1503 réponses à ce sujet

[EmperorSahlertz]

Well, I get as much a kick out of taunting mage supporters as mage supporters get at hating the chantry, and come on, its not like its hard to do either. And no I don't like mages, I made that clear quite early in this thread.

[Chris Readman]

Great, good for you.

[Daerog]

MariSkep wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Apparently, it was the line of thought by people like Uldred and all of the mages who rebelled against the templars in A Broken Circle.

Yes, Uldred's side was rebelling agaist Chantry (Templars) and Circle of Mages (Mages). Mages where divided, so it was take over Circle of Mages as well. Do you think example Wynne and Irving would be alive after the battle, if they would have been fighting agaist Templars.  I'm sure you understand this one. So, question is why wasn't all mages fighting for they "freedom"? They actually fighted agaist each others too. Can you explain that?

Uldred was working for Loghain. Wynne explained what Loghain had done. Some of the mages were repulsed by it and refused to work with him, therefore turning down Uldred's offer. Pretty simple.

Also, there are mages that are loyal to what the Circle currently is, and there are mages who are loyal to the Chantry. The Circle is against blood magic, so that didn't gain Uldred that many allies. Also, there were mages who didn't like what Loghain did, but those were the mage who were in-the-know, which likely wasn't many. Many mages were likely just caught off guard while they were trying to sleep after the meeting between Enchanters.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Chris Readman wrote...

Great, good for you.

You asked.

Modifié par EmperorSahlertz, 19 septembre 2010 - 03:52 .

[Lumikki]

MariSkep wrote...

Uldred was working for Loghain. Wynne explained what Loghain had done. Some of the mages were repulsed by it and refused to work with him, therefore turning down Uldred's offer. Pretty simple.

That's true that Uldred was working for Loghain. How ever, are you saying that  "half" of mages refused work with Loghain, over  they own freedom? You REALLY think that was the reason?

[Daerog]

Hey, the anti-mage view should be presented, as it is present within Dragon Age and has to be considered. Can't just ignore it, there are many anti-mage people in Thedas. Especially misinformed people and the populace of Orlais.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Are you saying we are wrong at resenting mages, and that the whole "Broken Circle" incident was just a big tragic mistake?

Had the rest of Thedas held the same attitude like the Qunari towards magic all of that would have been avoided.

Modifié par EmperorSahlertz, 19 septembre 2010 - 03:54 .

[Chris Readman]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Chris Readman wrote...

Great, good for you.

You asked.

Technically, I stated, I didn't ask. Still, power to you.

[Daerog]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Are you saying we are wrong at resenting mages, and that the whole "Broken Circle" incident was just a big tragic mistake?

Had the rest of Thedas held the same attitude like the Qunari towards magic all of that would have been avoided.

Certainly it was the mistake of Uldred and his extremist followers.

Edit: The mistake being not being reasonable and going all bloody murder on the whole place. Really, what do you think would have happened later if Uldred was successful? Oh, military response by the templars and an Exalted March if need be.

It's like the stupid Na'vi, you know Avatar 2 will involve humanity dropping nukes from orbit on the people if humanity really wanted those resources underground.

Modifié par DaerogTheDhampir, 19 septembre 2010 - 04:00 .

[RazorrX]

Mages can be requested of the circle by the ruling government. This is in accordance to the rules governing mages in the chantry. All mages are to serve (magic is to serve man NOT rule over him) the ruling government as the chantry allows. Thus a Bann can request a mage and get one, but it is not always guaranteed. So they are 'loaner' mages.



Again we know of 2 mages that gained relative freedom for any period of time in game: Wilhelm and Wynne.



Wilhelm was the mage who assisted Maric in his rebellion. He and his golum played a very great role in the rebellion in fact, and as such he was granted the right to live away from the tower. Why the chantry allowed this is unknown, but it IS known that the chantry had sided with Orlais during the occupation and as such probably were making many concessions to Maric when he first came into power to make up for it.



Wynne was granted leave to travel with the grey warden after said warden had cleared the Circle Tower of abominations. The templars there owed the grey warden a great debt and so did not gainsay the request and allowed it.



Thus you see the extenuating circumstances that were involved in allowing Wilhelm and Wynne to leave the circle on thier own, vs being summoned by a lord.



Regarding Uldred. Uldred had been manipulating people in the circle tower to rebel for years prior to Loghain. When Loghain and he made their agreement, Uldred had a considerable sized group who were willing to break away from the chantry as the oversight had been getting more and more harsh ever since the split between the TI chantry and the Orlesian one. When Uldred made his play in the meeting, Wynne told of how Loghain left the wardens and king to die. The Circle ignited, as even some of Uldreds allies turned on him and thus was born the great abomination invasion.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Well all the pro-mages are concerned about here seems what is right for mages. So is it that far fetched that a con-mage is for what is right for the rest of humanity?

[Lumikki]

MariSkep wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

MariSkep wrote...

Uldred was working for Loghain. Wynne explained what Loghain had done. Some of the mages were repulsed by it and refused to work with him, therefore turning down Uldred's offer. Pretty simple.

That's true that Uldred was working for Loghain. How ever, are you saying that  "half" of mages refused work with Loghain, over  they own freedom? You REALLY think that was the reason?

I was giving an in game explanation for why several mages refused the offer (or at least didn't accept it then.) I really don't see why it matters. Ever heard of Uncle Ruckus?

Think about it. If someone offers all mages freedom. Would it matter who it was as long the offer is real?
Many you have sayed that Tower is prison for life for these mage. Now they refused offer because they don't like the person who is giving it? So, you put you personal hate toward this man in other hand and 80 year of prison in other. You choose 80 year prison and no-one ask why?

[Riona45]

Sir JK wrote...

Do you think a Templar can choose not to take his vows when the time come? They practically gets raised by the chantry. Neither do they get to choose if they're going to be placed in a chantry, a circle or sent to hunt apostates. It's not a chosen proffession (by them anyways).

While it's true that some people (like Alistair) are forced into becoming templars or other members of the Chantry, I never got the impression that that was true for everyone.  I looked up templars and some other Chantry entries in the wiki and I can't find any lore that confirms what you are saying.

[Daerog]

There is also the mage who fought against Maric and the rebellion. Orlais can get mages as well. One who is trying to gain political power in Fereldan as well.

[Chris Readman]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Well all the pro-mages are concerned about here seems what is right for mages. So is it that far fetched that a con-mage is for what is right for the rest of humanity?

Wow, you are definitely right! NONE of the pro-mage people care about other humans at all! How dare they, those fools! All their statements about keeping a regulating body or other policies to keep them in check were just lies, they were just planning to secretly have orgies in their towers and summon demons to feed on the flesh of children. Those sick bastards!

[Daerog]

Riona45 wrote...

Sir JK wrote...

Do you think a Templar can choose not to take his vows when the time come? They practically gets raised by the chantry. Neither do they get to choose if they're going to be placed in a chantry, a circle or sent to hunt apostates. It's not a chosen proffession (by them anyways).

While it's true that some people (like Alistair) are forced into becoming templars or other members of the Chantry, I never got the impression that that was true for everyone.  I looked up templars and some other Chantry entries in the wiki and I can't find any lore that confirms what you are saying.

Most of what is being said is speculation from little information and opinions given from people only from Fereldan, and other people from the books.

[RazorrX]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Well all the pro-mages are concerned about here seems what is right for mages. So is it that far fetched that a con-mage is for what is right for the rest of humanity?

Again as i have pointed out for over 6000 years the world got along fine and dandy without the chantry locking up mages.

So your statement that the chantry is doing what is good for humanity is incorrect.  The chantry is doing what is good for the chantry.   In order for the chantry to be all powerful and spread it has to be able to manipulate peoples hopes and fears.  They have the blight which they tie to mages and demonize mages so that they are the ones controlling them while they hold out hope that the world can be saved by them (chantry) and them alone.

[steelfire_dragon]

I spit on your chantry, I urinate your so called maker.

Adraste was a @#$@#$@#$, AND my ancesters @$#% her before she was burnt a t the stake.



I will fight against them

[Riona45]

Sir JK wrote...

And ultimately... out of all five mage fraternities, only one (libertarians) actively promotes the idea of separating themselves from the chantry (and one semi-actively). The Aequitarians, the largest of the fraternities, are quite content with the status quo.

Not precisely.  From the wiki:

Aequitarians seek not to go to extremes in any matter concerning magic. Although there is some disagreement among them of where the perfect 'balance' lies, all aequitarians are pragmatists at heart, and are often called to broker compromise between the Libertarians and the Loyalists.

That's not quite the same thing as being "quite content with the status quo."  You're thinking more of the "Loyalist" fraternity, there.  After all, Irving is an Aequitarian, and yet he is quite happy if you ask for the "freedom for mages" boon.

Modifié par Riona45, 19 septembre 2010 - 04:16 .

[Selene Moonsong]

Given the discussions with and of the Chantry in DAO, they are definately a faith gone wrong somewhere along the line.

[Riona45]

DaerogTheDhampir wrote...

Riona45 wrote...

Sir JK wrote...

Do you think a Templar can choose not to take his vows when the time come? They practically gets raised by the chantry. Neither do they get to choose if they're going to be placed in a chantry, a circle or sent to hunt apostates. It's not a chosen proffession (by them anyways).

While it's true that some people (like Alistair) are forced into becoming templars or other members of the Chantry, I never got the impression that that was true for everyone.  I looked up templars and some other Chantry entries in the wiki and I can't find any lore that confirms what you are saying.

Most of what is being said is speculation from little information and opinions given from people only from Fereldan, and other people from the books.

Probably.  But in this case, I have the feeling that if it were really true that all Chantry members (including templars) were raised by the Chantry at a young age and had no choice to be what they are, we would have heard something to that effect somewhere.