#mage rebellion

[celestialastronmy]

Dragon Age Inquisition: Vivienne vs. Fiona - Political Pragmatism Meets Revolutionary Idealism

The conflict between freedom and security has eternally plagued societies across both fictional and real-world contexts, manifesting with particular complexity in the realm of Dragon Age's Thedas, where magic represents both tremendous power and existential danger. At the center of this ideological maelstrom stand two formidable women whose contrasting approaches to mage advocacy create one of the most nuanced political tensions in Dragon Age Inquisition: Vivienne, the Imperial Enchanter known as Madame de Fer, and Fiona, the former Grand Enchanter who led the mage rebellion. Their divergent philosophies regarding magical governance, freedom, and responsibility present players with a sophisticated metaphor for real-world political struggles between institutional reform and revolutionary change. Their characters embody fundamentally different responses to oppression—one seeking to master the existing system from within, the other attempting to dismantle it entirely—raising profound questions about pragmatism, idealism, and the true meaning of effective advocacy.

Aristocratic Survivor vs. Revolutionary Leader: Origins and Ideologies

Vivienne's persona as "Madame de Fer" (the Lady of Iron) exemplifies her deliberately cultivated image as an uncompromising force within Orlesian high society. Born into a world where magic is feared, she ascended through political acumen to become the official enchanter to the Imperial Court of the Orlesian Empire, achieving unprecedented status for a mage through careful navigation of existing power structures. This extraordinary achievement forms the foundation of her worldview: that individual mages can thrive within the established system through discipline, intelligence, and strategic alliance-building. Her penchant for extravagance and high fashion represents not mere vanity but rather calculated political armor, deployed with precision in the complex machinations of the Orlesian court. Vivienne's embrace of the Circle system emerges not from a lack of ambition but from a deeply pragmatic assessment that the fears of ordinary citizens toward magic can not simply be legislated away through declarations of independence.

Fiona's journey stands in stark contrast, defined by suffering and resistance against systems of exploitation from her earliest years. Born in an Orlesian alienage, she endured the traumatic loss of her family at just seven years old, followed by being sold into slavery to a Comte who subjected her to horrific physical and sexual abuse. When her magical abilities manifested, she used them to kill her abuser, nearly dying in the process before being sent to the Montsimmard Circle. Her subsequent induction into the Grey Wardens, mysterious cure from the Taint, brief romance with King Maric Theirin, and eventual rise to Grand Enchanter shaped a leader intimately familiar with multiple overlapping systems of control and containment. Fiona's ideological commitments arise not from abstract principles but from witnessing firsthand how institutions can fail the vulnerable, creating in her a resolve to pursue systemic change rather than exceptional accommodation. Her revolutionary stance emerges organically from a life defined by resistance against forces seeking to control her body, mind, and magic.

The Weight of Historical Context

Both women's approaches cannot be understood without acknowledging the socio-political climate that contextualized their choices. In the wake of the Kirkwall rebellion where "a mage killed hundreds with a snap of their fingers," public fear of magic reached heights unseen since the days of the Tevinter Imperium. This climate of terror, followed by an assassination attempt against Divine Justinia, created conditions where any mage activism would inevitably be viewed through the lens of terrorism. Each woman responded differently to this reality: Vivienne by emphasizing distance between "responsible" mages and those who would confirm the public's worst fears, Fiona by accelerating demands for independence precisely when institutional control tightened. Their divergent responses to this historical moment reveal fundamental differences in how they conceptualize the relationship between individual actions and collective responsibility within marginalized communities.

The Politics of Respectability: Vivienne's Institutional Approach

Vivienne's philosophy hinges on a sophisticated understanding of power as something to be carefully navigated rather than directly confronted. Her approach to mage advocacy prioritizes working within existing structures to create strategic exceptions and gradual reforms. "Magic must serve man, not rule over him" is not merely religious doctrine to her but practical wisdom about maintaining a sustainable relationship between magical practitioners and the broader society that fears them. Her criticism of the mage rebellion centers on its timing and messaging rather than its underlying grievances: "By voting when they did, my colleagues all but declared war upon the ordinary people of Thedas, a war in which we are outnumbered a hundred to one". This statement reflects not capitulation to oppression but a clear-eyed assessment of political reality and the dangers of revolutionary overreach. Vivienne's pragmatism extends to recognizing that magical freedom can not meaningfully exist without addressing widespread cultural fears—fears that can not simply be dismissed as irrational prejudice when magic genuinely poses catastrophic dangers.

The Question of Complicity

The central critique leveled against Vivienne's approach is whether her exceptional success within a flawed system ultimately reinforces that system's legitimacy. Her position as mistress to Duke Bastien de Ghyslain and her attainment of unprecedented status as Court Enchanter represent individual triumphs that may serve to validate the very hierarchies that constrain most mages. The accusation that she enables oppression by promoting the Circle system gains particular force when considering the documented abuses within certain Circles, including the use of Tranquility as punishment. Yet her defenders might reasonably point out that unregulated magic has repeatedly proven catastrophically dangerous within the Dragon Age universe. Vivienne's insistence that mages require training and oversight addresses legitimate public safety concerns that revolutionary rhetoric often glosses over. The fundamental question remains whether her approach represents necessary compromise or a sophisticated form of Stockholm syndrome that privileges individual exceptions over collective liberation.

Breaking the Circle: Fiona's Revolutionary Vision

Fiona's leadership of the mage rebellion represents a fundamentally different approach to magical governance, based on the principle that freedom from oppression can not be negotiated within systems designed to control. Having witnessed abuses at Montsimmard Circle and across Thedas, she concluded that incremental reform would never address the fundamental injustice of forcing mages into confinement. Her critique directly addressed institutional failures, including the inaction of Grand Cleric Elthina regarding Kirkwall's Circle abuses before Anders' radical action. When she called for a vote to dissolve the Circle of Magi, she sought not merely better conditions within confinement but a fundamental rethinking of how magical education and oversight should function. This revolutionary stance reflects her assessment that the Circle system itself, rather than merely its implementation, constitutes the problem.

Revolutionary Failures and Unintended Consequences

However, Fiona's revolutionary approach produced a cascade of consequences she seemingly failed to anticipate. The timing of the independence vote—in the aftermath of magical terrorist attacks—played directly into existing fears and stereotypes about uncontrolled magic. The narrow margin by which the vote passed (described as "only a small margin" by Vivienne) created divisive fractures within the mage community itself, ultimately pitting "mages against mages" in an internecine conflict. Most dramatically, her eventual decision to indenture the mages to Tevinter in exchange for protection represented a stunning capitulation that traded one form of control for another potentially more sinister one. These outcomes raise serious questions about whether her revolutionary approach represented true vision or a failure to anticipate the practical consequences of idealistic action. The critique that she was "horrendously ill-timed and selfish" in her vote for independence gains power when considered alongside these unintended consequences.

Leadership Styles in Conflict: Authority vs. Democratic Process

The contrast between Vivienne and Fiona extends beyond ideology to fundamentally different conceptions of leadership itself. Vivienne embodies aristocratic authority—uncompromising, individual, and built on personal excellence that commands respect even from enemies. Her sobriquet "Lady of Iron" captures both her strength and her inflexibility, characteristics she cultivated deliberately to navigate the lethal political landscape of Orlesian high society. Her leadership style relies on personal authority rather than popular mandate, positioning her as exceptional rather than representative. This approach grants her significant freedom of action but distances her from the collective experience of ordinary mages whose daily struggles she may no longer fully comprehend. Her stone-cold demeanor and "gloriously sardonic" wit serve as political weapons but may also reflect emotional armor constructed to survive in hostile environments.

Democratic Vulnerability

Fiona's leadership, by contrast, centers democratic process even when outcomes prove divisive. Her pivotal decisions emerged from votes rather than unilateral authority, reflecting her commitment to collective self-determination even when unity proves elusive. When the vote for independence passed by only a small margin, she "chose to let the motions stand" rather than imposing unity through authoritarian means. This democratic approach creates greater legitimacy but also vulnerability—the narrow margin of her victory created space for opponents to question whether the rebellion truly represented the will of most mages. Her eventual capitulation to Tevinter occurred under extreme duress when all other options had been exhausted, calling into question whether democratic leadership can withstand overwhelming external pressure. The argument that "in her dotage, she could not handle looking after the well-being of so many people" reflects not merely ageism but a deeper critique of whether democratic process can effectively protect vulnerable populations during existential threats.

Advocating for Magekind: Measuring Success and Failure

Any assessment of which woman better served magekind's interests must grapple with the complex question of what constitutes "success" in advocacy for a marginalized group. If success means institutional stability and preservation of magical knowledge, Vivienne's approach offers clear advantages. Her emphasis on working within existing power structures prioritizes preventing the complete collapse of magical institutions and the potential loss of centuries of accumulated knowledge and training methodologies. Her political maneuvering created protected spaces for exceptional mages and potentially laid groundwork for gradual reforms that would not trigger widespread backlash. This incremental approach potentially preserves more lives in the short term but may perpetuate fundamental injustices indefinitely.

Revolutionary Potential and Cost

Fiona's revolutionary approach, despite its catastrophic short-term consequences, potentially addressed deeper structural issues that Vivienne's reformism left unchallenged. Her willingness to risk stability for the possibility of fundamental change reflects a different calculation about what magekind truly needs: not better accommodation within an unjust system but complete reconceptualization of how magical education and oversight should function. The tremendous costs of her approach—including civil war and eventual indenture to Tevinter—raise profound questions about whether revolutionary change can succeed when power disparities remain so extreme. The critique that she was "naive and ineffective" gains force when considering these outcomes, yet her failures may represent the inevitable result of confronting entrenched power rather than personal inadequacy.

Conclusion: The Dialectic of Magical Politics

The conflict between Vivienne and Fiona ultimately transcends simple judgments about who better served magekind. They represent not merely opposing strategies but complementary forces in a dialectical process of social change. Vivienne's institutional pragmatism creates spaces for survival and preservation of knowledge during periods of reaction, while Fiona's revolutionary vision maintains pressure for fundamental reform rather than mere accommodation. The tragedy of Dragon Age's mage conflict lies not in the wrongness of either approach but in the failure of these perspectives to synthesize into a more effective hybrid strategy. In their inability to recognize the legitimate insights of each other's positions, both leaders ultimately failed to achieve their shared goal: a world where mages could live with both dignity and responsibility. Their conflict serves as a sophisticated meditation on the eternal tension between freedom and security, between revolutionary change and institutional stability—questions that remain unresolved both in Thedas and in our own world.(Actually they should kiss for safe measures)

[almaverses]

another thought i had during the mage rebellion there must’ve been like an insane baby boom. like those ex-circle mages were probs fucking like rabbits and with templars too busy snorting the red lyrium nose beers to punt mage babies to the chantry there’s just a surplus of babies in southern thedas.

[niofo]

a scene i wrote in 2022 but i'm still coming back to it.

“And you decided to help me, out of everyone else,” noted Anders with sudden bitterness. “You know what I’ve done.”

“The right thing.”

Anders flinched like those words had physically struck him. He bolted from the bed and then got to the window, leaned against the sill, he shook his head.

“You shouldn’t be saying that!” he exclaimed almost with desperation. “You’re the Inquisitor, you can’t endorse… what I did.” His voice broke in the end.

“But I do,” said the Inquisitor calmly. “And believe me, everyone around knows my opinion about this. You did the right thing, Anders. The Kirkwall Circle was about to be annulled, every single person who left it alive that day was because of what you did.”

“I started the war…”

“No, Fiona did, when she decided on the vote. We all did. It would have started sooner or later, the only difference being that the whole Kirkwall Circle would be dead by then, just like Diarsmuid. They don’t need any excuse to hate and kill us, they’re going to do it anyway. You gave us all hope. I wish some other people noticed it as well, instead of blaming you for what templars were doing no matter what.”

He noticed that Anders was slightly shaking and it was not just a trick of light. The Inquisitor waited for a while, but not seeing the other mage’s face he couldn’t be sure if it was fine to continue. It probably wasn’t. He did it anyway, as gently as he could.

“We all have blood on our hands, Anders. But you are a healer, you tried to save as many people as possible. And you did save them. Thank you.”

[thesummerstorms]

Okay, so this remains one of my favorite pieces of lore. It has influenced my general idea of what the Circle in Antivan City would have been like: still a mage prison, but on a shorter leash. There is a cultural tradition/understanding that if the Antivan Templars tried to pull a Kirkwall, the Crows would verge into historical reenactment. With real poisons, of course.

I think because of this, also, there's an idea that Antivan mages especially Antivan mages found as children, are meant by custom or maybe even law to only go to Antivan Circles. (There's only one in canon that we know of, but there could possibly be others given that Orlais definitely had at least three. Fereldan might have had two to three at various points in history, or the Circle might have been moved three times.) The idea that's perpetuated is that Antiva and the Crows especially look after their own, even the mages.

Of course the reality is less neat than that. Plenty of mages in the Circle would point out that Crows seldom bother to avenge at the individual level unless the abused mage has a wealthy family on the outside who they managed to retain ties to. The threat of Crow retribution makes the Circle in Antiva City better than some other Circles... but does not fundamentally change what the Circle is. And of course, the skeptic could point out that although killing the Templars was at least vengeance, it didn't do anything for the mages who were already dead or show that anyone had cared to intervene in the escalation abuses before that point.

There's also the Crows themselves having mixed motivations and a bit of pragmatism to their enforcement.

The fact is that there are always some newly discovered Antivan mages that end up shuffled out of Antiva and into the Free Marches across the year. It's the Templar 's way of pushing back at a perceived threat to their authority, especially for more conservative individual Templars who view the Circle in Antiva City as undisciplined or too unrestrained. The heads of Houses are generally aware this goes on... but if the mage in question isn't particularly powerful or well-connected or potentially useful and the overall number of mages sent out of the country remains in plausibly deniable limits for both organizations, it tends to be overlooked. A merchant prince's child will always make it to Antiva City; the child of elven tradesmen very well may not.

It's also an open secret that certain Antivan-born Templars can be bribed or bought by Crows. Not all of them. But enough that a Crow apostate who has passed their final tests and graduated to full assassin might be able to show the Templars their brand and pay a bribe for their release, if they're lucky. Enough that some of those same vulnerable mage children who other Templars might ferry across the border can be bought for the ranks of the Crow Compradi if encountered before they make it to and formally enter the Circle. Enough that the Crows know enough for their own warped version of the Harrowing.

But yet, it remains true. If the Antivan Circle was unjustly put to the sword, the Crows are sworn to respond again in kind. For some, that makes life a little better that it otherwise might be. And the Crows are dedicated to maintaining that idea, mostly for the sake of their reputations though some individual Crows or Guildmasters might also find it aligns with their convictions.

All that said, with my world building + head canons I now am wondering how exactly the lead up to and emergence of the Mage-Templar conflict went down in Antiva.

The general timeline (which is more focused on the South) goes:

In 9:38 College of Enchanters vote not to dissolve Circle -> Chantry freaks out it was even a vote and dissolves the College as a governing body/refuses further meetings ->

In 9:40 White Spire uprising (Cole/Asunder) -> Lord Seeker cancels the Nevarran Accord breaking Templars from Chantry -> Templars "anul" the Dairsmud Circle in Rivan, murdering the mages because they were basically integrated into their society and still practiced spirit possession/seers -> College of Enchanters votes for independence as a result -> Lord Seeker "declares the Circle of Magi no more" per World of Thedas though it provides no other details ->

by 9:41 it's then the "Mage Templar War" and we get the Conclave and Inquisition. The Fereldan Crown initially offers shelter to the mages, and we see know how that ends.

All the information we have about what this looks like tends to be specific to Orlais, Rivain, and the Free Marches from what I can remember. I feel like Antiva is Northern/distinct enough that the effects would be felt slightly differently, but not as distinct as say Nevarra so the outcome ends up completely different.

I really need to sit down and think through it bullet point by bullet point what would happen practically, but the ideas I have right now:

some or all of the Crow Houses operating in Antiva City, maybe even House Dellamorte, having to step in and use threats to prevent violence when the Nevarran Accord is cancelled or after the vote for Independence

Some of the Antivan Templars taking this as an opportunity to stick it to the mages AND the Crows because they've felt their personal and organizational authority has been slighted too long and/or that the White Spire is the "natural" conclusion of the Antivan Circle's "liberality" (no that doesn't make sense, but it absolutely would be a talking point)

Crows have to put their money where their mouth is re: not letting the Circle be slaughtered wholesale. It's a standing contract.

But this damages one of their main recruitment angles for mages and there's a lot more mixed public reception than there was in the Towers Age when the mages were already dead and the commonfolk could sympathize without risk of actually having to integrate the mages back amongst them

Crow Apostates now don't have any particular distinction or protection from any other mage in the eyes of the Templars following the Lord Seeker, even some of the ones that used to be bribed

That said the Antivan Chantry dynamic probably looks different if funded heavily by the merchant princes, and especially if some of those merchant princes have been assured their one off mage family member was "safe" staying in the Antivan Circle

The conflict is probably a lot less open than in Fereldan or Orlais

But...where do the Antivan mages go after the Templars and Mages both break off from the Chantry? The Crows can't absorb all of them. How many are willing to join the rest of the rebels in Fereldan, especially if it's been emphasized/propagandized that Antiva is better for mages? I imagine they can still only camp out in the Circle ignoring that it's ended for so long.

But if the propaganda is that Antivan Circles are protected, do they have higher numbers of Chantry/Circle loyalists?

I need to think through this more.

I do know Viago is probably white knuckling his (metaphorical) grip on my mage!Rook, Arsinoë de Riva's collar.

(also if you vibe with any of this and want to use any of this world building, feel free; just give the post a shout out/link,.)

[aly-the-writer]

Thinking about the mage rebellion and Fereldan. My main Warden is a Surana that sticks Alistair with the throne so I never really gave it much thought about why Ferelden's ruler would accept the rebellion.

But I replayed and something stuck out to me: Connor was frustrated about them being in Redcliffe. He asks how that could be seen to be a good idea. And honestly? Given that the Wardens rule Amaranthine and it's a major point of entry from the sea it wouldn't be that hard to have set Fiona's people there and gotten fewer side eyes by the locals. They're used to Wardens, mages ain't that weird in comparison. Especially after the Warden-Commander let a possessed corpse follow them home from the swamp like a lost mabari.

But Ferelden has a population problem. Lots of dead young men and women just at Ostagar, let alone the southern hills, the bannorn via the rebellion, and Denerim. And the survivors of the Siege at Denerim would have had high chances of Blight Sicknesses, there were probably epidemics following 9:31. That would have crippled the fighting population. That doesn't even count that a lot of the refugees who made it to the Marches and elsewhere never returned.

Redcliffe is the fortified gateway to Ferelden from the /Orlesian/ border. The same Orlais that certain powers (Gaspard) want to return to being an expanding empire.

Celene's hold was weak. Weak enough the Inquisitor could arrange to break it entirely.

The Chantry is primarily Orlesian and that would give the mages a reason to not want Orlesian control if it came down to Gaspard as Emperor bringing chevaliers back across the Frostbacks.

I don't think Ferelden took the mages in out of generosity. At least not entirely. I think they saw a chance to add a significant military force to their country if their gamble paid off - and that's why Teagan agreed. Unfortunately for the rebellion the Tevinter thing is a definite point of no return - the mages weren't loyal enough to their own cause, to where they were, to continue the risk of keeping them.

[elevanetheirin]

I'm listening to Dragon Age Asunder

Spoiler*********

, I had forgotten, Lord Seeker Lambert's actions are what actively started the "mage rebellion" as a matter of fact he calls their sanctioned conclave an act of rebellion.

[ofcrowsanddragons]

What if someone in-universe deliberately pit them against each other?

Seems likely that since mages in their circumstances are capable of gaining political power and allies, it would be in the Chantry/monarchy's interests to encourage infighting.

(That maybe backfired.)

bioware had to pit vivienne and fiona against each other and invent mage infighting between them because if they were allies they would be wayy too powerful

[buriedknight]

Do you truly despise your own brethren, Your Worship?

our inquisitor with @starrythroat

[almaverses]

imagine being a child or the loved one of a child who came into their magic during the mage/templar war. like the circle isn't an option for the parents and the concept isn't even a thing that exists for the child having never known it. very little options to control your magic and probably not even 10 yet half the population thinks you're a monster and you have literally no idea why.

[niofo]

rewatching my favorite anime from the 80s, rurouni kenshin, bcos of this new remake (i don't like it) and i find it really funny bcos every time kenshin and saito stand next to each other all i'm thinking is that would be exactly the height difference between idris and anders. just the tiny man and the beanpole man doing the revolution.

fiona is said to be really tiny as well, even for an elf, and then adrian is also very short. i went with fan theory that ostwick's first enchanter lydia is blackwall's sister liddy, who i see as very similar to blackwall, so pretty buff, but also short. anders literally had to hand the rebellion down.

if i was better with drawing i'd make an art of all 5 of them planning to bring down the chantry and anders is just there, two heads taller than everyone else.

[crossdressingdeath]

You know what? I think a lot of DAV's biggest plot weaknesses ultimately come back to DAI, because a lot of them can be summarized as "Why didn't they get into [thing that DAI set up]" and... the answer is that Bioware was never going to be able to meaningfully engage with those things, and they should've known that when they wrote them into DAI. The Divine, Kieran's existence, Urthemiel's soul, the Well of Sorrows, all that stuff DAI set up that people are mad DAV didn't focus on? All of those should have led to pretty big alterations in the worldstate, and the worldstate has to remain roughly the same for everyone. We were never going to get the massive impact those choices should've had, for the same reason the Warden's boon at the end of DAO was quietly forgotten about as soon as Dragon Age became a series instead of a standalone game: the writing just can't support choices that would create such massive divergences. Like... take Urthemiel. Whether or not Mythal got Urthemiel's soul (and by extension whether or not Solas potentially had the chance to take it) should have been a huge deal! It should've led to two pretty different paths! Except... it can't. Because Bioware can only write one story for each game they make, which means the critical path can't really change beyond flavour text and occasionally which character gets a cameo slot; Mythal didn't get Urthemiel's soul in every worldstate, so Urthemiel's soul can never be relevant to the main plot. And the thing is, they would've known that going in! DAI was the third game, they must have known that worldstate variation could never be more than flavour text and cameos! Hell, you can see Bioware scrambling to make all the Divine options more or less the same in terms of impact on Thedosian society in DAI, which was definitely done to make writing sequels feasible. So why did they write Mythal getting Urthemiel's soul into DAI? And it's the same for all those other big, story-changing choices. People have differing opinions on the merits of including variable flavour text just to say it's there but that's not what this is about; in terms of the actual plot the variables cannot be relevant (unless it's something like the Warden ally choice where every option is ultimately the same in terms of plot impact, and even that one's pushing it; it never is explained how Hawke ended up friendly with Loghain). I think when talking about choices from DAI that DAV didn't engage with it's important to take a second to ask yourself if Bioware could have written a version of events that worked equally well with every possible outcome of that choice and could be tweaked to engage with every variation without having any major impact on the main plot. If the answer is no I think it's better described as a DAI problem than a DAV problem, because it's not actually DAV's fault that DAI wrote checks it couldn't cash.

[clayton-comics]

This is soo good.

Not so long ago I think I posted about fanfic appreciation, in the topic of fanfic this will definitely be useful ❤️

Thank you for your work transcribing it for us 😊

If finished, it would be a great source. 👍

Conversations with Cullen 1: Cullen is a Busy Man

Note: So far, I have only been through this conversation with a female Dalish mage and a male human warrior. There may be other gender/race/class-specific dialogue missing.

The PC approaches Cullen while he’s training recruits.

Cullen (to recruit): “You there! There’s a shield in your hand. Block with it. If this man were your enemy, you’d be dead.”

Cullen (to his lieutenant): “Lieutenant, don’t hold back. The recruits must prepare for a real fight, not a practice one.”

Lieutenant: “Yes, Commander.” (Salutes and leaves)

Cullen (to you): “We’ve received a number of recruits – locals from Haven and some pilgrims. None made quite the entrance you did.”

[Go to 1]

1: Dialogue Options:

General: I’m glad I’m here. [Go to 2]

General: I like to stand out. [Go to 3]

General: It wasn’t my choice. [Go to 4]

2: General: I’m glad I’m here. PC: “I just hope I can help.” Cullen: “As do we all. It is enough that you would try.” [Go to 5]

3: General: I like to stand out. PC: “At least I got everyone’s attention.” Cullen: “That you did.” [Go to 5]

4: General: It wasn’t my choice. PC: “That wasn’t my idea.” Cullen: “I’d be concerned if it was.” [Go to 5]

5: Conversation continues:

Cullen and PC begin a walk and talk ala The West Wing.

Cullen: “I was recruited to the Inquisition in Kirkwall, myself. I was there during the mage uprising – I saw firsthand the devastation it caused.”

A soldier trails along behind them.

Soldier: “Ser!” (Hands Cullen a report.)

Cullen: “Cassandra sought a solution. When she offered me a position, I left the templars to join her cause. Now it seems we face something far worse.” (Glances at report.)

Dialogue Options:

General: I believe the mark will help. [Go to 6]

General: Everything’s a mess. [Go to 7]

General: You trust in the Inquisition? [Go to 8]

6: General: I believe the mark will help. PC: “I must have this mark for a reason. It will work. I’m sure of it.” Cullen: “Provided we can secure aid – but I’m confident we can.” [Go to 9]

7: General: Everything’s a mess. PC: “The Conclave destroyed, a giant hole in the sky – things aren’t looking good.” Cullen: “Which is why we’re needed.” [Go to 9]

8: General: You trust in the Inquisition? PC: “You left the templars for this. You believe the Inquisition can work?” Cullen: “I do.” [Go to 9]

9: Conversation continues:

Cullen: “The Chantry lost control of both templars and mages. Now they argue over a new Divine while the Breach remains. The Inquisition could act when the Chantry cannot. Our followers would be part of that. There’s so much we can– Forgive me. I doubt you came here for a lecture.”

Dialogue Options:

Flirt: I like your enthusiasm. [Go to 10]

General: I don’t mind. [Go to 11]

General: You’ve thought this through. [Go to 12]

General: No, not really. [Go to 13]

10: Flirt: I like your enthusiasm. PC: “No, but if you have one prepared I’d love to hear it.” Cullen: (Laughs.) “Another time perhaps.” PC: (Smiles awkwardly) Cullen: “I, ah…” (Clears throat.) [Go to 14]

11: General: I don’t mind. PC: “You understand our situation. I appreciate your opinion.” Cullen: “Look around. Our people are well-organized and committed. Despite what the clerics may think, we’re in the best position to help.” [Go to 14]

12: General: You’ve thought this through. PC: “You’ve given this a lot of thought.” Cullen: “I know what happens when order is lost and action comes too late.” [Go to 14]

13: General: No, not really. PC: “I hadn’t planned on it, no.” Cullen: “Then I shall spare you.” [Go to 14]

14: Conversation continues:

Cullen: “There’s still a lot of work ahead.”

A soldier approaches.

Soldier: “Commander! Ser Rylen has a report on our supply lines.”

Cullen: “As I was saying.”

Cullen walks away.

[End conversation]

Next conversation: Tell me about your colleagues

[erme-maererme]

while we are at it (which is to say, while i’m in act1 of dai and am constantly reminded of it) it’s impressive that cullen’s changing his mind about the templars according to cullen himself happened only at the point of meredith demanding to kill hawke. meredith whipped out her magic sword and the templars went like damn that’s magic, and magic is bad, we shouldn’t listen to our possessed knight-commander anymore. the slaughter up to that point was fine though. meredith’s rhetoric and practices have been the same throughout the entire game, the templars did not question the annulment at all until meredith raised her lyrium sword against hawke. and the templars were attacking hawke until that point quite eagerly as well. so it wasn’t meredith’s actions that made them step away in the end, it was meredith being contaminated with some bad magic. that was the only new component and the only part of it that made them think twice, and cullen admitting it so easily says everything about his views during dai as well and templars in general

[abyssal-ilk]

very interesting to me that if you decide to ally with the mages in dai, vivienne doesn't lose approval at the moment of picking that choice, but she DOES lose approval if you talk to her between allying with them and the attack on haven. not really sure what meaning could be behind it (my favorite guess is that she's stressed out of her mind with the arrival of fiona and the other mages and the inquisitor talking to her is an annoying distraction she doesn't need at that moment + she has to put on a show of being disapproving of their choice because otherwise she is willingly complicit which is dangerous for her), but the delay is funny to me. you don't even have to take that hit of disapproval if you just wait to talk to her at skyhold.

[wylldebee]

The Mage-Templar War should've had a much larger focus in Inquisition instead of being shoved into comics/books change my mind

[artypurrs]

Art by the amazing artist @deyonside thank you