Dragon Age Wiki
Register
Advertisement
Dragon Age Wiki

EDIT WAR ALERT!!! Person keeps posting speculation crap

Someone keeps posting speculation crap near the end of Overview. Please do something about it. (VicGeorge2K9 (talk) 22:32, August 31, 2011 (UTC))

The user has been alerted. Since there isn't a point to discuss this (since this is purely speculation), I don't think a page protection is necessary. Hopefully, this ends. --D. (talk · contr) 00:44, September 1, 2011 (UTC)

Article neutrality

A little proposal re this article: lets stick to facts, namely events and words, and avoid mentioning motives and speculations, because they are debatable. It would also be great if someone cleaned the article up and removed such words as zealot, tyranny, oppression, atrocity etc since they are highly emotionally charged and do not contribute towards neutrality. Asherinka (talk) 09:21, January 24, 2012 (UTC)

Article Structure

We have a separate article for the Battle of Kirkwall (9:37 Dragon). Given that 1. the war does not start until much later and the "battle" (that is never referred to as such in Asunder and instead is always called "Kirkwall rebellion") is technically not even the part of it, but rather a prerequisite 2. we have that article, I propose that we move any content that is missing from that article but is included in this one there and leave here only a short summary within background, not under a separate caption. Opinions? Asherinka (talk) 17:34, February 29, 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. I think the Mage-Templar War starts when the Circle of Magi was actually dissolved. Anything before are more like "pre-war events". --D. (talk · contr) 17:59, February 29, 2012 (UTC)
Your reasoning on both points is sound, thus I heartily support you once again.
20px-3431068.png Tekka Ijuin | Talk 
22:42, March 1, 2012 (UTC)
Agree that the war should break out in 9:40, not 9:37, since the war does not seem to have started until the end of Dragon Age: Asunder. Is this issue resolved...? Once resolved, the conflict box needs to be updated. e.g. IMO, Battle of Kirkwall (9:37) belligerents should be removed (Orsino, Meredith, Hawke); Free Marches conflicts date for war changed to 9:40, etc.
Also, the use of the modifier "rebel" is confusing, since it's not clear who's rebelling against what. It is used, for example, to describe both rebel mages and rebel templars. I would recommend against its use at all, although I still don't have a good word to describe either group now that both are separate from the Chantry. Independent mages? The "new" Templar Order? Or are templars just templars, regardless of who they work for? And, what about templars and seekers who are still loyal to the Chantry? Are they rebels? Rebels from the rebels? Anyhoo, I think you catch my meaning. :) --R2sMuse (talk) 14:57, July 11, 2012 (UTC)
It has been a while since this question was raised. Should we decide, or leave it open for more comments? I'd be pleased to take a crack at moving the Battle of Kirkwall details to the other article and streamlining this one, unless someone else would rather. --R2sMuse (talk) 02:24, February 5, 2013 (UTC)

I am not sure why the "Unresolved" tag has been placed in this discussion, since in fact there weren't any opposing views. Subsequently, I am removing it and I am making steps to materialize the result of the discussion. Na via lerno victoria 09:21, September 19, 2013 (UTC)

An addition to this discussion, should events at the White Spire also be under the Background section? I'm unsure, as it is only after those events that the mages formally decide to go to war and the Templars revolt against the chantry to subdue them. Further, what's the stance on battle articles? Need they have occurred in the games because if not I think the events at the White Spire could have one.Ravenfirelight (talk) 14:04, April 25, 2014 (UTC)

Hold on now, I wasn't aware of this topic at the time, had I been I would have opposed reducing the battle of Kirkwall to 'background', let alone removing so much information from the page. Even more since [1] this source] puts the start of the war at 9:37 (not 9:40, as the article with that source wrongly - and strangely claimed). Alexsau1991 (talk page) 15:56, April 25, 2014 (UTC)
In fact, on the timeline the marker for the Kirkwall Rebellion comes immediately after the marker for the 'Start of the Mage-Templar war', which says the destruction of the Kirkwall chantry incited the war, which thus begins with the kirkwall rebellion/annulment of the Kirkwall circle. Alexsau1991 (talk page) 16:07, April 25, 2014 (UTC)
Alex, the war clearly only begins after the events of Asunder. Asunder makes that clear. The Templars and Mages are not at war until after the White Spire incident. As to the reduction in content, most of it was a repetition of information already available on the Kirkwall Rebellion page. Ravenfirelight (talk) 16:19, April 25, 2014 (UTC)
Do you mean on page of DAI are misinformations?FirstDrellSpectre (talk) 16:22, April 25, 2014 (UTC)
It wouldn't be the first time they've released faulty timelines. If the Kirkwall Rebellion was the start, then it follows a VERY loose and peculiar definition of war, considering that there was no subsequent fighting until after the White Spire, which was the clear spark Ravenfirelight (talk) 16:26, April 25, 2014 (UTC)
Off topic, but I think Gaider choosed a wrong name for the incident in Kirkwall, to be a rebellion a rebel army is needed, when Anders was alone with no army.FirstDrellSpectre (talk) 16:33, April 25, 2014 (UTC)
On that, I agree with you, FirstDrellSpectre. They also calls the Qunari invasion the "First Battle of Kirkwall" on that page. Which is a bit odd if you dig into the lore at all. Ravenfirelight (talk) 16:52, April 25, 2014 (UTC)
Gaider gave this name to this event in Asunder, but he made a mistake by giving the wrong name. Writters aren't so absolute to make us feel like we don't have own reasons. But that's not the first time he made mistake, Calling had chronological errors. I would call that even Right of Annulement in Kirkwall.FirstDrellSpectre (talk) 17:03, April 25, 2014 (UTC)
I actually made that suggestion on the Kirkwall Rebellion talk page, but it seems to have fallen off the radar. This is off topic though. Ravenfirelight (talk) 17:09, April 25, 2014 (UTC)

Ravenfire, Dragon Age Asunder may well state that, Dragon Age II, the Dragon Age website, and the World of Thedas, all clearly state that the Kirkwall Rebellion was the spark which ignited the war, it doesn't get much clearer than-

"Destroys the Kirkwall chantry with the grand cleric still inside, inciting the Mage-Templar War that spreads throughout Thedas"

A lack of fighting doesn't mean that there wasn't a war - it wasn't uncommon in medieval conflicts; it was four years between the first and second major battles of the first War of the Roses, for example. Heck, even in modern conflicts, in the second world war it took 7 months before any major engagement took place.

As for a faulty timeline. Most of the mistakes in World of Thedas were picked up, and a list of corrections published on their website. The start and instigation of the Mage-Templar war however was not one of them, quite the contrary they reprinted the aforementioned quote from WoT onto their website. It's just as possible that Asunder is faulty in it's telling of events, or that other events have been retconned since - the book is 3 years old now, it certainly wouldn't be the first time BioWare has retconned something.

Drell, a rebellion doesn't need a 'rebel army'. A rebellion needs rebels... people to rebel. That's what Anders and the Kirkwall circle did, hence a rebellion. Alexsau1991 (talk page) 22:28, April 25, 2014 (UTC)

There was no rebellion. There was an annulment and mages trying not to die, and failing. Anders was the only rebel, and not a member of the Circle. Asunder makes it out as an isolated, if inflammatory, incident. Look, Kirkwall became a rallying call for mages lobbying for a split with the chantry, but mages and Templars did not start systematically fighting one another for three years, and only then because of the events in Asunder, in fact the mages voted against secession between Kirkwall and the White Spire incidents. The fighting, the break with the chantry on both sides, that all occurred only after the events in Asunder drove them to that point. To say it starts at Kirkwall defies all logic Ravenfirelight (talk) 22:45, April 25, 2014 (UTC)

The circle didn't rebel, only Anders. So many times Orsino repeated that the circle had nothing in common with actions of Anders. Only Anders rebelled, noone else. Anders had no army, no supporters, the underground was wiped out. Even Orsino condemned Anders for his action, that's a sign of no connection between them. Circle didn't rebel, it was Anders, only he planned the explosion and he caused it. One man isn't enough for a rebellion.FirstDrellSpectre (talk) 22:34, April 25, 2014 (UTC)

One man certainly is enough for a rebellion (in Kirkwall, Anders were practically the straw that broke the camemls back, the mages and templars had been pushing against each other for years). Regardless such accuracy as we see it doesn't matter in names, different names are given to events to suit the agenda of different authorities - the United States revolution isn't known as such in the United Kingdom, for example. But that's not really relevant here.
To say it 'started after the events in Kirkwall' might defy all logic, but only if you take Asunder as the only accurate source. As I said, retconning could easily have taken place - given the amount of time that has taken place between Inquisition and Asunder (3 years), it certainly wouldn't be the first time. It has been stated that the war started in 9:37 in two recent occasions, (as well as in DA2). Logical in your eyes or not, BioWare consider the war to have started then. We'll probably have to wait for Inquisition before we can make a judgement to the contrary. Alexsau1991 (talk page) 14:12, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

Gonna have to side with Alexsau on this one. When Bioware, the actual creators, writes that it started in Kirkwall in an official website as clear as day, the fans inferences should be irrelevant. In my opinion, when it's that explicit on the website that kirkwall was the start, the matter shouldn't even be disputed anymore.(Sports72Xtrm (talk) 14:20, April 26, 2014 (UTC))

Fine. It may defy any sort of logic to call Kirkwall the start of a conflict that only broke out years later, but I'll leave it alone until we get new information from Inquisition. Ravenfirelight (talk) 15:01, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

New Image

The article needs new image, it shares the same with Kirkwall Rebellion.FirstDrellSpectre (talk) 19:19, January 25, 2014 (UTC)

A bit rich given you were the one who changed the Kirkwall Rebellion page so that it shared the same infobox image. But anyway, it doesn't particularly matter, and having a main image with in-game footage is preferable to concept art, especially since by definition it is not final, so I'm going to change it back. And so solve your problem, i'll also change the Kirkwall article back. Alexsau1991 25px-Goddammit.svg.png (talk page) 23:16, January 25, 2014 (UTC)

I think that picture DA2 Mage blasting a Templar with fire will be better than the currect one. The current one shows a flashy phenomena, not fight between mages and templars. The current picture fits more the battle in Kirkwall more than the whole war.FirstDrellSpectre (talk) 07:05, May 1, 2014 (UTC)

I like the existing one. It shows a specific, important event rather than a couple of generic people fighting each other, and it's a better quality image. --Kelcat (talk) 23:53, May 1, 2014 (UTC)

Lambert's Status

How should we reflect Lambert's status? We know he's dead but can we safely consider that common knowledge from an in world perspective? If Lambert is presumed dead by most people in Thedas from 9:41 onwards, but they don't know for sure, should we leave it as possible or not? -HD3 Sig 03:52, November 21, 2014 (UTC)

It has already been confirmed in Dragon Age: Inquisition that Cole confesses to his murder in a party banter with Cassandra (thus confirming initial speculation of said spirit did at the end of Asunder).Zach Hontiveros Pagkalinawan (talk) 15:47, December 20, 2014 (UTC)

Loyalist Mages opposing the rebellion

I spoke with Vivienne, and she says that half the Circle mages support the rebellion, half oppose it, and the "Loyalist" mages, as she calls them, are led by Vivienne against the rebels. I was wondering if they should be added as a third faction on this page, or added in the Templar/Seeker faction? DRAEVAN13 19:54, November 27, 2014 (UTC)

I support this addition, however, we will need more proof from the game itself or official confirmation from Bioware to verify its status as a third power in the ongoing war. Having the fabulous First Enchanter of Montsimmard tell us this upfront is helpful, but remember that she is also skilled in The Grand Game so she could be making it seem like alot of people are on the side she believes in even if it might not be the case. Then again, she maybe telling the truth to an extent; who knows? I won't pretend to fully understand Orlesians (even if she is technically from the Free Marches).Zach Hontiveros Pagkalinawan (talk) 15:56, December 20, 2014 (UTC)

venatori, red templars and the inquisition

When we played Dragon Age: Inquisition we saw venatori as supporters of cirle mages and red templars as corrupted templars ruled by envy demon. The inquisition was involved in this war as well. We shall add them.Andrzej.lewinski.351 (talk) 19:39, December 3, 2014 (UTC)

The people involved

Should the people who died before the official outbreak of the war be considered "commanders"? Wynne especially strikes me as odd because she, as far as I have understood, were against it and putting her on rebels side seems odd. Caspoi (talk) 12:07, December 18, 2014 (UTC)

when did the war really end

On page of this conflict Battle of Haven is described. However the battle wasn't part of the mage-templar war since the war ended with one faction conscripted by the Inquisitor. There was no "final battle", the herald simply took one faction from the war and left another to be enslaved by the Elder One. The unconscripted faction no longer fought for own cause, but for their new master. That's why I think the battle of Haven wasn't the part of the mage-templar war, since one faction joined the Inquisition and another was stripped of free will. Mage-templar war didn't end traditionally by final battle, but by taking both sides to another war.Andrzej.lewinski.351 (talk) 15:55, February 19, 2015 (UTC)

An excellent question. With the whole conflict subsumed into the war against the elder one, it might be a good idea to establish where the mage templar war ends and the war against the elder one begins. My submission would be the battle of haven. Even though the Venatori continue, the rebel mages the venatori conscripted perish there and the templar order refocuses to aid the inquisition. conversely, the templars are largely subsumed by that point into either the red templar faction, the inquisition or continue to remain neutral, such as the templars in hossberg. So I think that is a good end point. But perhaps the battle of haven section should just be a brief note saying that many members of the non recruited faction perished there, since it is really more a conflict in the war against the elder one more than the mage-templar war

-HD3 Sig 15:58, February 19, 2015 (UTC)

Lord Seeker Lucius I know that almost everyone will have killed him during their DAI playthroughs but it is ultimately up the the player to kill him since you may not even do that quest so surely he should have his cross in brackets? 86.143.231.211 (talk) 23:02, April 5, 2015 (UTC)

Lord Seeker Lucius

I know that almost everyone will have killed him during their DAI playthroughs but it is ultimately up the the player to kill him since you may not even do that quest so surely he should have his cross in brackets? 86.143.231.211 (talk) 23:03, April 5, 2015 (UTC)

Advertisement