47 réponses à ce sujet

[webbedfeet]

Lucrosian.



Infinite power should be used to make infinite money. Infinite money means better bargaining chips against the Chantry, governments, Wardens, what have you. You're also using magic to serve man, too (serve you, especially), so everybody wins.

[Khayness]

Libertarian, but not the crazy Chantry hater zealot like. The Templar oppression does more harm than good, mages should be let to govern themselves. Mages turn to forbidden powers out of desperation, this is obvious I think. Power crazy mages will be hunt down and turned into Tranquils, we can deal with our mess. The Circle should be led by a few elder mages who keep eachother in check, no First Enchanter thank you very much. One man can be corrupted.

[Sean2112bd]

Khayness wrote...

Libertarian, but not the crazy Chantry hater zealot like. The Templar oppression does more harm than good, mages should be let to govern themselves. Mages turn to forbidden powers out of desperation, this is obvious I think. Power crazy mages will be hunt down and turned into Tranquils, we can deal with our mess. The Circle should be led by a few elder mages who keep eachother in check, no First Enchanter thank you very much. One man can be corrupted.

Well, I can see your point, but that would be more of an oligarchy where things are ran by a select few. Perhaps a better approach would be to have three separate branches, First Enchanter, Elder Mages, and Knight Commander Templars. First Enchanter would be the President and Enchanters and Templars would be the Legislative and Judicial Branches lol haha jk, but it could work...right?

[Khayness]

Well the rule of a selected few aren't neccesarily bad. Let's go with the Aristotele 3x2 constitution chart
and assume they are aiming for the common good. We are scared of and can be turned into monsters or an emotionless shell-of-a-man, we got enough problems, we won't aim for mage world dominance. That didn't end up good the last time anyways
The selection of the Wizard Council (sounds pro) should have very strict laws, and only the most qualified persons could get in.

[Sean2112bd]

Khayness wrote...

Well the rule of a selected few aren't neccesarily bad. Let's go with the Aristotele 3x2 constitution chart
and assume they are aiming for the common good. We are scared of and can be turned into monsters or an emotionless shell-of-a-man, we got enough problems, we won't aim for mage world dominance. That didn't end up good the last time anyways
The selection of the Wizard Council (sounds pro) should have very strict laws, and only the most qualified persons could get in.

Nice chart  Yeah I suspect if it is for the common good then it would work. A wizard council would be a good idea. Personally, I think Templars should just be policemen and not overseers. They can be called upon if there is a report of maleficarum/ blood magic or if there is probable cause. The way I see it it's almost like Martial Law inside the tower and it would be better for mages to police themselves. Templars are for dire situations, kind of like a SWAT team or a separate agency of some sort. 

[Annihilator27]

Libetarions for me.

[Emerald Melios]

Julian_Kraynog wrote...

Maleficar.

[SOLID_EVEREST]

My elf Arcane Warrior would be an isolationist. I think the mages would do well to make their own civilization free from any rule...

[k9medusa]

Northern Sun wrote...

Assuming I'm not already a apostate/maleficar, certainly libertarian.

Me tooB) Just want to be free...

[Schneidend]

Lucrosian. Concerns of partnership with the Chantry or freedom from the Chantry are petty and inane until you have the wealth and power to cement either goal. Magic is a tool, so use it and bide your time while the Chantry thinks they have you under their thumb. Soon enough, you'll have the ear of the king himself, and can accomplish whatever you deem fit.

[Big_Chief]

I would totally be an Aequitarian (hope I spelled that right). I tend to be very moderate in all things, and they sound like the most reasonable. Extremes in any direction tend to do more harm than good.

[Nikowood]

If forced to succumb to the tower-

Libertarian/ Isolationist/ Lucrosion- I would want freedom, isolation from mad villagers, and money for magical services for pilgrims coming to my hut in the woods.

If born Dalish, I would want to be Keeper! The dalish keepers are kick ass and honestly I wish that you could have this origin in the game (future DLC please?!)

[Sean2112bd]

 Looking at some of the responses it seems that Lucrosians are like Capitalists who want a monopoly on Lyrium haha

[Ascending-Gambit]

Do to the large ammount of influence the chantry has over Ferelden, I feel co-operation with the chantry would be best. To show loyalty and trustworthiness, not to mention preserverance will gain sympathy if not with the bigots in the chantry then the civilian and military population.

Attacking and being radical only makes them look right. Not to mention blood mages are shunned by almost everyone.

Modifié par Ascending-Gambit, 12 mai 2010 - 02:06 .

[maxernst]

Libertarian, but of the more moderate sort. I'm too risk-aversive to be a radical.

[CultKiller]

Abomination(Not the type in the circle but like Flemeth)/Malifecar

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

The Chantry/Templars/Circle would never catch me in the first place!

Modifié par Ryllen Laerth Kriel, 14 mai 2010 - 03:35 .

[sonofalich]

the Republicans oh wait i mean the Lucrosians.

[Emerald Melios]

Julian_Kraynog wrote...

Maleficar.

[Zerbin]

Aequitarian. Try to keep the lid on the pot.

[Seagloom]

I would be an Isolationist. This dilemma is too complex; with too many parties involved. Quite frankly, I cannot be bothered with it. Let other mages play politics and fight for social reform. I want to sit back, relax, and live out the rest of my days in peace.

[NewbOfLegend]

In most cases like this I find myself with a loyalist viewpoint, however I cannot STAND the chantry so I would most definitely be a Libertarian. Unfortunately my favorite character is Liliana so that's the irony.