I don't remember learning this in-game, but from what I understand, there's dialogue indicating she is trained to fight.
Maybe you should add "I think he did" to the list?
@Chaos9059763 I managed to get Vivienne in a templar playthrough once. I made the templars allies instead of conscripts to hurt Leiliana's chances, and then kept the Wardens to hurt Cassandra's. (That didn't hurt Vivienne's support as much as it did Cassandra's, and Leiliana was pretty much out of the running by then.) I also made sure to explicitly tell Vivienne that I thought she'd make a good divine, and to do the War Table mission to support her.
It was a lot of work, but I made it happen, and you can too. Just remember to chase the dialogue options that boost Vivienne's chances and hurt everyone else's. (And it helps if you start pretty early on, by the way: one of the ones you should make sure to grab is one in Haven suggesting that the system would be fairer if there were mages in the Chantry.)
It also helps if you play a mage, and take the dialogue option saying you'll use this opportunity to set an example of a mage doing great things: that gives Leiliana a minuscule boost, and gives Vivienne a slightly bigger one.
The ability to balance honor and ruthlessness, and use whichever is the smart option at the time.
Too little honor, and you'll wind up doing horrible things when a more morally upright answer could get you the same result, or an even better one. But if you go with the honorable solution all the time, your Warden puts Harrowmont on the throne of Orzammar and contributes to its stagnation, and your Inquisitor does a long quest chain to get the House of Repose off of Josephine's back instead of taking the quick option.
@Karician -"Seems that way. You really need to replay DA2 is you're so convinced that such a crazed Meredith supporter is so worthy of freedom from his addiction."
I didn't say he was worthy of freedom from his addiction. Remember: I started my very first post on this thread by assuming for the sake of argument that you're right about that.
For my part, this argument isn't about whether Cullen deserves freedom. It's about whether freeing him is worth it for other reasons... like providing an example to other templars that it can be done.
"You'd take the word of Orlesian nobles who are more interested in eye candy rather than the fact that their country is in decline and potentially on the brink of ruin? Ok."
Not if I was interested in advice on how to run a country, obviously. But I think the fact that they're all crowding around him makes a case that some people find him compelling. Combine that with his high rank and inspirational story of surviving the blow-up in Ferelden, I think it's fair to say he probably counts as a celebrity... to the extent that that concept exists in Thedas.
Note that I don't mean that word as moral praise: some really messed up people get that status. But the fact that those messed up people are celebrities means that people listen to them, sometimes more than they should. Why not use that?
-"Think about how many times Cassandra has been wrong,"
That doesn't disqualify her from having good ideas once in a while, does it? Maybe this isn't one of them, but you don't decide that by looking at the suggester: you decide that by looking at the suggestion.
-"Inquisition had plenty of characters who have every reason to be very much alive who don't appear or are even referenced in the game."
It did, but is Mettin one of them? If you back the mages in DA2, I don't think he can make it out of the resulting questline alive, and I know that backing the templars doesn't guarantee he does. The Keep doesn't track his survival, so for all we know, the devs are just assuming he died in DA2. Combine that with years of offscreen warfare, and the fact that the biggest lunatics in the templars formed a splinter faction that we eradicate early in DA:I, and I'd be shocked if we ever meet the guy again.
Now I should concede that Karras's survival in DA2 is tracked, and that we have no direct evidence that he has since died. He's another lunatic who would be more likely to join the nutjobs in the Hinterlands or the main templar band in Therinfal than any other group... but maybe I could believe he avoided (or deserted) those groups and survived, possibly starting his own. So I guess I gotta concede that there's at least one bad templar who this could help... but I'll get to that a couple of points down.
-"Both characters can potentially survive DAI, and in the former's case if you don't reach Lysette in time she'll die. My Inquisitor has no reason not to risk his life for people who deserve mercy."
This isn't what I meant. I didn't mean stopping them from dying. (In fact, if you didn't do that I can't really use them as an example of my real point, can I?)
-"My Inquisitor has no reason not to risk his life for people who deserve mercy. Assuming both survive the events of the game, they could break their addiction independent of whatever Cullen does or doesn't do. You're prescribing importance to a character that isn't reflective of what we see in game."
Well, how I'd respond to that depends on whether I'm supposed to see it as a metagame commentary or not.
Do you mean that we don't actually see the effect that Cullen has during the events of Inquisition and Trespasser? Because no, we don't, and shouldn't expect to. We won't be able to truly know what impact he has for years, maybe even decades. No matter what decision your Inquisitor comes to, it's the result of them taking their best guess and running with it, and history will either vindicate them or not.
Do you mean that we don't see any reason to believe he's having an impact in the metagame sense? I'd have to say you're wrong there: the epilogues seem to communicate that he is helping former templars who don't want to be templars any more. Maybe these two would have shaken it anyway, but the epilogues make it sound like there are some who kick the habit specifically because of Cullen. (Unless you don't help him, in which case he doesn't do anything of the sort, and nobody seems to emerge to take his place.)
-"Mages are born with a strange power. They never asked for that. All Templars take an assumed risk when they change themselves to join the Order and drink lyrium. That's a conscious choice they're making. Why should the Inquisition or the Inquisitor fix characters for unknown risks/drawbacks that surviving Templar characters must have taken into consideration?"
If basic empathy isn't enough, consider this: the templars are not born with their power. They only keep it if they keep adding lyrium to their system, and helping them stop doing that means they lose it. Whatever you're afraid the templars will do, there's a non-zero chance that they need the lyrium to do it... which means that the templars who have nefarious plans might not go to Templars Anonymous anyway.
This is especially true if you're afraid of seeing anti-mage pogroms. I'm not saying that's not a legitimate worry, but an ex-templar who wants to do that needs to either refuse to shake their addiction, or accept that they're going into them underpowered. (But the choice is made for them if they assume they can't shake the addiction, isn't it?)
Not to mention that the addiction addles their brains, until they fight it off. A templar has a clearer head once they're cured. Some templars who wouldn't otherwise be a danger might well be, if they want to shake the addiction but don't know that they can.
-"Regarding your last paragraph, yeah there must have been a miscommunication."
Fair enough.
-"You can't move 10 feet in Thedas without tripping over a cult."
Which is part of why the templars are so worried.
@Karician "You're elevating Cullen to the tier of 'celebrity spokesman,' really?"
Am I? I don't think so: I'm pretty sure the game itself is. Which word in the phrase "celebrity spokesman" do you feel is a poor description? His status absolutely makes him a celebrity (ask the fans in Halamshiral if you don't believe me,) and Cassandra absolutely means for him to serve as a spokesman. (Edit: And what does her questionable ability to judge character have to do with any of that?)
-"Pure speculation."
It's speculation based on what we see of the few templars we meet in Haven, an attempt to get in the heads of the templars you're thinking of, and the stated goals of all three organizations. I wouldn't call it pure speculation, or if it is, it's at least speculation I put some thought into. But fine: it is me being a bit speculative.
-"Do you think the templar who was responsible for mage Cole's demise is deserving of a future?"
Do you think that a paperwork mistake (even one with horrible consequences) is worthy of having your mind destroyed? This guy isn't Meredith, or Alrik, or the Cullen I'm assuming exists for the sake of argument. It'd be one thing if he'd done this on purpose to deliberately kill someone in a horribly torturous fashion, or if he hadn't regretted it... but the Cole we know can discover that neither of those is true.
-"Or Ser Mettin?"
Now that's a better question, and the answer's no. But you're speculating when you imply that he's still in a position where this matters to him. Even assuming that he's still alive at the end of DA2, and survived the years of war between the two games (and those are both assumptions,) I honestly can't think of a guy more likely to join the lunatics in the Hinterlands. So I'm going to go out on a limb and say he's probably dead.
-"How many bad Templars are you willing risk letting loose on Thedas once the dust settles, because your character is willing to help a fanatic like Cullen Rutherford? The lyrium binds the worst of the Templars as well as the best. How can you be so certain that giving shitty Templars and out wouldn't do more harm than good?"
Well, honestly, I can't. For all I know, I could be doing more harm than good. But how certain can you be that the templars you fear are still a problem? I admit that my guess that most of them wound up in the Hinterlands band or the Red Templars is just a guess, but it's a guess that seems to fit, and you haven't actually done anything to refute it other than pointing out that it is just a guess.
How many good templars are you willing to sentence to this same fate out of fear of bad ones who have probably become much more rare than they had previously been?
Besides: if nothing else, the ones who take this out won't be templars anymore. The lyrium doesn't just bind them, it's also the only reason they're anything more than really competent knights. Any templar with nefarious plans is more capable of carrying them out if they're still on the lyrium.
-"Evangeline is a cameo and novel character, and Lysette has like 5-7 sentences with of (largely expository) dialogue. Not sure why you think their existence justifies mercy on a crazed enforcer like Cullen but ok."
Because mercy on them might require it. Are you willing to risk destroying both of them in order to destroy him? Or do you know something I don't that makes them deserve that fate?
-"Chances are Lysette has a stronger will than Cullen."
Now that is pure speculation. And anyway, it doesn't answer what I asked: are you willing to take that chance?
-"I don't see why that matters for the purpose of roleplaying."
You seemed to see some reason it did in your last post. You said that your character might have been inclined to see it more as a way of helping other templars than as a way of helping Cullen, but that unfortunately the game doesn't let you say that out loud, and I thought you were implying that that was going to stop you. But if so, shouldn't the same apply to your interpretation of this as a way of destroying bad templars?
@Karician Again: there's no reason to bring up Cullen himself. I'm not arguing that. In fact, I'm assuming for the sake of argument that you're right about him not being worth saving for his own sake. My argument isn't about him, and you admit that he was a particularly dogmatic templar not representative of the rest, so I'm not sure why you keep bringing him up... unless you consider making him pay for Kirkwall to be an actual positive that outweighs any good he could otherwise do.
As for the rest: Cassandra explicitly says she's hoping to use Cullen as a model for other templars who want to break their addictions. Having a celebrity spokesman for something, an example that other people can point to, can only help. Maybe some will save themselves without him, and maybe some are so far gone that they can't help themselves even with that example, but he's certain to be a net positive influence. Maybe your character prioritizes making Cullen pay for his actions over maybe saving templars who deserve it, and that's not exactly a wrong way to play a mage, but the bycatch is still on him.
And relevant to whether or not the templars deserve help: I agree that I can't prove the templars serving the Inquisition are the more moderate ones (apart from Evangeline and Lysette, I mean,) but I think it's more likely than not. Like I said: the Inquisition wouldn't appeal to the more morally wretched ones as much as the rogue band in the Hinterlands or the main band in Therinfal would. But I'll tell you what: if I can't promise that all the templars who work for you are worth saving, I believe I did mention two worth saving who work for you. Are you willing to risk them not saving themselves because you couldn't bring yourself to help someone who could have helped them? And are you willing to take that risk just because doing so might have helped someone who didn't deserve it?
"Shame the limitations of the game make that sort of nuance more headcanony,"
And yet you don't mind going into head-canoned nuance to Cullen's detriment: the idea that not taking him off lyrium is revenge for Kirkwall isn't something your character can ever express out loud.
"There's no reason to save him by that same logic, though."
That quote was a metagame comment on the consequences of choosing when he quits, and wasn't relevant to whether or not him quitting is desirable at all.
@Dwarftank I agree in part, but the player might not want to use their own knowledge; they might want to limit themselves to what the PC knows. And what the smart thing to do is depends on whether the player is using the PC's knowledge, or their own. If the player is using their own knowledge, there's no reason not to just have him quit right then. If the player is using the PC's knowledge, they should promise to let him break it after the war, when he no longer needs to be as sharp.
Either way, I can't think of a single reason not to let him break it at all, unless you're actively hoping it will break him. But I think we're agreed there, right?
"To my knowledge, there is no mess-up from Cullen while he isn't taking lyrium. Correct me if wrong. If I'm right, then the player has no practical reason not to support Cullen."
You aren't wrong, but Cullen is afraid it could happen, and it is a legitimate worry for all the PC knows.... but that problem could be solved by telling him to go back on lyrium, and telling him during a subsequent conversation that you'll help him break his addiction after they're done with Corypheus. And yeah, that's a legitimate option: I had one of my PCs do it that way. So if the PC's doing this over practical concerns, and not just deliberately screwing Cullen over, then it seems to me that that's the best solution.
@Karician The only bit of this that really seems to work as a response to what I argued is the last paragraph: remember, I'm assuming you're right about Cullen, so how your character feels about him isn't the point. As for the rest of them...
The idea seems to be that you want to continue the Chantry's practice of forcing templars to serve using their lyrium addictions? And rather than considering it a Con that you're destroying a whole bunch of templars who aren't Cullen, you consider that a Pro?
I'm not sure which "known fanatics" you're talking about: I don't think the fanatical templars joined the Inquisition. They wouldn't have joined the Inquisition before you make the choice as to whether you'd rather recruit the templars or the mages, because they'd have wanted to continue the war rather than end it. I think the ones who most resemble the picture of the Templar Order you seem to be working from were the ones we have to kill in the Hinterlands, who continued killing mages (among others) in the wilds even after they were ordered to fall back. So you don't need to worry about the very worst of them. They're dead.
And the ones who agreed to fall back to Therinfal Redoubt, but were still fanatical templars in all other respects? They probably either got put on the red stuff quickly so that Corypheus could make sure they wouldn't rebel against him, or just snuck out when it became clear that Lord Seeker Lucius had priorities other than fighting the mages and sealing the Breach. One thing's for sure, the only possible way the fanatical templars there joined the Inquisition is if your PC did Champions of the Just... and something tells me your PC didn't.
The templars who deserve to be broken by their addictions are already broken, one way or another. Even if we assume Cullen deserves it, or at least isn't worth saving from it, I don't think the rest of the templars you're contemplating screwing over do.
@Karician Let's assume for the sake of argument that you're right that Cullen is entirely unrepentant, and that only a few templars besides him benefit.
How is that not still worth it? Do you really want to destroy Cullen badly enough to destroy the other templars who work for you?
I remember reading something on Tv Tropes saying that whichever of the two available options WASN'T sacrificed in the Fade is going to play some sort of part designated for the Fade Survivor, but I have no idea if it's backed up by any dev comments. And personally, I was hoping that whoever WAS sacrificed gets possessed by the Nightmare.
I'm also pretty sure that whoever drinks from the Well is going to fill some part. (Or at least I hope so: it'd be pretty anti-climactic if geas thing doesn't go anywhere.)
I think there's also potential for whoever winds up controlling Zathrian's Dalish clan to have a part to play. (That would be Zathrian if he lives, Lanaya if Zathrian sacrifices himself to end the curse, and The Lady of The Forest if the werewolves slaughter the healthy elves and let the sick ones turn.)
@Dwarftank "It is a weak move."
Uh, how? How is not wanting to die horribly due to the Blight, and seeking to avoid that death, a weak move? You can argue that there's other things the Warden could be doing instead of spending his time looking for a cure that might not exist, or that doing so at the price this question suggests isn't worth it, but I don't think not wanting to die is in and of itself a weak move.
Male, 30, USA
Let's see... I've got:
-A Cousland who probably wouldn't have thought it was worth killing a whole bunch of elves to lengthen his own lifespan, but would have been tempted (not because he's particularly evil, but because knowing your days are numbered sounds like a hell of a weight to put on someone,)
-a Chaotic Evil Surana blood mage who would have gone for it in a hot second,
-a paladin-esque Templar/Champion Brosca who absolutely wouldn't have,
-a selfish Aeducan who might have... although he'd be more likely than other PCs to bear in mind the risk of getting Tainted again (although I suspect that if Caladrius could cure the Taint, the cured person would have been immune from that point forward)
-a Mahariel who wouldn't have,
-a Tabris who... is a Tabris,
-another Cousland who absolutely wouldn't have,
-an Amell blood mage who... might have?
-another Mahariel who's even less likely to take that deal than the first one would have been, although she'd have been sorely tempted if she could have substituted human victims for the elves,
-a paladin-esque Spirit Healer/ Arcane Warrior Surana who wouldn't have heard of it,
-a magic-obsessed Templar/Reaver Aeducan who took the deal as originally offered, but wouldn't have taken this one: she was cool with getting extra Constitution, but would not have been willing to give up the ability to sense darkspawn, and was willing to trust Avernus to blunt the bad stuff that came with that ability
@Chaos9059763 "Since none of these Divine actually change it. I can't say one is better than the other."
Really? I thought they all changed it at least a little, though some more than others.
Leiliana changes it the most drastically: she dismantles the Circles entirely, and two more organizations show up in its place. One of those is the College of Enchanters, which is run by Fiona and presumably loses a lot of the practices you object to. The other organization claims to be the Circle reborn, but almost certainly can't compel members to be part of it the way the old Circles could, and therefore is probably going to need to change drastically if it wants to keep its members.
Vivienne is a Circle mage with a very specific idea of how the Circle should work: she acknowledges that the templars went over the line in way too many cases, and believes that being sent to the Circle should be as much an opportunity as it is a restriction, the way it was in her experience. If she gets control of the Chantry, her first step is to take complete control of the system and make sure everyone is clear that they answer to her. If you combine all of those factors, I can't imagine she's not stripping a whole lot of unambiguously abusive practices away from the Circle.
Cassandra, I imagine, keeps much of the old system the way it was. But I imagine she's making it harder for the templars to get away with a lot of the abuse they used to get up to, if nothing else.
@FlamesOfChaos13 Yeah, putting the brakes on a bit sounds more in-character for Cassandra (and for reform-minded templars) than banning it entirely.
@FlamesOfChaos13 It could also mean that she's just refusing to control them, even though the lyrium grants her the ability to do so. And while it's enough of a stretch that I wouldn't ordinarily even bother posting that, I find it hard to believe that the templars themselves are insisting they not be given lyrium. They know better than anyone else what it does to people, but they also know why the templars have been taking it better than anyone else does.
@FlamesOfChaos13 Where are you getting the idea that Divine!Cassandra doesn't allow templars to use lyrium? You're not the first person I've heard say it, but I haven't seen anyone give actual direct evidence to that effect, and I've never seen any in-game myself.
I know she supports Cullen's attempts to help people kick the habit, but that's not evidence that she's not allowing more people to develop it. And templars are appreciably more able to fight mages if they use it.
@FlamesOfChaos13 I don't think you need to worry there. We've already seen Charter refusing to consider Solas's plan.
And I think she's probably far from the only elf who doesn't want humanity gone. For example, Briala's probably going to oppose his plans if she's back with Empress Celene, and might oppose them even if she's not.
If so, I'd go with Leiliana, especially considering that I like everything else she gets up to... but that's not the only possible way it can go.