If every Mage is a ticking bomb ready to explode, shouldn't a player experiment IG the downsides of choosing a Mage, instead of just being told they have to be locked up for theirs and other people's safety.
It is said that Mages are more sensitive to the Fade and that during their sleep are haunted by demons, but that is never shown or talked enough to justify why the Templars would need to lock them up; and, as seen above, as a player this danger is never experienced.
Hawke has the possibility of becoming a Spirit Healer in DA2, thus making them at risk of possession, and yet the game does not talks about this issue while Anders, a literal Abomination, is around.
Bethany's dialogue with Aveline hints to the unpredictability of Mages, and yet it's never properly explored and Bethany's major problem seems more the Templars' relentless search for her as an Apostate than a supposed innate urge to lash out.
Tevinter is an Empire run by Mages, but it's repeatedly shown that what makes it 'evil' is not magic-it's the very corrupt and ambitious people in charge of it that happen to use magic as a tool to grab power.
(Also, their Mages get a proper preparation for their Harrowings, unlike those in Thedas)
If the games want to give us a reason why we should understand that the Mages are inherently dangerous, why all the 'unstable' Mages are so because 1) they were abused by the Templars, 2) they tried to repress their magic with horrible results or 3) are horrible people on their own independently of their capacities?
I have the same thought every time I see one of these posts and I don't share it because I don't want to come off as rude or anything, so please know I mean no offense! And this isn't targeting OP. I'm just genuinely baffled by the fandom sometimes and feel the urge to talk about it
People are always saying 'Bioware wants us to think the Chantry is Good and Mages are Bad, but *overwhelming evidence to the contrary*'
But like... If 99% of the people who play these games walk away thinking 'man mages are oppressed' then... That's intentional. Does everyone just think the entire writing staff is super incompetent?? Like they made a great game with intriguing characters by sheer luck but they don't understand their own content? Why does everyone think they're trying to stay 'in the middle' oe side with the Chantry or anything else??
All our lives we hear good things about religion, by people who believe it, to justify the the horrific things that religion has done. We know it's bullshit. And then we hear good things about a (fictional) religion by characters who believe it or justifies atrocities and I guess that makes people think the writers believe it? Or something?
But yeah, no. They're using things that set off our 'hey that's bullshit' alarms because they want us to know it's bullshit. They want us to know that the characters believe in the Chantry despite everything, and we Should Question That.
I just don't get how everyone can walk away with the same thought and think it's not by design. It's the narrative they intentionally put into the game. It's on purpose.

















