have final say in all decisions. (A big reason why I always leave Hawke in the fade. Because the Champion makes his/her own damn decisions!)
I do really like the idea that there should have been some consequences for him working with the Inquisition.
But I don't think it's valid to criticize him in DA Origins, for the hypothetical that he could have abused his power; when we know that he didn't, and he even defied a demon literrally tempting him with it. It's a valid and fair critique of the power structure of the templars as a whole, but in that aspect, his character isn't even in question.
Sorry for the ranting comment. I've been replaying DAI; and I have thoughts.
Oooo. I like your take! As for your last point, I’d argue that sometimes you are the villain in someone else’s story whether or not you intend to be. Surana/Amell would live under the threat of Cullen’s crush whether or not he would ever act on it.
tbh I thought the circles/templars were unambiguously necessary in Dragon Age Origins, which didn't really shy away from that fact. A lot of reasonable, likeable characters are pretty much moderate pro-circle/chantry people, like the head mage guy, wynne and alistair. Particularly considering that stern, sometimes cruel necessity vs. corruptible or ineffective humanity was a pretty clear theme in that game, it makes sense to have a group of people for whom a lack of discipline or even oversight could essentially wipe out a village or, in fact, the world. A lot of the harder decisions in that game aren't really between moustache twirling evil and good, they're between sacrificing some part of your humanity to prevent an apocalypse, and the mages are basically walking symbols of that trade off.
One thing I was a bit uncomfortable about in the later two games is that the case for the circles was, if anything, exaggerated, but they seemed to start leaning into the whole "minorities are actually walking nuclear bombs" motif of fantasy, which never really made sense to me as something that's supposed to seem sympathetic and seems thematically one dimensional(like for example collapsing the binary of the Force in Star Wars from "because negative emotions feed off of the dark side and fuel the dark side, it is a vicious cycle that is difficult to escape. decisions form habits and habits form personalities, and so there is ultimately a trade off between erratic emotion and serenity, violence and peace, nature and its destruction, particularly for people, like those with BPD, who have to worry about very dark vortexes of emotion" to the fan-favourite grey jedi trope of "people can have one emotion sometimes and another emotion sometimes", presented as being very profound). Especially after some of the things we learn about magic in Inquisition(and what we knew about the magisters, demon possession and blood magic), the continued existence of Thedas borderline seems like a stroke of insane luck. But most of the likeable characters don't seem to care? Solas in particular is strangely laissez faire about it all, which is odd, considering, well, you know. The benefit though is that the later games are still somewhat ambiguous about the whole thing. It's not exactly unrealistic that a group of people with power over another would lead to fucked up shit, and that the people on the receiving end would get upset, regardless of the finger wagging of their Aequitarian elders
@@spencerhahn1635 man, DA:O was just a whole other league in writing compared to later games. A true dark fantasy with realistic and grim worldbuilding, main story, sides even. Always trade offs, never solutions, everything feels not right and hecked up until you make it right as a character.
Later games turned the world and its stories into a generic wannabe one-session DnDland, nothing truly unique and special.
I remember when starting as a mage in DA:O, if you just run around the tower talking to other mages, you get the chance to learn about internal Circle politics, different factions like libertarian mages who want to live on a secluded island, or revolutionary mages, or just greedy corporate mages, etc., and it immediately presents the situation as much more complex than 'mage demon freedom templar bad' vibe. And then it all plays out in Circle quest when you learn that the reason everything went south was actually due to power struggle between the mages themselves. Uldred doesn't even pretend to be some kind of civil rights leader.
Still I think even in DA:O the danger of mages isn't properly reflected in-game. I mean, you get a Codex note about abomination, for instance, when a templar describes how entire legion of his brethren was wiped out by just one ab. Now that's a truly horrifying enemy, right?
And then you get to the Tower and the first abominations you encounter are complete low-level pushovers. Yes, Uldred is strong, and Sleepy Demon is the absolute worst but it's those low-level junkies that kill all suspense related to abominations and demon possession. Also the hidden possession Cullen is so freaked about never plays out in game too. Like there's never some kind of meaningful twist of events when a mage supposedly good and trusted turns out to be possessed. That's why final dilemma in Orinigs in Circle story is no dilemma at all. Game gives no stakes or reasons to back up Cullen and kill the rest of the mages because we never actually see the consequence of supposed hidden possession (every possession like with Connor or Uldred is always very obvious in-game).
@@Diofill37 Personally I think that might be because the circle was suppose to be the first place you go to. Easier enemies (at least compared to the other areas) and quicker to beat (even with the fade part). Would make some sense since they drop serious hints of the circle going out of control early on so maybe it would put urgency on the player to check it out so you don't loose your mages.
@@ugan2 I think the Broken Circle quest is so short relatively speaking is because you're encouraged to do it during the Urn of Sacred Ashes as though it's a side mission. The game quite heavily pushes you to go to Redcliffe first and then suggests going to the Tower when put between a rock and a hard place and that's probably, if I had to guess, the route most players took the first time.
I always kinda hated the decision between the Mages and Templars. It's almost framed as if you have to choose the "lesser" of two evils. The mages are not inherently evil. I don't believe the Templars are either, but they are kinda like police officers in the real world; enforcing unjust laws in an unjust system and routinely brutalizing people while convinced that they're doing the right thing...okay maybe I think they're evil. It seemed to me like every NPC that wanted to recruit the Templars wanted them simply because of deep-rooted prejudice and tradition. But to me, it's about choosing to recruit a group that is historically(and in actuality) the oppressor, and the group that has been historically(and in actuality) oppressed. The mages endure being demonized(no pun intended) for simply existing, and then are imprisoned and brutalized, also for existing. The choice was always easy to me.
It also always struck me as weird how if you DO recruit the templars most of the characters who have pushed you towards it insisting that the order is noble but they have "lost their way" disapprove if you directly take control of the order by taking them directly under the Inquisition (with this being right after they've been left leaderless because they cant keep themselves in check at least at that time too, like it's not even a powergrab they have no head). Like, ok so they *want* the order and just think they need *new and different* guidance but when you actually *try* to use your power to fundamentally change the corruption and problems inside they are no longer on board? Makes it seem like they didnt have that much of a problem with their methods after all and they were just worried about the "bad rep" the overt way they were running at that time was more of the thing they took issue with.
@@sedmikrasky. That's exactly how I feel about it. One of the reason I was pretty much an acquaintance with Vivienne at best. Her solution to the chaos that unfolded is: Everything should go back as it was. She's like, yeah the system in place that resulted in the rebellion in the first place should be reinstated.
I never understood it. Although I guess she wanted the system that she was used to navigating to be back in place, so she could go back to making power grabs
@@mp5enthusiast Vivienne is such a weird case for me because like you said she is obsessed with returning to the status quo but she only held as much power as she did back then because of social connections from her time playing the game, if the status quo returned but she no longer had those connections (which could happen rather easily because of any number of reasons) what was her plan? Is she just *that* confident in her ability to either stay on people's favour or network back from scratch? If she ever fell from grace in a big way I doubt people would be receptive to her scheming as a has-been leashed back in a Circle again but despite how easy it would be for her to find herself in that position she seems to never look at things from a perspective that is not her current privileged position, for me it borders delusion sometimes (Not to mention her petty antagonism if you don't go along with her wishes despite how easy it would be for the Inquistion at its peak to ruin her?)
@@sedmikrasky. Again, your comment pretty much perfectly sums up my feelings about Vivienne. I tried to not dislike her when she was introduced, but I pretty much dislike people in positions of privilege that comes from wealth. And she absolutely holds it over anyone and everyone.
@@mp5enthusiast I don't necessarily but most of them also have no clue and no empathy for what it's like for people without them - a rare few make it their responsibility to acquire them to the best of their ability but some to probably most do not and that's what's dispicable.
When you talked abt how if he was told to do so he'd kill the warden during the harrowing I remembered that every other storyline happens as you go through yours but the difference is the story you pick you survive while every one else dies.
So if you don't pick the mage prologue Cullen most likely starts off killing some one he either liked or love
And that’s if they fail on the off chance they pass and make it to smashing Jowan’s phylactry then they would be a tranquil which isn’t much better considering all the stuff that happens to them too
I don't think that's true! Yes, the origins do all happen simultaneously, but imo what determines whether said origin survives is whether Duncan is there. Duncan isn't needed for an Amell/Surana to survive the Harrowing, that's only when the rest of the story with Jowan happens. Still: it is interesting to think of that as an option.
The massive problem with dragon age two is that every mage you meet in a side quest or actually get to talk too is always evil and or a blood mage. They try so hard to make the conflict have two sides that the over correct and it becomes almost comical. I remembered a quest (I haven't played in probably a decade) where you help a escaped mage meet up in a cave with their lover, but don't worry he's totally not evil but wouldn't you know it 5 seconds later blood magic. It was about the 6th time by that point It made me throw up my hand and give up on the whole main narrative of the game.
Except Wynne
@@indigocrayon520 They are not in dragon age two. Dragon age origins had quite a few mages that were trying to just live their lives. Two and Three is where they lost the plot IMO
@@BloodPixi3 sorry I missed "two"
Yeah I think a big issue with Cullen is that he was meant to be a sad story of radicalisation but he was so popular they kept bringing him back. I have a lot of issues with the way the games handle mages and also elves though. I've been in the fandom a long time and I remember how many people supported the templars/hated mages and also hated the Dalish. I think because Bioware always wants to have grey areas and make choices seem more complex they have demonised Thedas's minority groups too much.
Even in Inquisition, the mages sided with tervinter and the Templars got tricked into being corrupted with red lyrium. This choice was made so they can do the whole mage/templar choice at the end of act 1. However to do that they had to character assassinate Fiona and railroad the whole mage rebellion plus the Templars got tricked into it. So instead of a story about how oppressive the templars and the chantry are we have them being tricked into doing bad things and we have Mages once again making bad choices. It just makes the mages look worse.
As I said the Dalish get a lot of sinmilar treatment in the first two games.
Really? Because most fans I see wholly support mages and minorities of Thedas.
@@berilsevvalbekret772 he is right though to "both sides" the conflict in DA2 and DA3 bio ware make over 90% of all the mages you meet and interact with evil it's almost comical. DA2 ending is the worst Meredith is obviously wrong. But oh wait the head mage IS a blood mage oops...
@@berilsevvalbekret772Thats because thoes minorities are the anti status quo factions, and anti status quo factions are allmost allways better narratively.
Mages have a miles long advantage compared to templars in regard of narrative appeal. It's kind of sad how BW insead of owning that tries to agressively make it a "grey" conflict by making every second mage a crazed blood mage. It's an uphill battle, they wont even it out, all they are doing is making things fustrating.
Idk if someone has commented this already but I saw recently that the father of Wynne's child was heavily implied to Gregoir but she never told anyone.
Enjoying the deconstruction so far. Quick correction, there is a bigger timegap, between the end of DA2 playable timeline, and the start of DA:Inquisition. It's about 4 years from the Rebellion kicking off in Kirkwall, to the conclave trying to restore peace as the lead up to the 3rd game. I believe the 1 year time gap is from the actual in game narration in DA2, where Cassandra is interrogating Varric. But theoretically, it does provide much more time for him to reflect, during the relief/rebuilding efforts stated to have taken place during the time inbetween.
Hey! I see where you’re coming from! But I will say that Tresspasser I believe takes place in 9:42, and since Kirkwall finishes sometime in 9:38 and the whole of Inquisition is said to take place over four years then there can’t have been more than a few months to a year between The Chantry blowing up and Cullen leaving Kirkwall.
@@Kreetin7ase game Inquisition takes place from 9:41-9:42 with a 2 year gap to Trespasser which happens in 9:44. As you said Kirkwall final battle is in 9:38. There’s roughly 3 years between the battle and the start of Inquisition.
Varric and his interrogation by Cassandra does happen in 9:40.
Over all I found your essay very interesting though! It’s well thought out and you layout everything in an easy to follow way.
@@Kreetin7 Trespasser takes place some time in 9:44. The Conclave happens in 9:41 and Corypheus is defeated sometime in 9:42
@@Kreetin7 I don't know where you got that information because you only have to look as far as the timeline on the wiki or at what happened with Cole at the white spire to know Inquisition starts in 9:41, 3 years after the Kirkwall Circle.
I completely agree with everything you say about the Templars as an institution being completely evil, and they are. However, I disagree with the argument that Cullen recommending the use of Templars muddles his redemption arc.
Templars possess abilities that can be used as strategic advantages when approaching problems such as the closure of the breach. All Cullen has ever known are the tools of the Templars, so it makes sense that he would recommend using the Templars as another tactical approach based on his in-depth knowledge of solely their abilities, not their political purpose. At this juncture in the story, we have very few resources to work with, so all options are on the table as long as the breach is closed.
We were given two approach methods:
1. Use the Mages to power the anchor so that the Inquisitor had more magical strength to close the breach, which has a high potential of corrupting the mages into abominations since it would obviously be a giant party beacon for everything residing on the other side of the Veil according to the convos we have with other characters. (Which never actually happens as a consequence in the game, and would have been worth exploring.)
2. Use Templars to suppress the breach and weaken it so that the Inquisitor can use what power they can muster from the Anchor to close the breach. This puts Templars in the line of fire instead rather than the mages. (Another decision in which maybe something could have gone partially awry since the tactic is “pure speculation,” but is also never explored in-game.)
From a purely tactical perspective, using the Templars is the “minimal risk” option in theory. However, in practice, the game never explored the repercussions of either choice; which could have been a landmark moment to really show how either decision can lose lives, it just depends on the manner in which the player is willing to pay the moral cost behind them.
I don’t think recommending the Templars on Cullen’s part weakens his potential redemption arc. If anything, it’s a logical option based on who he is, what he knows, and the extremity of the breach situation at that point in the story. And by recommending to put the Templars in the line of fire against the breach rather than the Mages, with his newfound albeit flawed perspectives put into consideration, I would argue that this is a potential step in the right direction for him. Giving the Templars a newfound purpose of protecting everyone against a greater (non-sentient) threat, rather than the Chantry’s definition of only using them to keep mages in check.
EDIT: I forgot to say that I really enjoyed this video essay! I apologize for my comment being predominantly a counterpoint argument.
i’ve played the games MANY times but ig i’ve just always glossed over the fact they named the mage “solution” the FINAL SOLUTION. interesting choice they made there
The problem is the chantry tbh, because templars would still be needed to keep order in public, specially if we allow mages to live freely among people.
If circle towers became open/more like just schools, definitely would be a progress. But towers and Templars would ultimately still be necessary, as there will always be a maniac plotting terrible acts.
The Chantry is the issue they persecute the mage and they raise young children into addicts to guard them since Templar training takes years. And while templars can leave (they really can’t) they face lyrium withdrawals once they are cut off from their dealer/enabler it’s a giant mess
I appreciate that you bring up how the Chantry and Templars often times create the problems they say they're trying to solve. People assume free mages IMMEDIATELY turn into the Imperium when we don't even have all the details on how that built up into a total mage-ocracy outside of some small stories in codexes. And even then they still take a lot of care to tell you the Imperium is wasting away and that even all their magic isn't enough to take on the Qunari or even the 'White' Chantry. We know there was a lot of deceit and back stabbing in the founding but no indication that magic in and of itself was the cause of their turning into a bunch of dicks. This slippery slope argument is annoying to hear especially when we haven't even gotten to see Tevinter yet and our only direct accounts are: a former slave, a magister (he becomes one later but yknow), and a soldier from the class right above slaves. We get little on how mages NOT in already established families live and survive in the Imperium.
Meanwhile we get a good dive into how the Templars were ALWAYS mage hunters even from their inception as the Seekers and the old Inquisition. Sure a lot of them end up addicted to lyrium...but most of them still actively decided to join the group of armored mage killers with the intent of harming mages for one reason or another. Some were forced in and all were influenced by the Chantry's propaganda which I think are important points to remember, but they still have a LOT more agency in where they stand in this conflict than mages or even just innocent bystanders do.
Anyway, great video and as much as I love Cullen and find him to be interesting, I do tend to get mad at him when he's acting all anti-mage even into Inquisition.
I will say I think if they had intentionally made Cullen go kind of back and forth in his radicalization it could have worked as that's fairly realistic when radicalizing or deprogramming and it would have made his differing actions more understandable than just jarring.
This exactly! Even the mages in the imperium don't automatically turn into the common view of the imperium. I mean, Fenris may (I can't remember but it seems likely given his survival of the lyrium tattoos) have been a mage, his sister certainly was. Crem and Dorian tell the PC that weaker and poorer mages are still enslaved in Tevinter. It's hardly the case that "every" teventer mage is a "Magister" and a blood mage. Even if they were all blood mages, it's the mage that does the evil with it, not the magic itself. Merril was certainly not a monster OR an abomination and she used it. Even in the Imperium, most mages are just people trying to survive. Like with mundane psychopaths and killers, it seems like the worst magic transgressions are born of extreme ends of the spectrum where one extreme is sheer desperation, the other is a perfect combination of privilege and greed. The same could be said of destructive rulers and desperate killers with no magic at all. As far as I can see, the only Mages who have caused the terrifying damage that everyone is SO scared of are Fenris (a god by all accounts, not really a Mage anyway) and Coryphius (also arguably a demigod). If we're judging all ppl by the acts of gods then the Maker and Andraste caused just as much destruction and bloodshed with their founding and promotion of religious zealotry.
I agree with many things you said, especially the lack of consequences he faces. However, as someone who has overcome indoctrination I know that it takes VERY long for your heart to actually feel what your mind understood to be the truth at some point. You have to be very vigilant or you will fall back into old thought patterns, you will - especially in times of stress or uncertainty- miss the days when everything was crystal clear and you knew what to do in order to be a "good person". Letting go of old believes is a constant struggle and I chose to see that represented in Cullen's back and forth about mages.
Solas isn't morally grey, the dude is straight up 100% genocide tier evil. Solas be like "I'm not evil, but I am going to destroy the world though"
Big agree. People give him slack cause... Elven Glory I guess
Yea fr people go "yea he believes in racial purity and destroying eveyone else but that's not so bad. He's bald and he was nice to me."
@@lastmanstanding7155 And he's honestly not even that nice if you don't romance him. Always opening his mouth about the Dalish if you play an elf.
@@Zodiark303because they're wrong.
@@theatlantean8036 Ok right, but they don't know that. Most Dalish really think they are doing the right thing and are just trying to save what little culture they have left. Solas is just a bitch.
I really like your essay and even though Cullen is one of my favourite characters in DA I have to agree with all your points. I always saw him in Inquisition as being on the way to see mages differently, definitely not all the way there, amybe not even halfway there. Since I romanced him with my female mage character it was easier to accept the changes in his character as organic and see them partially as a result of that romance helping him to see mages in different light. He even admits it in one of the romanced scenes, how it sickens him now, the way he saw mages and that he wouldn´t even care for you much before with the way he saw them all.
In my opinion Cullen leaving templars and joining the Inquisition was never about him changing his opinions of mages, it was his way of taking back control of his life. Of breaking free from his leash, leash made out of lyrium, chantry propaganda and templar doctrine. What both his circle experiences have in common is being betrayed and controled - first by mages, than by templars. His changes for the better were based on him trying to kick his lyrium addiction and breaking free of blind obedience of the templar order. It was very telling for me, how different , cold emotionless and regresive he became if you pushed him to keep taking lyrium. It always made me wonder how much that addiction "helped" him to become more and more radicalized hand in hand with his trauma. And how much it has influenced all the other templars, made them more susceptible to commit bad things, to instill in them the chantry doctrine about dangers of magic. Propaganda and drug addiction working together to instill and enforce the chantry doctrine in templars makes the Chantry as an organization evil and your comparison with antisemitism is chillingly accurate for me.
I think the fear and uncertainty of mages is a lot more complicated than you're making it seem here. You have to keep in mind that the chantry was founded after Ferelden won it's independence from the Tevinter Imperium. The more you read about the Imperium and the absolute atrocities that were committed, it makes a lot more sense how the fear and condemnation of mages ended up happening. That's not to say it's RIGHT, and I always play the series as a staunch supporter of mages, but I feel like you are trying to put historical events from the real world that are not one to one comparisons here and it's clouding your judgement a bit. The villain of DAI is LITERALLY an ancient Tevinter magister who is trying to dominate humanity using magic, and whose magic might have created the blight in the first place. Everything in Thedas that has happened is because a group of VERY powerful mages went too far and nearly destroyed the world. Solas created the veil for a reason, and although he is an advocate for magic within the game he is also very outspoken about how magic is corruptible and used for selfish gain.
I think the games writers have created a very interesting plot where they want you to side with and empathize with the mages, but they also want to show you that the fear isn't coming out of nowhere and magic in the wrong hands could literally destroy the world.
The game designers gave you Anders as a way to really empathize with the rebellion just as much as they gave you Fenris to show what magic in the wrong hands is capable of.
As far as Cullen goes, he's a very interesting and multidimensional character, and I really like romancing him as an elven mage. I do think there could have been more done with him for sure, but I personally like that the writers have given us a character that we can also empathize with in a visceral way that isn't a mage.
You also see the flip side with both characters - Anders becomes a monster and his antipathy for Fenris is vicious and immoral, Fenris too is willfully blind to the abuse of mages and gratiously cruel to Anders and Merrill. Both of them approve of some decisions many would consider to be utterly despicable.
This is exactly how I see it too!
Nah.
@@gzapray7203 Whatever.
Absolutely agree! its a lot more complicated than "Templars bad, mages good". The templars and the circles are not the right way to deal with mages, but within the context of the games, its a very understandable solution.
Really good video! Im genuinely shocked that bioware were confused as to why people weren’t siding with the templars more. They tried so hard to “both sides” the issue.
I sided with the templars because their quest was better and I like their armor 🙃
@@reffa2858 well yeah but like I cant see anyone siding with them like morally. Im down to side with the templars in a playthrough so I can experience calpernia
@@CommanderNam well even if you side with them, you can leash them to the inquisition if you want them to feel a bit of irony....
Honestly for BW to think that they should be completely out of it, not in touch with reality.
Which they arent, obviously. They live in their own world of make-belief. I noticed it a long time ago. And writing for DA2 in particular was soooo bad when it comes to Anders and mage/templar issues, like so bad its not even funny.
@@CommanderNamI side with them morally. I dunno how everyone focuses on templars with bad attitudes and completely ignores mages mass murdering people constantly.
In Dragon Age if a lot of people are dying then it’s mages who are doing it.
In DA:4 we are going to Tevinter where mages religiously perform sacrifices and yet I can still see people being all like “but the templars tho!”
this is a great essay, and thank you for putting all this work into it. cannot imagine how demanding this video was. you've got a nice flow of speech that's very easy to listen to, and it's a cool thing when it's about video essays. well done!
Cullen admits himself he should have questioned and acted against Meredith sooner but you dealing with traumatized individual who was idealistic. Also he was kept in the dark about some of the worst stuff because she knew he wouldn't approve at first. To me it's a strength of BW's storyteller that they show someone getting sucked into the orbit of a dangerous extremist and then coming to see how unhinged and toxic they are and actually it isn't too little, too late it's at the 11th hour but it still matters and it makes a difference because it still gives Hawke the chance to defeat Meredith. Anders loses himself, Fenris's views don't never radically shift it's good that we get SOMEONE who does prove capable of growth in a good way.
I wish we got to see Meredith more in Act 1 and Act 2 of DA2. From the talk and what you can read, she didn't go full over the line until getting ahold of the red lyrium relic.
I feel like you would have more of a whiplash of personality change going into Act 3 if you actually knew her before. She didn't agree with making all mages tranquil, and it looks like she used to keep the peace with Orsino.
I loved this!
The Chantry's suppression of mages (and the way they goes about it) only really makes sense if they actually want mages to procreate.
Without mages having babies, the Chantry looses most of their next generation of Templars, Seekers and Chantry Sisters/Mothers. If a mage births a child that grows up to be a mage, that child already feels indebted to the Chantry and has been indoctrinated to believe that their magic is scary, so to protect everyone, they must go to a Circle.
The Chantry has more political power within Thedas than the rulers and nobilty do. The Chantry has enough land (or could demand it) to make sure that each country has two Circles, so that female mages are only watched over by female Templars.
I think BioWare did touch on other circles and the wealthy being able to see their mage children again and also letting mages out? Idk. I didn’t think this was possible in DAO, but after talking to Vivienne and exhausting the human mage dialogue in DAI, it seemed as if the other circles were less strict? Idk seemed like a Ret-con but also possible that we only saw the worst circles.
Okay but the circle has to exist, every time mages rose up they tore the world apart evanuris being the best example old magisters ect😊
From my understanding, the soul isn’t taken from the body. The soul/spirit connection to the fade is blocked. They cut the spirit off from the fade.
I feel like Bioware failed in DA 2 to show several characters growth over a period of years because of the friendship rivalry system that was used. It greatly limited the potential for these characters to grow. I hated it. Why couldn't Hawke have actually had some effect on his/her companions over the years? Perhaps Cullen's opinion of mages could have been shown to change more during the different stages of DA2? It was a really dumb system. It's like Hawke really wasn't even present. For instance, if I was a companion of Hawke and I was constantly rivalled by this person, my opinion would either change or I would leave. I couldn't stick by someone I basically hated. The friendship/rivalry system was so unrealistic it was laughable. (BTW I loved Fenris as a character, but Bioware really missed out on a chance to have him grow as a person, and I hated that.) I loved the Cullen in DAI but it's like he's a newly created character and not one that has evolved over time.
While yes the circles were not always good, neither were the mages. As with any story you have the good, the bad and the in-between. as a longtime Cullen fan, I can actually understand his story, his character progression and I can understand his PTSD in a unique way as I also have it. The changes in his character can actually be attributed to growth and yes his stopping the Lyrium. In the first game he's more like he is in the third game. In the second you can see he's almost flat, even unfeeling when on Lyrium. He rarely shows emotion save for a couple times, One is with Wilmod on the coast. Mind you during 2 he's also dealing with Meredith who has gone off her rocker and he is her second in command meaning he dealt with her more than any other Templar, The second emotion showing time is during the end, where no matter the side you choose he will stand against her with you, he will back down even if you are not made Vicount. In DAI he's dealing with coming off more than a decade of Lyrium use, PTSD as well as what he perceives as the end of the world, yet he will still make concessions towards mages, and if you are a mage and a love interest still fall in love, something he's always avoided as he chose to dedicate his life to the Chantry. While he's made mistakes, he's been unkind to mages and has a past he comes full circle, he tries to undo his past as well as deal with his present and actually look toward a future (if romanced), none of which are easy when you are haunted with PTSD, when your sleep is a constant flash of bad memories, fears you harbor and deeds you've endured. At their core most Templars aim to serve the maker, the chantry and Thedas, some let the power get to them, some get lost in the politics, the games and the rhetoric, and some attempt to remain true to why they joined. Cullen is flawed, he's scarred, he's battered but he's still standing, if you do not make him take Lyrium in DAI he actually is one of the first Templars, (non-seekers) to break the Lyrium addiction, one of the first to have a life beyond the order, and to change the image of Templar, to aid the ones coming off Lyrium after end game, and he is no matter what people think the one who trains the Inquisition army, without his training the Mark and the Inquisitor could only do so much. When you talk to him in Detail he reveals he joined the order at 13, took lyrium at 18 and served through the blight, through the siege of Kirkwall and left Kirkwall and the order to Aid Cassandra, Cassandra being a hand of the Divine, a seeker as well as a hero in her own right is better suited to judge him than any other character in game. (watch the anime "Dawn of the Seeker" it tells her early story).
The problem with mages= bad is that 90% of the time they resort to blood magic (which by itself isn't evil) because of how the templars treat them
I’m not as convinced on your DA2 take, there was a lot of messed up stuff being done by mages in Kirkwall, a lot of which was done with Orsino’s aid, including that serial killer who was stitching women together and then we have Orsino himself becoming an uber abomination, all without red lyrium to drive him mad.
As you said, DA2 is great with its politics, but I don’t think DA2 is as clear cut on who you should be supporting as DA:O
I mean, at the end the response is to... kill every circle mage? Even if some of them are murderers, a good amount of them are straight up children. Meredith even wants you to kill Bethany. I don't see a grey area here. It wasn't, "kill Orsino". It was "kill Orsino and every other mage in Kirkwall."
Ok so far it's a critique of circles - yup ok I'm cool with that but I do think the solution is probably having something more like Hogwarts an academy or a mixed system of more smaller schools so closer to the mage's family and for some very sensitive or independent minded mages like Anders something like home schooling. The Harrowing sucks though.
Cullen does not act on his crush even if the mage in question actually tries to get him too. This is important because yup the system that places them both in that situation is flawed and facilitates abuse but he knows this and describes his resistance of it as it being inappropriate because of it.
Part of the vows to become a Templar is a vow of celibacy. That's what he means when he says it would be inappropriate.
@@mlpfan-id1np Actually no - I suppose you wouldn't know this because you've never flirted with him but if you ask in DAI then he says both that templars are not required to take such a vow and he never has - so actually he doesn't mean that at all.
Great analysis but I think a lot of what you have said as being a Cullen issue is mostly a Templar issue. His virtues should include every time he has not let his experiences cause him to do bad things also. Trauma is destructive and can compound with time as much as people think time can "heal all wounds". The system is so normalized that most people, specifically Chantry following people, do not realize the power imbalance unless they become a victim.
You said that Cullen never receives any consequences for his actions but we forget that he has been tortured equally by himself and while we as players may not accept it as enough it is more than we see from any person who is anti-mage. The core of his character is that he Is a Chantry Templar...a person that has fully believed and lives by the Chantry and has no clue how to live outside of that propaganda. So even the fact that he has questioned things at all and grown in any capacity is a huge thing. You are calling for him to give more than that because you see the story from many perspectives specifically from being able to see the inhumanity of the entire system.
When we think about how he changes in context of being a member of Chantry life, he has had major changes against what he has been told is morally just. Which, IMHO, is justification enough to be trustworthy in inquisition at least.
The whole "Cullen doing something against Meridith too little too late" is basically asking a military man to commit insubordination against their CO for them doing what is lawfully correct. There are huge ramifications for Templars that go against their superiors (themselves going to the mage prison for example other than being slain for being a sympathizer). While Meridith is indeed terrible, she only becomes lawfully wrong in the end where Cullen, true to character, opposes her. His flaws are that he is lawful in a system that is unjust and that is possibly the hardest thing to turn against. Yet, he still does.
While I agree as a player there should be more consequences or displays of making amends from him in game, I think that from within the system that he lives, the small steps in the right direction make total sense.
This is a brilliant comment. I was trying to think of a way to word what I was thinking when watching the video, but you have managed to do it far better than I ever could.
Ok going in I don't think I'm going to agree with this but I really like Cullen's arc as it is it shows how a decent person can be broken by trauma and how they can recover themselves. I think he does end acknowledging the power imbalance saying circles should rule themselves and mages could serve outside them under supervision.
39:00 To me, this point is kinda moot due to the fact that he's not talking about morals or virtues. He's talking specifically about ABILITIES here. I honestly can't blame him for wanting to go to the Templars for help with the Breach.
Think about it.
This is a magic mark that almost nobody understands and it's also related to the GIANT MAGICAL EXPLOSION that caused a DEMON-SPEWING HOLE IN THE SKY. Remember, Templars aren't just knights in fancy armor. They're specially trained to nullify magic.
If I had to choose between powering up something that nobody understands that is DEFINITELY related to an explosion or weakening the giant hole in the sky causing demons to appear, making it easier to control, and making it less likely to cause something else to go ary, I'd choose the latter.
I agree on most everything else, but that point bothered me.
Honestly, Cullen made amazing full circle growth in his character arc by going from the mess he was after the demons used the warden’s image to torture him with since he was in love with her in the first game. To running straight to Meredith since she was super strict but then realizing what a monster she was too and siding with the mages at the end of DA2 ti then falling in love with a mage again and yeeting his inner (and outer) Templar for good in DAI. It was one of the best character developments I’ve ever seen and the way he was able to grow and become a good man after all that trauma makes me love him. Is he still a little militarized in his ear table missions yes. But that’s not related to the whole Mage thing. That’s just his military training kicking in. And honestly sometimes that is needed. But for most missions diplomatic or subterfuge works better.
Bioware's attempt at morally grey storytelling in the mage and templar conflict just falls so very flat. They try to equate violence of oppression with violence against oppression, and blame mages for their own oppressions at points. I find it interesting that you mention antisemitic connections to the conflict because I have always equated it to my own experiences as a gay and trans person, and have seen other equate it to their experiences with racial oppression. In a way, I think the mage vs templar conflict can reflect a lot of real world experiences while being its own thing entirely, and I think making a video essay examining that is a very interesting idea!
Idk how you can say the conflict between mage and Templars isn't grey. Mages are Literaly possible weapons of mass destruction. Mages can get posesses without wamting it. That does not mean the templars are right, thats why its grey
Because it isn't, the end. It isn't grey. The game mostly fails showing the danger the avarage mage can posess. We see exceptional cases that have the powers of gods, but the avarage mage is defeated by a dagger. The avarage abomination is defeated by a low level mercenary. The player can be a bloodmage and deal with demons and fuck all happens.
"But gameplay segregation" I hear you cry, no. It's part of the game, it should support the lore.
No amount of "but, but, mage dangerous, Templars needed" changes that. If mages are so much more capable to do damage than everyone else, maybe nerf warriors.
It's important to remember that magic has widely been used as an oppressive force in Thedas. From the elves of Elvhenen to the Tevinter Imperium, magic was used to conquer, control, and enslave others. The Templar Order doesn't just exist to be an "oppressor", it exists to prevent that from ever happening again. Think about it, would you be okay if people who could casually wipe out a town had absolutely no oversight? That just because they were having a bad day, they might end up killing thousand of people. Would that be okay with you? This is absolutely not to say that the Templars themselves don't need oversight, because they very much do and have on many occasions abused their power. But they exist for a reason. It infuriates me that Bioware went with the Mage/Templar duality, where either the Templars brutally oppress the mages or the mages have complete freedom (all the while not so subtly pushing the latter choice as the "correct" one). The obvious answer is that BOTH the mages and templars need extensive oversight, yet we have to go with one group triumphing over the other. The only thing that can come from this is disaster.
The Templars *had* oversight, the Seekers. The Seekers had oversight, the Chantry.
The issue is that every level of oversight failed in their duty.
I guess Cullen feels better to me in 2 because my Hawke is a mage who sided with the mages. I'll admit I tend to have my characters push him further and further from his harsh views, Anni Surana was his crush and while there was definitely some struggle in there I get the feeling he wants to apologize to her in inquisition, Lynn Hawke challenged him every chance he got while being both a mage and a man most recognize as a good person, and Rose Trevelyan who ultimately becomes his wife is herself a mage, she's ment to be a relatively soft-spoken and gentle woman, she's the most andrastian of my mages, and it just feels cute for her to push that last little bit that Lynn couldn't get at. I mean I feel like he could have been written better, but it helps for me that my characters all push against this for him.
I thank you for this video as I get into arguments with my friend that is a great guy (and he can be, he's fine-ish), but everyone seems to forget that he hasn't really redeemed anything. He says that he has, but nothing to show for it makes me not like him and not trust him with anything magical related. Thank you for this video, it informed me of information I overlooked in judging his character, but also brought up to light arguments I didn't think of that show what he is like that people like to ignore.
My almost full Templar supporter inquisitor with the templar specialization that took almost all templar options looking at this video: Is that a Demon i hear possesing you?
The circles are basically a old fashion fransiscian monastery where they learn ,read books,and reflect while being basically locked away.
I guess this is just the consequences of EA rushing out DA2. So many retcon, seriously leliana can die in origins but is alive in inquisition. I expect dreadwolf to have more retcons.
Gurl listen, okay, we would be friends. About dragon age if nothing else. I think about these very things all the damn time. Bioware, imo, always gets a few feet away from sticking the landing, from saying something strong story-wise, from making a powerful point. And then at the last moment, they back out, they fuck it up, they just don't hit. And it infuriates me.
I love so many of these characters, Cullen included, for what they're suppose to be, for what potential I can see in them. But they ain't it, honey. I have to do most of that character work in my own head for Bioware.
I totally agree with Bioware missing the mark with the "moral dilemmas" they create. They did the same with so many of their games, and it's taken playing similar games like DOS2 to realise that you can have similar dilemmas that ACTUALLY mean something if it's just executed properly. I mean, sure, have your moral dilemma, but make damn sure that the player KNOWS they're CHOOSING to be an extremist 'knight' who's a glorified slave trader and murderer. Don't pretend it's a "grey" area, it's not. It's a choice. I still adore the bioware games since they introduced me to this kind of RPG, and I'm still really looking forward to the next game... But the older I get and the more comparable games I play from other companies, the more I realise how overly simplistic and tokenistic BW's moral choices really are.
i wasn't even that big a cullen fan but ever since seeing someone suggest he and samson swap places i haven't gotten it out of my head. especially if we got to see samson get used to being in command and grow into a leader vs just let cullen have his villain arc goddammit
ps. love the video btw, insta subscribed! hope theres more essays, dragon age has.... a lot
Well your video popped up and I'm am both impressed and intrigued lol this was an amazing breakdown and I wanted to thank you for posting it 😊
I don’t agree with all of the points. But I loved this video so much. The way you presented it just *chefs kiss*. I subscribed for it.
I love this video mainly bc it exactly points out all the faults with the templar's order and why it legitimizes Leliana as next Divine. We need to let people be who they are, punish those who use power in the wrong way for what's possible in a fantasy medieval-renaissance world and make it better. I never understood why there even was a choice between templars and mages when the difference is so clear. Support the mages, they're oppressed as f*ck, templars are nothing more than bigotted soldiers lol
I just discovered dragon age and all the fandom stuff i've come across so far has been either uncritical cullenites or people who absolutely hate him, so it really means a lot to me to have this video by someone who likes him like I do but also sees the flaws in the writing.
Okay the dragon age inquisition first point is kinda iffy. Think about it, your dealing with an unknown magic and you have the choice between risking causing an unknown magical reaction using the mages or risk using the templar magic negation and doing nothing. Because it felt like he was the only one at that table thinking about the possible consequences, that could have been caused.
What is the difference between bind demon to a mage grey warden, vs a blood magic mage possessed by a demon? 🤔
Wow, this is so well explained...I'll never see him the same way again! 0-0
I understand your points but disagree in some areas. I can’t believe I’m acting as an apologist for a religious institution, even a fictional one.
Labeling The Templars as a hate group is a little extreme, given that blood mages and abominations are a thing. The Chantry’s line about being born with magic being a sign of sin to be ashamed of is BS, but you have to keep in mind that Andraste founded the religion to rise up against the slaver mage lords of Tevinter. Their doctrine is going to have anti-magic undertones(Andraste being a mage herself is still just a fan theory). Also, untrained mages are a danger to themselves and others, so it’s not a one-to-one god hates gays allegory. If memory serves, even Wynne accidentally lit a boy’s hair on fire when she awakened to her power.
Yes, The Circles are the more evil institution and needed to fall. However, templars are still victims of religious indoctrination and addiction to a substance that The Chantry, up until DA:I, possessed a monopoly on the trade of.
Your argument about Cullen in DA:O leaned way too hard on a hypothetical abuse of power. Besides that, Gregor runs a tighter ship than Merideth. He’s not going to approve the rite of tranquility for something so petty. I feel like a lot of Anders’ stories about templar brutality come from Kirkwall. Then again, maybe not. Now I recall how in Awakening, they were ready to label him a blood mage so that they could execute him after so many escape attempts.
PTSD aside, Cullen's whole arc in DA2 really is a case of how rushed that game was. It’s the same reason you have to fight Orsino and Meredith, no matter who you side with. Still, canon is canon, even if the game went from concept to gold in only a year.
I mean, if you really want Curly to face consequences, you could just keep him addicted to lyrium and disband The Inquisition. In that ending, he becomes a mind-addled junkie begging on the streets.
Ya, it feels like she dislikes the templars not so much because of their in game actions but because of real world parallels that we understand but these characters obviously aren’t aware of. The mages are not a 1:1 insert of 1940s Jews as she seems to believe, the situation in thedas is complicated and has histories spanning thousands of years that need to be taken into account.
You cannot go into a fictional world only to find whatever is “close enough” to real world events to fit your preexisting worldview. Parallels can exist, intentionally or otherwise but you need to be able to see the broader story and narrative beyond just “so who is this universes Hitler?”
The video is amazing, but I noticed some inconsistencies with the lore:
1. Lyrium is not a drug. It can, however, be used as a drug if prepared correctly. Templars prepare lyrium in a very different way than the lyrium potions are created, making it into a drug that is highly addictive and inhibits templar's thinking.
2. Revka Amell didn't have 8 children. She had 5 children. It's never stated if the man she had them with was secretly a mage or not, but it's said he was her husband. It's possible that Amell family just simply has magic genes running through them. Still, considering that from all Amells only children of Revka and Leandra are mages, it's very probable that both Revka and Leandra had babies with mages or people with magical heritage. Warden Amell is also not the youngest of all of Revka's children, but the oldest. Leandra says that all of them were taken to the circles, but World of Thedas says that her husband just took the rest away and left Kirkwall. It's an inconsistency that is often explained as "husband took the children from Kirkwall and then all of them were found to be mages and taken".
~nitpicking lore issues ends here~
Outside of that I find it funny that Uldred is always the one blamed for the Broken Circle, while he did it as a deal with the main antagonist - Loghain. Uldred did the worst possible thing to win the freedom for the mages, and that's also Loghain's fault. Uldred is a bad guy, and Loghain is the guy who knows how to use him. In Kirkwall the situation is even worse because that place is basically a second Aeonar. The Veil is so thin there that I wouldn't be surprised if regular people also heard demons, like Lily claims she can in Aeonar.
With Anders it may feel like tricking the player because we have no knowledge of this world, so we couldn't know what Anders was creating, but from the perspective of a mage Hawke or someone who knows some stuff about Thedas, I think that trick could very easily be a way in which Hawke got plausible deniability in helping to take down the symbol of oppression that this huge golden church was. (I'm not going to cry over that building).
Speaking of the game's ending: *mourning the fact that Hawke was not allowed to just team up with the terrified nobles to stand against Meredith and become the Viscount simply because of the false gray morality dichotomy that this game is trying to push*
BTW Meredith seeing Hawke as an enemy would make more sense if Hawke teamed up with nobles to take her down and become the new Viscount. It'd be at least logical, but let's be honest, she wasn't logical at this point in the story. Idol was singing too much of a banger. I mean, it still makes sense still, because of Hawke's influence, but it'd be supported better if there was an opportunity to strengthen that position by chosing to ally with the nobles who were terrorized by Meredith at that point in time. If you chose not to, you'd still be an influential figure that threatens Meredith's position, but if you do, you are a confirmed threat this time around, so Meredith's obsession with you is a bit less maniacal then.
I remember that the first time I played DA2 I sided with the templars because I thought it will be the same kind of situation as when Warden was cleaning the Circle Tower from abominations. Well, it felt kind of the same when I could spare some random mages, but with years (and the help of people on tumblr) I realized how fucked up that choice is. Which brings up how people who were raised as christians since birth, even if they were somewhat rebellious, are very susceptible to this game brainwashing you in the same way that the Church does. It convinces you that locking up the mages is a necessary thing, and people like me, raised in Christian homes, don't even blink at how fucked up this idea is until years later, when we finally deal with all the crap we were fed as kids. Another reason why it's easy for me to identify with Cullen, when I myself believed stuff that are simply morally bad.
The retcons also annoyed me a bit. Especially the one that took away Ander's happy ending. I mean, at least as much of a happy ending as a Warden can get in this dark fantasy world.
And when it comes to DAI, I also think it were his first steps, very clumsy ones on the road to the de-radicalization, and it's annoying that the game treats it as a full de-radicalization redemption when Cullen still didn't deal with his shit and if you romanced him, you are once again, just like Amell and Surana, an exception from all the other mages. The special one.
I like Cullen as a character, but if he were Alistair 2 as many fans see him, he would be less naive and less susceptible to Chantry's bullshit, because that's the biggest distinction between them. Alistair wanted to leave his templar training because he never wanted it in the first place but also because he saw through the bullshit (even though he hates blood mages, but well, Anders does too, so... what can we do), which Cullen never did (and damn, this is another thing I relate to Cullen so much. I wish I were as smart as Alistair to see through bullshit when I was young, but I was not, and I believed in a lot of shitty stuff).
As a huge fan of de-radicalization as a story to be told I stand behind you wholeheartedly. I wish we had more stories that showed de-radicalization right. That showed to all the bigots that there is actually a different path than radicalization and hatred. That they can change.
The false dichotomy in DAI is even more stupid, because we could simply do both quests. Both are vital to understanding what is happening in the world right at that time, so splitting them like that for some false sense of dichotomy just felt like a stupid decision whatsoever. Not to mention that when we recruit templars in the Champions of the Just they're not treated the same as mages are. With mages, you either choose if they're your allies or prisoners, but with templars we don't have the same choice. As if they had no culpability in what was happening. As if the highest-ranking ones weren't feeding everybody red lyrium with zero consequences, with nobody ever noticing. How is it different from what happened in the Broken Circle? And yet, templars are the heroes that withstood horrific things, while mages are the bad guys who dared to be manipulated by the Tevinter Magister and submit.
Cullen stating that he is feeling bad but then advocating for the templars is so bonkers. Especially when you have Jaws of Hakkon where he proposes to leave one of the Avvaran abominations under templars watch. And I'm here, like, no, go away; this is a bad idea. I agree that he will never be a redeemed man if he doesn't stop seeing the whole issue as "templars suffer too", which is true, but it doesn't make them less complicit. It just means they are not the greatest evil there is, because Chantry obviously is the main bad guy for recruiting kids into the service (kids that they often raised into thinking mages are evil) and also letting bigoted adults join the order, and then giving them all a drug that inhibits their judgement. Especially considering that Alistair can use templar abilities without the lyrium.
The lack of any consequences for Cullen, especially all the possible situations the game could account for but didn't that you have mentioned yourself, also drives me nuts. He is never confronted by the game, even though Leliana does peck him a lot whenever he opens his mouth during the War Table meetings (she shots down some of his more pro-templar ideas as simply stupid and ridiculous and makes digs at him about him being oversensitive about the threat that mages possess (Mage will sneeze and someone will scream "blood magic").
And I still stand by my assertion that this dichotomy is no longer needed. Why go "choose either mages or templars" when you can force templars to abandon being templars and put them under Inquisition and then put both mages and templars to work on the Breach? Or better, just mages, while templars are put on the front line to fight demons that will surely pour out of the Breach when the Inquisitor re-opens it. That's a better strategy, tbh. They suck at suppressing magical threats, but they're good with swords, so let them use them on demons. The mere distinction of choosing between them feels like a subtle message that those games will never allow the conflict to settle. Will never allow templars to realize the system is broken and needs to be dismantled and that templars need a fundamental re-evaluation as individuals, because tons of them are bigots that have to either try to change or be held accountable for what they were doing.
I really like this discussion! I remember when the characters for DAI were announced before the game came out and not wanting Cullen & Cassandra in the game (Which I mostly backslid on after the game came out, more so with Cassandra.) because of how they were in DA2. Like most, my DA2 Hawke was a mage and yea he stands against Meridith at the very end (Like you said about him in DAI, it was to little too late.) and he is the first Templar to lay his sword down after the fight and let you go. That moment didn't feel like he was letting you go because he respected you or mages now, it felt like now that Meridith was dead, he was afraid of you so he ends hostilities. In short, I didn't feel like he was redeemed enough to warrant me wanting him to be in Inquisition.
Honestly, its hard to criticize a guy that had been through as much trauma as he did. Think about him living with the abomination outbreak in the circle during DA:O. Seeing everyone you know be turned into an abomination or killed. Being tortured. That kind of thing would stick with someone their whole life. If that wasn't enough he had to survive the blight that was still ongoing. If THAT wasn't enough then we move into DA:II where his superior was slowly losing her mind with power. Also there was a sect of blood mages inside the city also turning templars into blood mages and the lot (here we go again in his mind right?) it is very possible that initially he thought what Meredith was doing was justified up until the end when he realized she was actually crazy and wanted to take thing way too far. If THAT wasn't enough we roll into DA:I where either you deal with Corypheus a teventir magister (mage) either convinces all remaining Templars to take red lyrium and posses them OR Corypheus turns all the mages evil and here we go all over again for him, right? How could a dude who survived and saw all that actually trust a mage again? of COURSE he is going to tell you to side with the Templars.
An issue with the video for me is that you can't discount the fact that any power will corrupt people.
The Templars and the Chantry have a lot of power and they are quite corrupt themselves. The same will happen with the mages in a long enough time scale. May not be immediately but when there are people in the world that can literally shoot fireballs from their hands power will get to their head and corrupt them.
I can see the argument of Dragon Age making the Templars seem too good or justified but I can't see how they aren't justified.
What did the elves in Tevinter do when they became slaves to the Tevinter mages. Nothing. Because there was no way to resist them. It required other nations and the Imperium weakened for them to lose.
I am not saying what the Circle does to mages is a good thing. What I am saying is that mages have to be taught how to handle their power and be given the basic morals of not killing people. And to have systems in place to deal with mages who are evil.
I don't think it is the devs fault for making a game that doesn't have easy answers or has people on either side being evil.
In DAI I like making Leliana Divine because what she does for the Circle is better. Making it more of a school you go to, to learn how to use magic and make the Templars a force to deal with mages gone bad and not as watch dogs.
Powerd doesn't corrupt. What power does is atract the corrupt and give corrupt people a platform to act upon their nature.
@@i.cs.z well you can say both. What power can do is alienate you from everyone. Causing you to live in your own reality.
Cullen went from a young naive templar wanting peace and fair treatment for mages to being mind f*cked for days possibly for a week by blood mages. He is kinda scarred for that but that does not make him a villian when he obviously sides with a mage (because its canon) to take down Meredith
Cullen went from a young naive templar wanting peace and fair treatment for mages - Thats debatable at best because even in DAO's beginning he was on the same path as most other templars. The writers explicitly said they wrote him creppy and borderline r-pey in DAO seeing how he was all but stalking your mage female character
I could never bring myself to support the templars, and it's honestly not surprising that a majority of players support mages. No matter what Bioware do, how they try to humanize templars and show them as victims as well, they are the obvious oppressors. I mean, come on, Bioware games are very popular with female and LGBTQIA+ gamers , did anyone think they'd go ahead and support the oppression of an innocent minority, hated due to religious-based prejudice? Didn't think so.
Cullen's story arc could have been better. I think he is really trying to change and it's only addressed as him trying to kick lyrium. After you ally with the mages; after the cut scene, he doesn't hate the mage's. He doesn't totally trust them, but, doesn't throw a hissy fit either. There is some growth if not for just accepting the main's decision. There is only two mains who want total freedom for the mages and that's Leliana and Solas. Dorian even expresses sceptisim. Ambassador M wants the mages help but never expresses their freedom. Leliana does. She is the only one who has lived a more rounded life in this series and is given no romance possibilities or is a more main side character than anyone else. All other characters have lived a more linear life than Leliana. All the side kicks less Cole are sided one way or another. Cole is the only character that just wants to help. Even Sera is sided (poor is power and conscript whoever, no freedom) and she's crazy. Cullen is still all templar. Cassandra is all templar. Solas is all mages. Vivennne is all templars. Amb. M is all mages (not give if she wants them to be free or not.) Iron bull is all templar. Varric is sided with whatever you Hawke character is. Dorian is all mages. Blackwall is even as long as he believes in the Inquisitors goal. Grey Wardens don't get involved in the mage/templar drama. The nuance is there with each and it's a moral issue, but, if you want to get right down to it, you make people like you or mad at you. Cullen has had time to grow. It's actually been 3 years since kirkwall and he is still all templar. Even though trying to kick lyrium, he's still all templar. In this whole game, no one mentions Lysette in any video. She states that the templars are supposed to protect the mages. Also, she's a recruit and hasn't been brainwashed yet. I like your take on the Cullen situation and agree on most. Cullen is still all templar either way. He may or may not hate mages, but, loves templars. I think he realizes that lyrium is a drug and really wants to kick it. I think he just still doesn't like mages. Despite what happened in DA2 at the end, he still doesn't like mages.
well dragon age 2 does good job showing what happends when mages left uncheked too... hawks mom comes to mind andres blowing chantry tavinter magistrate hunting fenris or even redcliff from dao where one child gets possesd by demon if conor would be send to mage tower redcliff never happends... So if there is no templars you get tavinter on your hands... If I remeber corectly before Wayne was brought to tover she burned child as kid. So you have to teach mages how to use their power you cant just let them get hang of magic by themself. Is circles best way to do it? Not realy. Are templars necesary? yes they are. culen saw first hand what happends when mages get possesed by demons. By the way in your view all templars are evil by same logic in chantry view all mages are evil because of what tavinter empire was... in this story there is no black and white but lots and lots of grey.
Two things:
1: I think he joined the templars to help support his family. You hear about his siblings but not his parents. At 13, he probably had to make a choice of being an apprentice being paid a little, going home where there isn't much food or space. Or joining the templars, where they probably gave his family some coin, he goes off so they have more food and space, plus they feed him, and he can send them money over time.
2. He gets a lot of sympathy because of how his story plays out. But he can still grow up to be a creep if Leliana romances the warden with a mage background. He'll ask about her two ways: one friendly to Leli and sexual by runner. He never actually finds anything good in mages unless you romance as one, but that's flawed because he is getting something out of it, and it's just that one mage.
Cullen's character arc is REALISTIC, whether you personally LIKE him as a person or not. You're not expected to LIKE him. The goal of Bioware is NOT to make characters likable, the kind of people you'd like to be friends and have coffee with. It's to make characters who are realistic - i.e. could be actual people you know.
The problem here is not the writing around Cullen. Rather, it is your assumption that characters should not be problematic.
How Cassandra's views on the seekers changes should've been what they did with Cullen a quest that deals with the wrongs/a open realization.
thank you SO much for this video, ive been saying this for a long time but its great video. his "redemption" did not happen in inquisition and im massively annoyed that the inquisitor didn't get to judge him. i played origins first and then inquisition (back in my bad internet days, i couldn't download 2) and i was SHOCKED when i finally played 2 and the things he said made me despise him, and i had romanced him many times. i get he had 3 different writers but its like they didn't go back to his character in each game.
the only thing i'd disagree about is cullen being alistair 2.0. alistair from the get go tells warden that mages are terrorized (basically) by templars and he was glad that duncan recruited him for the wardens bc he didn't want to join. he's a great (silly) lovable character and one of the best of bioware's characters.
I still feel like the writers had to go out their way to make kirkwall a complete and utter disaster. Like you can do everything "right" be diplomatic and shit still hits the fan in the most bombastic way. You confide with the templars meredith still goes made, you confide with the mages Orsino still turns into a grotesque monster, you confide with Anders and he still blows up the Chantry.
Like things were just meant to go wrong around here I guess! And it shows because I get in Inquisition and people were like, yeah kirkwall was the worst our circles are nothing like that...
My favourite thing about Kirkwall as a setting is that in universe it is known to be a Bad Place. And not just because huge wealth gap we see, it is cosmically Bad. It started as a center of slave trade, the Sundermount is an old battlefield and a resting place for ancient elves. The city is built in a strange pattern implying that it was made for some sort of big ritual. The veil is thin and the mines are cursed. The place is fucked and it cannot be unfucked
@@grecha7656 yeah, I still cant get past the giant statues of crying slaves.
I half expected him to be a traitor later in the game bc of his behavior in the previous games.
I know this videos a year old but the stories and discrimination against mage’s and elves remind me so much of Indigenous peoples treatment in Canada, where BioWare is from. I doubt it’s intentional but I would suggest looking up residential schools, you’d be shocked at the similarities to circles.
People forget that Cullen is in dao and da2 I'm surprised someone actually remembered.
I agree with everything you said at this point (36 minutes in) but Inquisition takes place in 9:41, 3 after the events of DA2 in 9:38.
i saw someone once say that it should have been reversed, samson as the advisor and cullen as the one fooled by corypoo.... they were right and the more time goes on especially since the voice actor makes it harder and harder to forgive the flaws in his character arc..
the voice actor and character are not the same person and the VA can be replaced
@@emapple8298 okay 👍 my issues with Cullen as a character are only compounded by the voice actor. even if the actor was a literal angel I would still have issues with Cullen. regardless of that, every person is different and it is within my rights to have my personal feelings towards a character further tainted by the actions of the actor.
and more to the point my comment was discussing the concept of switching Samson and Cullen because their characters suit that switch so much better.
I always thought that mages are indeed *dangerous* and they do need some kind of *help/protection* against demons and temptation, not zealous vigilance. Because what the Templars do... God, it's like trying to stop a fire in a forest by freezing the entire world and then blame people for lighting campfires to avoid freezing. The Templars present themselves as the solution to the "mage problem", a problem they are not only amplifying, but maybe even creating in the first place.
I do think Cullen does have flaws as a character, mainly because the production problems that Dragon Age II had and because of how his "redemption arc" had to be rushed into Inquisition's beginning, but every time you asked rhetorically "why Cullen doesn't do anything against Meredith? why does he realizes that she crossed the line just now?" I do also ask myself "why would he?".
I mean, they never gave any sign of such redemption arc during Dragon Age II and he had no plot-wise reasons to do so (like a mage making him change his mind and make him realize he was getting brainwashed by Meredith). It would have been a groundless plot-twist, why fight against everything you believed when you never showed any sign of sympathy for Mages since the game started?
And don't get me wrong, I would have LOVED to see Cullen standing up for the Mages, being the first real stand of a non-mage ally for the Mages (besides the hypothetical decisions that Hawke can make during the game). But as much as I love Dragon Age II... I don't think we could really judge him for what he didn't do and what he allowed, because he didn't had any other choice on his fanatical zeal, a blame which again, I push to the big bosses of EA for rushing the team on finishing the game as soon as possible.
Anyways, I did loved your review, you made me see things very differently
it's a great video. For Missing information's about Cullen during his time in Kirkwall, I would suggest to read "Dragon Age The world of Thedas Vol.2" They Give more background information that we don't have in game. (Pages 223-227)
I quote from the book:
"With Meredith gone, the templars were leaderless and, as he was forced to admit, potentially dangerous. He rallied the templars to begin repairs on the Gallows and ensure protection of the loyalist mages who continued to reside within. He coordinated with the city guard, lending aid to relief efforts throughout the city. For over two years, Cullen effectively ran the Templar Order in Kirkwall, bringing some stability in the struggling city."
I think these actions is the reason why people respects him so much, but the lack of background in DAI is confusing.
@@_Karite We do meet some mages in inquisition who escaped from Kirkwall though.
This is so perfect and delicious omg. Perfect, thank you!
Are mages dangerous yes
Is the circle a solution no
Crazy that I randomly watch a old video (noah cg) and randomly searched it and found this; I honestly never actually noticed him until inquisition. It’s funny that he really played a much bigger role, if anything I figured he was just another dude with the same name.
Karl Anders's friend isn't made tranquil by Meredith but by a creep called Alrik who the exact sort of abusive Templar you say there's a danger of DA:O now Meredith isn't innocent what she does to Maddox is equally abusive in a different way and does exactly what you accuse her of doing with Karl but that's an unsanctioned abuser and he's a different kettle of fish - narcissistic and sadistic. Yes her regime and beliefs blindside her to that abuse but she WAS not the direct cause in that case. Also yup Alrik is definately a fascist but that doesn't mean the templars and chantry are. Act 2 - Cullen's views on tranquility are bad but he's advocating for more widespread use not universal use. Not curtailing Meredith - he talks about this in DAI - she didn't tell him things at the start then she shut down any concerns he did have as she became more unhinged and if you side with the templars in the final battle he objects to killing the mages who surrender and then tells his objections are 'noted but ignored' - only really Thrask and if he remains recruited Keran stand up to her physically and they get played by Grace with Thrask dying only Hugh stands up to her verbally and he gets ostracized by everyone else. Agatha also if you side with templars stands up a more extreme Templar Mettin. The point is a)what Cullen could have done was limited b) he was not unique in failing to realise that Meredith was out of line and not doing anything about it. Also you're like he doesn't go the whole way and save those mages - you're asking someone to turn against their own leader who they've followed for years AND the city's saviour and hero with should have done better. Do you KNOW how unrealistic that would be to expect someone to do that? Even people who abuse you people often don't turn against over one thing but after many and a lot of questioning it takes a long time to realise someone you looked up too is toxic and it takes a lot of insight and courage often over time. I don't think Meredith just selected Cullen because of skills and some matching extremism but because she saw someone young and to an extent naive she could mould. I think he turns when Hawke is treated because he sees it the point that he CAN because a city's hero is threatened who can help him stand against her. If he challenges Meredith before and both Hawke and the rest of the order turn on him he dies and achieves nothing. No good general attacks at the wrong moment before they are sure of enough support no matter how idealistic they are - I'm sorry but you're being naive to think otherwise. Also I'm not entirely convinced Anders is right - Fenris does have some legit concerns which Anders's dismisses the logic that could be applied to him too and Anders admits he is responsible for Vengeance at least partly.
Re: Dragon Age Origins what Cullen supposedly in the epilogue can be dismissed as rumours. You don't see it happen and it's not something that you can't explain away by that retcon. In legal terms it's inadmissible as evidence except as proof of rep which is kinda damning not to the same extent.
Also deradicalisation doesn't happen overnight, as someone stated it's been three years and he does express regret that he didn't stand up to Meredith sooner or see her for what she really was. He also says her fear of mages resulted in madness. The templars are NOT a state sanctoned hate group although Meredith's ones probably were. Again the templars are NOT evil as a group sorry not down with ATAB - nuance sadly missing from that vp. He does say that circles should run themselves - that's a pro mage position. Red lyrium isn't just powerful lyrium it's corrupted - so no you're off base then. Also asking an extra Templar to go ATAB is like asking a cop who stepped away from the force to go full on ACAB and go full on drug legalisation or prisoner rights baby steps. Not as many consequences as you'd like isn't no consequences. Again you're pushing ATAB even if you're right then it's unrealistic. Also there isn't effing time to put all the dialogue in that will fully tell you everything about them - I have the books that DO flesh out ok the Fiona lines would have nice. I'm sorry but believing in ATAB is NOT a requirement and I disagree about his redemption being a failure. Sorry not sorry - I stand by what I've said before. You have points but you've annoyed me - you ask too much and I can't follow you. Peace out.
Always seeing people defend the fear of magic because of Tevinter, abominations, ect., but that’s not an excuse to enslave mages for something they MIGHT or theoretically COULD do.
Templars are evil. Period. The Chantry is evil. Period. There’s no “nuance” or “justified reasons” behind enslaving and abusing a group of people for something they were born with.
Circles should be I institutions of magical education, not gloried mage prisons. Magic shouldn’t be feared, but studied and understood. This education should also be open to the general public.
Templars should properly protect the masses from dangerous magic, but being mage jailers is not the way. At all.
You said Templars are bad period and then said that Templars should protect the people from the bad mages, even though that's what they do.
Thank you for this. Really coherent, reasonable and well thought out. I honestly can't fathom anyone siding with the Templars and not think it's an "evil" playthrough. I love Cullen by the end of Inquisition because my characters are ALWAYS pro mage if not Mages themselves (yes, I will forever be salty that my character couldn't help Anders actively with that bomb, because you better efffing believe I'd bomb the head office of Auschwitz). When he has a supportive Mage influence all the way through he's tolerable and it's possible to sympathise. He was essentially indoctrinated from birth and believed the Templars were needed and good. He was a child when he was "allowed" to join the Anti-Mage army. A effing plus parenting... but I digress. I can sympathise if he's "softened" by the DA protags. But yeah, he's essentially - Ethically and morally - a Nazi who turns coat and starts helping the prisoners he's been trying to genocide from his early teens. It's very difficult to suspend disbelief and think he's actually legitimately changed in that small sliver of time. The only thing that helps, is the chaos he saw in the Meredith fight mirroring the horrors of the Ferelden tower, and the fact that he's detoxing from their semi-self aware mind control drug.
Incidentally, this is also why I have absolutely no time or respect for Hawk's brother. He's a lost cause and I can't deal with him. It pisses me off that I can't play a mage character and keep Bethany instead.
I don't think the Templars should be compared to the Nazis since the situation is a bit more complicated than just saying "Mages good Templars pure evil." The mages tower in DAO is a great example of mages not all being purely helpless victims of oppression. Templars can abuse their power and do monstrous things to mages, but mages can do the exact same against Templars if enough of them fall to demons and blood magic. DAO even shows how one mage being possessed can cause far more destruction and damage to the world than any single corrupt Templar (I'm talking about Redcliffe.) I do think that Bioware did a poor job at balancing the two factions and made mages a lot more just and sympathetic, but I don't think we can ignore that blood magic and possession doesn't just come from Templar oppression, and can happen with or without Templars. If that happens, like with Redcliffe, what are none magical people supposed to do?
I was so betrayed because I played Inquisition first so I thought "oh he disliked mages and wants to change" but when I realized the "Mages cannot be treated like people" line came from him I immediately thought he didn't do anywhere near enough to even cancel that bit out. He is not redeemed and faces no consequences unless you make him keep taking lyrium and even then it's not even a 1 to 1 punishment.
Thanks for explaining this, I found it difficult to explain.
for you point on inquisition, I feel this is a bit of a black or white point of view of him still being cautious about magic, saying that it completely negate any redemption (personally, i would just call it character developpement now after he experienced the horrors of abominations and the horror of templar's power abuse). I feel he is now more we need to be prepare for abominations but we can't treat all mages like abomination in coming. We see many abominations who kills innocents through the games. That said, i strongly dislike the mage romance with Cullen, the dialogue is terrible, it feels like inky is always apologizing to be a mage it's really wrong. I also agree it would have indeed very interesting if there had been someone reacting negatively to him bc having been a part of the abuse in Kirkwall, tho he did turned on Meredith at the end so it might have sway opinions
Overall, I think if he had done a complete switch to being loudly v pro mage would have been strange i believe.
I really feel like Dragon Age Inquisition struggled with making the Mage/Templar a grey area. Mainly with how the lord seeker approaches us talking smack. Then we meet grand enchanter Fiona who's shows us more respect than the lord seeker.
[Spoiler]
I feel we should've seen the lord seeker struggling more with his possession of the greed demon acting odd instead of a complete arse. Or should've put a different character in his place instead of making him the bad guy twice later down the road in Cassandra's personal quest.
I chain played all 3 games so I too found his arch to be a little off putting. they really should have had him have a come to maker moment at the end of act 2 or the very beginning of act 3 and do everything he can to help the mages. and then make him pro mage in DAI. given that he was prone to radicalization, and being disillusioned with the templars, it makes sense that he would over compensate and become super pro mage in the 3rd game.
Great video! One thing though. The Chantry is evil, not the Templars. The Templars are just as much victims of the system put in place by the Chantry as the circle mages. Most Templars are conscripted as children, put through rigorous training, and forced to battle addiction for the rest of their lives all because of the Chantry's "anti-mage" rhetoric. At the time of Inquisition, there is nothing inherently evil about the Templars considering that, after the Conclave, the Circle of Magi no longer exists. They are simply just an order of lyrium powered soldiers who no longer serve a purpose with no circles to police. I personally choose to go to the templars for aid in most of my playthroughs of Inquisition considering that if you don't, most of the templars either die or become corrupted red lyrium slaves like Meredith.
The chantry suppresses everyone. Mages and templars alike
Suppressing someone as the tool by which they suppress someone else are two very different things.
I romanced Cullen in my first Playthrough of Inquisition and I usually stick to my first romance, but his voice actor ruined it for me.
28:00 i love dragon age 2 too but i think when it comes to its politic's , its centrist diarrhea.
The problem is that by default in order to let you make your own decisions and for them to have impact they sort of have to have a middle line. Otherwise other people couldn't find a way of being what they wanted to be. Also I agree you're showing why the other side believes what they do. I've heard plenty of people argue that the games push you to side with mages and there are good reasons why they might be right and it's for a good reason.
I genuinely loved this. I’d be interested in more video essay breakdowns on games movies books and the worlds and characters they come from. 🖤♥️
I like playing as mages and arguing with just about everyone we’re not all blood mages 🤪
Blood magic by itself isn't even "evil" it's just another form of magic like every other one, it's the way it's used
Awesome analysis. Following :)
Fantastic essay
I have always been a mage player from my very first time playing Origins at 12. Always play a mage, always will. But i 110% appreciate how perfectly morally grey the Templar mage issue is. If you every start to think the templars go too far in oppressing mages, try to imagine the equivalent of mages in our world, could be a bunch of people at random in every day life, including 12 year old kids in the same schools your kids go to, all have machine guns stuck permanently to their hands at all times, there fingers tapped to the trigger and it can't be removed.
You can get rid of the gun, you can have faith that most of them would never use the guns they always have in the literal palms of their hands, but could you really expect society as a whole to just shrug and accept having people this dangerous and only a second away of taking the lives of potentially hundreds of innocents, sometimes just on accident?
It's absolutely understandable why the templars, and even Cullen, feel the way they do - And this is coming from a Mage Player.
Horrid analogy, horrid.
Imagine mages being a thing irl forever, we would just get used to it, like we get used to all manner of dangerous things in our everyday life. We as a society shrugged off worse things.
In your house there are perfectly mundane substances that you likely can accidentally mix and make poisonous gass. There is high voltage electricity innyour walls and can but your hands in the socket, silos and the like can compust spontanously. Cars are conceptually terrifying, and electric cars more so. There are people willingly wearing jewelry they know is radioactive.
You live with that kind of danger day to day and don't even notice. If mages were real, they would be the same.
Something something red lyrium *waves hands*
I love this video
Also yessss for Surana origin. My Surana was male, but I love him so much
I cant agree with more what you're saying.
The only problem I have with Cullen is that he's a fictional character.
Sexy authority figure with tough exterior, who has all these internal struggles including his addiction that only I can fix? Yes, please!
There's a lot of Cullen defenders in the comments but yeah, you said what needed to be said.
I don't know, it's kind of sad when someone can't recognize severe PTSD in a character and blames them for that.
@@zilazilazila “severe PTSD” does not excuse being aggressively pro-genocide (the Rite of Annulment) and pro-Tranquility (lobotomisation, enslavement, and rape). “Severe PTSD” does not excuse dehumanising attitudes like “mages are not people like you and me” and being pro-systematic torture and imprisonment. “Severe PTSD” does not excuse being a card-carrying member of the fantasy Gestapo who never actually acknowledges that those opinions and actions were wrong or rejects them (and in fact continues to speak in favour of them all through Inquisition). “Severe PTSD” does not excuse active participation in and support of systemic oppression - especially when he expressed those attitudes and actively participated in the torturing and beating and killing (and according to his original writer, probably raping) *before* the trauma ever occurred. Hope that helps.
I always felt the templars were pretty morally black but the choices you make in the game were not there because it's morally grey and you don't know what is right but rather that you can choose to be good or evil. That may just be my perspective now cuz I haven't played in a long time but it felt very on the nose when they call it the Tranquil Solution. Templars are nazis. I'm surprised to hear people actually liked Cullen for that reason. Inquisition did skip over it a lot and I don't think I realized he was even the same character from the previous two games. The focus always needed to be on the player's agency yet keeping important characters around for a through story which is why Cullen probably stood by in DA2 until your life was at threat. Kinda annoying but might have been some scope issues there. Same with Inquisition. Focusing on Cullen's past and atonement may have been an issue if players hadn't played the previous 2 games.
Anyway fantastic video! Your points and examples were excellent and I was able to follow along despite forgetting most of the Dragon Age narrative altogether.
Templars are NOT Nazis they're police with all of the nuance and grey that invokes - some police are indeed bar stewards but I'm not a subscriber to ACAB and most of those who are think the system is wrong not necessarily ALL of the people.
Whenever we talk about the mage and Templar conflict, I like to bring up this quote by Vivienne.
"My dear, what a world you must live in. Do you know how mages are found? A little girl has a nightmare, and in her sleep, she burns her house down. A teenage boy has a fit, and lightning rips his mother to pieces. Imagine your own childhood and what would have happened if the darkest corner of your heart had a will of its own. People don't learn the fear of magic at chantry services, my dear. They learn it from us."
I really like Dragon Age and I want to see the conflict like the Gray moral dilemma they want it to be so I've done a lot of thinking about it. In the end, I do not see it as white and black Templars are simply evil. Because I do also agree with Fenris in that if Mages are given the same freedoms as everyone else, its inevitable that every none-mage will become a second class citizen. Like in the Tivinter Imperium. It's like if superpowers were real. The ones with superpowers - magic - will naturally move to the top of society. For their to be equality, Mages need to be restricted, because Mages just naturally have so much power by themselves.
I just see too many good reasons for the Circles to exist to see the Templars as an unambiguously evil organization. It badly needs reform, definitely, but its purpose isn't inherently evil. I still side ally with the mages more often than not in DA:I, but I don't feel terrible if I make any of the other choices.
That's the reason i like Vivienne so much. I may disagree with her at some points, but she still makes sense. Just like her quote about magic being like fire (I don't remember it correctly), not being bad on its own, but in wrong hands of a wicked person. And there's truly no way to tell if a person is bad, or not. So yeah, i agree that circles are important as schools where you are allowed to leave back home (just like every normal school), and templars as independent guards in cities (not jailers).
@@GhostInTheCogs yeah this is much better. But lets not forget Vivienne doesn't know as much as she pretents she does. She is more politican then a mage.
Great content glad I took time to watch it