1503 réponses à ce sujet

[Sir JK]

LobselVith8 wrote...

I don't find your comparison compelling. You're saying that, because the life of a peasant or a warrior is difficult, it's comparable to a life of a person who is imprisoned for being different? You're comparing the hardship of a life where people have the freedom to dictate their own actions to a life of a mage who can't do anything unless he or she has permission to do so? To be watched over 24/7 by drug addicts in armor who about talk about killing mages with glee... to never be able to raise your own children, to be taken away from your family, and to risk being turned into a rune crafting slave if they think you aren't strong enough to withstand a demon tricking you into giving consent to become an abomination. I don't see how anyone can say the Circle isn't a prison for mages, especially when the Magi Origin VO refers to the Circle as a prison.

No, I fear I didn't manage to get my point across.

A peasant don't have the freedom to go wherever they want when they want. If they decide to leave without permission or anyone taking their place at the farm their crops will rot and be ruined (or not be planted at all, depending on time of year). If they're really unlucky they'll also live in an area where the nobles would hunt down and kill them for leaving (they'd be called serfs then though).
Essentially their "freedom" boils down to a choice between staying put or putting their life at a huge risk.
Granted... they probably get to keep their children (if they survive... )

Templars are signed up at a very early age and there really isn't any alternative life other than taking the vows. They won't get to decide what to do with their life either... they must follow orders. Anything they want to do for themselves must be sought permission for. Deciding randomly to take a trek through the country side because you don't like your superior officer would mean a detah sentence once you return to civilisation.
Again, a choice of staying put or putting their life at a huge risk.

Same with clergy... they start their education (and like Templars, it's probably you parents putting you there) early and when the time comes to take the vows there are no alternatives open. Then they have to do whatever the chantry asks of them. They don't get to choose where they're placed, how they'll work or who they get to interact with. And like mages they're forbidden from having children (and unlike mages, also relationships).

My point was this: Noone has the freedom the mages seek, the only difference is that in the mages case it is enforced by the Templar's rather than someone else or the world itself. Yes, many of them can technically decide to pack up and leave... but the result is the same as if a mage would do it (likely death). They have just as much a choice in life as the mages do.

To give you a example.. Anders went apostate and was captured and escaped several times. Each time these "frenzied, hateful, mage-killing addicts" just captured him and locked him up. Not until they suspected he had killed some of them did they try to kill him.
If a Templar did the "same thing" and left without permission, as soon as he showed up again he'd be summary executed if he did not have a really good reason. On the spot. On the charge of desertion. Did the templar have more freedom that Anders in that regard?

[Solduri]

destroy both the chantry and the qun/quinari both are bad for mages!!!

[Bio D]

My Human Noble was the only one who actually liked the Chantry instead of just some of the people in it.

So, fight. The Maker is a bit of a jerk anyway.

[AbsolutGrndZer0]

I think the Chantry has it's place, however the problem is the same problem medevial Christianity had.  You got the lay people that beleive it, you have the good priests that really want to help, then you have the overzealous power-hungry crazies that start Exalted Marches (or Crusades) and burn witches (apostates).

Please note, my intention is NOT to start a real life religious debate, I am just pointing out that I see a similarity between them.

[Lotion Soronarr]

MariSkep wrote...
Which makes no sense since I don't recall mages needing to speak to be able to perform magic.

And you're forgetting the dragon cultists,  cultures outside of the Chantry's control that even welcome possession (Genitivi mentions them), the Dalish Elves (who have to flee because Templars hunt down and murder their Keepers) and pretty much the rest of the world.

You miss the point - Tevinter, Quanri, Orlain, Ferelden, etc... and control and group their mages.

First of all, we get vaccines for dealing with diseases. That's really all your immune system needs but that really has nothing to do with anything.

Like I said, my point stands. The Templars still force one of those 3 things on you.If it were about just keeping the mage contained they'd just keep him in the Tower but they don't. They force you to undertake the Harrowing, become Tranquil or die.

You are utterly missing the point.
A mage facing a demon is unavoidable. The Harrowing is a ritual DEVISED BY MAGES.
What the templars do is force such a confrontation in a controled enviroment.
And yes, those 3 options are the only sensible ones.

[Lotion Soronarr]

MariSkep wrote...
You're not sending a fire team or squad out to capture or apprehend someone in war time. You're sending out a group of detectives to track and handle someone they've been taught to fear and view as hostile. Two very different things.

What? Your'e making no sense.
Soliders are sent in to capture. And oyu somehow make it sound like it's less exploitalbe. How exactly? It's always a "US" versus "them" situation.
The potential for abuse ALWAYS exist in ANY system.
You're ranting about things for which there is no solution and throwing them at the chantrys feet like some horrible crime. It cannot be helped. It cannot be changed.

We've also seen the way the Reverand Mother at Ostagar treats mages, how the Chnatry treats anyone who isn't a follower of Andraste and have heard from several people who've dealt with them for a long time (Wynne, Alistair, Cullen) Templars as a whole don't mind the dirtier aspects of their jobs.

I disagree. You have no basis for a such a conclusion.

[Lotion Soronarr]

MariSkep wrote...
Which is what makes them incompetent.

Think of it this way, if you came upon a group of Nevarran Dragon Hunters who'd almost been killed to the man by a half dozen or so  drakes, would you then not assume they were not cut out to be dragon hunters?

Have you ever played on insane? Ever had to relaod, even once?
Then you're incompetent.

Or to put it another way, is a SWAT tems doesn't always win, does that make them incompetent?

[Daerog]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

First of all, we get vaccines for dealing with diseases. That's really all your immune system needs but that really has nothing to do with anything.

Like I said, my point stands. The Templars still force one of those 3 things on you.If it were about just keeping the mage contained they'd just keep him in the Tower but they don't. They force you to undertake the Harrowing, become Tranquil or die.

You are utterly missing the point.
A mage facing a demon is unavoidable. The Harrowing is a ritual DEVISED BY MAGES.
What the templars do is force such a confrontation in a controled enviroment.
And yes, those 3 options are the only sensible ones.

People miss that point.

The College of Enchanters in the city of Cumberland is the Circle's headquarters, as that's where Enchanters gather to determine Circle policy.  -from the wikia

The Enchanters develop policies and run the Circles. The Chantry governs and monitors it. The Chantry doesn't know how to teach magic and such, that is up to the Circle mages. It is the Circle's choice to make someone do the Harrowing or become Tranquil. No way a templar could tell if or when a mage is ready for such a thing.

Modifié par DaerogTheDhampir, 18 septembre 2010 - 11:32 .

[Everwarden]

If you missed Gaider's comments in the templars and chastity thread, he said that (at least some circles) allow mages to marry, so long as they behave. This is honestly more reasonable than I thought the chantry capable, so maybe they aren't the complete ****s I want them to be so I feel better about killing them in DA2. 

I think, after reading that, I've revised my opinion of Chantry oversight, and conclude that it's fine if they're willing to change two things:

1. Templar abuse should not be permitted or winked at. The templars are there for the public good, not for personal satisfaction from bullying mages. This notion has been contested previously in the thread, but no one can deny that at least in some circles, in some cases, templar abuse is grossly out of hand. 

2. Them taking the children away from mages. Completely unacceptable, and worth giving the Chantry a hearty ****slap for that alone. 

I still think there are systems that would work equally well or better, but it looks like the circles aren't so terrible. Perhaps the Chantry could compromise and allow the parents visitation? They have a chantry in the circle tower, it doesn't seem too unreasonable to raise the child in that chantry and not one two weeks away. 

[Talogrungi]

My apostate Hawke will view the Chantry in the same vein as my Shepard viewed Cerberus.

Don't like 'em, but will fight alongside 'em in service of the greater good.

But if it comes to a choice; I won't trust 'em.

[Sir JK]

Everwarden:
I'm not so sure the circles are the best place to raise a non-mage child (as in a child with no magical capability) though.
I'm not talking about rare dangers such as mage risings, abominification or random demon attacks here mind, but that they'd stand out. That they'd have virtually nothing in common with not only the other children (the apprentices), but also with their own parents. It's like a recipe for being bullied. Not to mention that the other mage children would probably be annoyed/distracted by that other child that doesn't have to practise magic.

Allowing the mage parents to see their children is something I'd agree with in principle though.

Modifié par Sir JK, 18 septembre 2010 - 12:22 .

[Daerog]

Everwarden wrote...

If you missed Gaider's comments in the templars and chastity thread, he said that (at least some circles) allow mages to marry, so long as they behave. This is honestly more reasonable than I thought the chantry capable, so maybe they aren't the complete ****s I want them to be so I feel better about killing them in DA2. 

I think, after reading that, I've revised my opinion of Chantry oversight, and conclude that it's fine if they're willing to change two things:

1. Templar abuse should not be permitted or winked at. The templars are there for the public good, not for personal satisfaction from bullying mages. This notion has been contested previously in the thread, but no one can deny that at least in some circles, in some cases, templar abuse is grossly out of hand. 

2. Them taking the children away from mages. Completely unacceptable, and worth giving the Chantry a hearty ****slap for that alone. 

I still think there are systems that would work equally well or better, but it looks like the circles aren't so terrible. Perhaps the Chantry could compromise and allow the parents visitation? They have a chantry in the circle tower, it doesn't seem too unreasonable to raise the child in that chantry and not one two weeks away. 

1. Well, that's true, and abuse of mages should always be frowned on and fixed. Mage should complain to Enchanter if bullied and Enchanter should report to whoever the Knight-Commander is. Most of the mage abuse seems to be outside the Circles, though.

2. I agree, I think the Circle should have more control over that situation. I don't fully understand the separation part, but likely has to do with having more control over the mages and not have any family groups forming. Probably more of a deterent to starting large families with only some of the children actually being mages in the Circle. Ugh, could you imagine there being a daycare part of the Tower when the Broken Circle quest happened? Geez, I wonder how many apprentice children died during that event. I mean, Wynne was like 12 when she came to the Circle, right? What a sad end. Welcome to the Circle, now an abomination is going to eat your face!

I think the biggest problem is the templar/mage tension, which may help if they involve the tranquil more with the policing. However, that would cause tension between the tranquil and the mages.... Geez, just draw some happy faces on the templar helmets, I bet that would do a load of good. The templars can remain stoic and vigilant, but won't look as inhuman/scary to the mages.

Edit: Also, mages can have children, with permission I bet. Remember that one mage who owned Shale had a son, who the Circle knew about. So, not all are spirited away. Although, he wasn't a mage.

Modifié par DaerogTheDhampir, 18 septembre 2010 - 12:24 .

[Everwarden]

Sir JK wrote...

Everwarden:
I'm not so sure the circles are the best place to raise a non-mage child (as in a child with no magical capability) though.
I'm not talking about rare dangers such as mage risings, abominification or random demon attacks here mind, but that they'd stand out. That they'd have virtually nothing in common with not only the other children (the apprentices), but also with their own parents. It's like a recipe for being bullied. Not to mention that the other mage children would probably be annoyed/distracted by that other child that doesn't have to practise magic.

Allowing the mage parents to see their children is something I'd agree with in principle though.

Well, the chantry claims the child whether they have magic or not, and there is a chantry in the circle tower.. why not have them do whatever it is they do to the children in that chantry and not one outside the tower? The mage children are taught magic, the non-mage children have all that Andraste crap shoved into their heads.  

The tower is dangerous*, but I think the incident in DAO is an anomaly, the rite of annulment has only happened 17 times in history. That may sound like a lot, but consider the fact that there is a circle in every nation, and likely one in each city-state of the Free Marches, and this is almost a millennium of history we're looking at. It seems to me that if they would bend a bit and enact policies like that there would be far, far more pros than cons involved. 

*Can you think of a stronger motivating factor to avoid becoming an abomination for a mage than a daycare in the tower? Anyone attempting to stir up a revolt would likely meet an icy wall of "think of the children" sentiment. 

[EmperorSahlertz]

There is one very simple reason for why they seperate the children from their parents: It is dangerous. Not only will the child live in danger from the inherint danger of magic, the child (or the parents) could be used as leverage for some demon to get a possession going. THat is the only reason why mages can't keep their children (even though Wilhelm appeared to be allowed to even thouh he was still part of the circle).

[DMC12]

DaerogTheDhampir wrote...

Geez, just draw some happy faces on the templar helmets, I bet that would do a load of good. The templars can remain stoic and vigilant, but won't look as inhuman/scary to the mages.

Lmao... I just got an image of the Smileys from Manhunt, only with armor and armed with swords instead of Glocks and baseball bats.

But I don't think you'll be able to really take down the Chantry if you wanted to, maybe go against them, but not usurp them completely. Of course, maybe at the end there will be a point where it transitions from Varric's third person narrative to a first person story after Varric is done telling Cassandra everything up until that point, where you'll then be able to finish whatever you were doing with the Chantry.

I find concept of the Chantry and the Mages very interesting though, as it's a very grey area of the DA universe. The Chantry installs order at the expense of the Mages's freedom, yet total freedom for the mages would most likely lead to chaos and anarchy. Reminds me of the decisions you faced in Deus Ex, especially at the end.

[Sir JK]

Everwarden wrote...


Well, the chantry claims the child whether they have magic or not, and there is a chantry in the circle tower.. why not have them do whatever it is they do to the children in that chantry and not one outside the tower? The mage children are taught magic, the non-mage children have all that Andraste crap shoved into their heads.  

The tower is dangerous*, but I think the incident in DAO is an anomaly, the rite of annulment has only happened 17 times in history. That may sound like a lot, but consider the fact that there is a circle in every nation, and likely one in each city-state of the Free Marches, and this is almost a millennium of history we're looking at. It seems to me that if they would bend a bit and enact policies like that there would be far, far more pros than cons involved. 

*Can you think of a stronger motivating factor to avoid becoming an abomination for a mage than a daycare in the tower? Anyone attempting to stir up a revolt would likely meet an icy wall of "think of the children" sentiment. 

I was under the impression that the circle chantry is very small, as opposed to say the Lothering or Denerim chantry. Most likely the children (all children in the chantry's care, including sisters, brothers and templars to be) are sent to the larger institutions to be trained and not just the local place with a revered mother. So they're essentially trained in boarding schools, hence why they're sent away (it's not to separate them from the mages but to send them to these established schools).

And you're right that the children could be used to stave of a revolt... but chances are they can also be used as rethorical fuel for one too (using precisely the same arguments no less). If the mages would percieve a threat, real or not, to the children they'd lash out somewhat fierce. Plenty of revolts in history have been done with the excuse to make the world better for the children.
And if I am honest... Uldred and his cronies didn't strike me like people who would care about the children's well being.

[Chris Readman]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

MariSkep wrote...
Which is what makes them incompetent.

Think of it this way, if you came upon a group of Nevarran Dragon Hunters who'd almost been killed to the man by a half dozen or so  drakes, would you then not assume they were not cut out to be dragon hunters?

Have you ever played on insane? Ever had to relaod, even once?
Then you're incompetent.

Or to put it another way, is a SWAT tems doesn't always win, does that make them incompetent?

I think you kind of ignored the fact that it took only 4 complete strangers, most of whom probably don't have much real experience dealing with mages and abominations, to save the day. What does it say about a huge group of men who were supposedly trained their whole life for this situation? Maybe they're not completely incompetent, but it shows that they are definitely lacking.

Oh and Sir JK, you are kind of going into the grounds of philosophical freedom. It is true that no one has absolute freedom, but mages are more restricted in certain ways than other people. They aren't even given the illusion of choice that some other people have.

Modifié par Chris Readman, 18 septembre 2010 - 12:55 .

[Daerog]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

There is one very simple reason for why they seperate the children from their parents: It is dangerous. Not only will the child live in danger from the inherint danger of magic, the child (or the parents) could be used as leverage for some demon to get a possession going. THat is the only reason why mages can't keep their children (even though Wilhelm appeared to be allowed to even thouh he was still part of the circle).

Hmmm. I don't think the bolded part is that much of a reason. If a demon gets involved, the mage gets killed, not much for leverage. Likely the children would be kept away from where magical studies are done and especially away from the Harrowing room. Likely some other reasons include: How much trouble do you think it would cause for a parent to learn that their child is going to become a Tranquil? Certainly would be grief if a child failed the Harrowing.

Modifié par DaerogTheDhampir, 18 septembre 2010 - 12:58 .

[Lumikki]

Chris Readman wrote...

Oh and Sir JK, you are kind of going into the grounds of philosophical freedom. It is true that no one has absolute freedom, but mages are more restricted in certain ways than other people. They aren't even given the illusion of choice that some other people have.

It's true that mages life are very resticted, but mage also has priviledges. Some peasants life can be alot harder than mages. In tower mages are living more closer to nobles life than peasants who works in fields and can sometimes even have hunger. In middle age, poor peoples life wasn't really that glorious. Think about slavery and so on..

Modifié par Lumikki, 18 septembre 2010 - 01:19 .

[Everwarden]

DaerogTheDhampir wrote...

 How much trouble do you think it would cause for a parent to learn that their child is going to become a Tranquil? Certainly would be grief if a child failed the Harrowing.

That's the same regardless, a child with magic would be taken back to the tower and trained in magic. 

[Lumikki]

DaerogTheDhampir wrote...

Hmmm. I don't think the bolded part is that much of a reason. If a demon gets involved, the mage gets killed, not much for leverage. Likely the children would be kept away from where magical studies are done and especially away from the Harrowing room. Likely some other reasons include: How much trouble do you think it would cause for a parent to learn that their child is going to become a Tranquil? Certainly would be grief if a child failed the Harrowing.

100's of people can get killed because one child, including other childrens. Demons don't lack of knowledge how to use the magic potential what children has.  Harrowing is test, can demon take over the person or not. Does the person has will and wisdom to resist.  So, all who failed was potential victims for demons anyway, it was just matter of time. In controlled situation, the casulties are alot smaller.

Modifié par Lumikki, 18 septembre 2010 - 01:17 .

[Everwarden]

Sir JK wrote...

I was under the impression that the circle chantry is very small, as opposed to say the Lothering or Denerim chantry. Most likely the children (all children in the chantry's care, including sisters, brothers and templars to be) are sent to the larger institutions to be trained and not just the local place with a revered mother. So they're essentially trained in boarding schools, hence why they're sent away (it's not to separate them from the mages but to send them to these established schools).

And you're right that the children could be used to stave of a revolt... but chances are they can also be used as rethorical fuel for one too (using precisely the same arguments no less). If the mages would percieve a threat, real or not, to the children they'd lash out somewhat fierce. Plenty of revolts in history have been done with the excuse to make the world better for the children.
And if I am honest... Uldred and his cronies didn't strike me like people who would care about the children's well being.

Pretty sure there is no rule against making the chantry in the tower bigger, or locating the non-mage children off of the island in a near enough chantry to make visiting plausible, assuming the parents behave themselves. They could be used to fuel a revolt too, I suppose, but I'm guessing the effect would still be to deter any brewing revolt more than inspiring one. 

We didn't know Uldred before he became an abomination, so I can't really debate that point... though if there had been more children around I suspect he wouldn't have been able to convince most of the people who ended up siding with him. 

[Chris Readman]

Lumikki wrote...

Chris Readman wrote...

Oh and Sir JK, you are kind of going into the grounds of philosophical freedom. It is true that no one has absolute freedom, but mages are more restricted in certain ways than other people. They aren't even given the illusion of choice that some other people have.

It's true that mages life are very resticted, but mage also has priviledges. Some peasants life can be alot harder than mages. In tower mages are living more closer to nobles life than peasants who works in fields and can sometimes even hunger. In middle age, poor peoples life wasn't really that glorious. Think about slavery and so on..

True true, peasants and farmers definitely have it horrible too, it was nice to see them get some form of representation and voice in Awakening though.

But I think the mages (normal people in real life as well), will often be envious of the high end of the spectrum (nobles, royalty, happy country folk), while trying to ignore the people on the other end who are suffering just as much or are in worse situations. Still doesn't discount the fact that they are part of the lower end of the spectrum, not the lowest, but still low.

[Daerog]

Everwarden wrote...

DaerogTheDhampir wrote...

 How much trouble do you think it would cause for a parent to learn that their child is going to become a Tranquil? Certainly would be grief if a child failed the Harrowing.

That's the same regardless, a child with magic would be taken back to the tower and trained in magic. 

Still, in the current system, a mage will never know for sure on anything. However, if the parent and child are in the same tower and they know each other as parent and child, I can see problems happening. Would certainly be hard living in a tower where one's child is droning about as a tranquil. Just pointing out stuff.

I'm all for the qunari model of child raising within the Circle. Gather them all together, have parents know of them, but have someone else take care of them, probably somewhere else. Probably allow letters, maybe visits, but discourage the parent from trying to escape just to see the child.

Edit: Ha, an even bigger shocker would be if a mage discovered what happened to their child. The child has become the new templar in the tower! Dun dun dunnnn, how very awkward....

Modifié par DaerogTheDhampir, 18 septembre 2010 - 01:27 .

[Sir JK]

Everwarden:

I suppose not. It all boils down to funding, accessability and if the chantry feels safe to keep their schools safe so close to mages. But regardless, a program where a templar could accompany a mage to see his/her children ought not to be too far-fetched (it's a resource issue mind).



As for Uldred. I know Torrin doesn't hold him in very high regard (seriously, talk to him and Niall about fraternities in the mage origin. It's a very interesting conversation if you stay neutral and uncommitted). Wynne and Irving had some things to say as well.



Chris Redman:

Spot on. It's a classic case of "The grass is greener...".