1503 réponses à ce sujet

[Brockololly]

Herr Uhl wrote...
I think that the penny arcade comic for DAO sums up how it lies. Templars may be hardened to not see any difference, but they are not taught that.

Edit: Apparently it can't be seen anymore.

You can still see it, you just have to mess with the address:
For example- http://dragonage.bio...o/pennyarcade/1
When you click on the other pages, just be sure to go in and add the "dao" part in between "http://dragonage.bioware.com" and "pennyarcade."

Herr Uhl wrote...
Edit 2: Here, my dev quote:

Sheryl Chee wrote...

Yes, there was crazy spell business. If you really pester Morrigan for details, she will say that it is a blood magic ritual. She also says that this was her whole purpose, to conceive a child with the soul of the old god. Morrigan is not a charity, she's not going to help you do the ritual and let you have this baby so that you can save Alistair from the absolute horror of sleeping with a really good-looking woman with no strings attached. Wow. How awful.

Right- and this is the in game dialogue where Morrigan says the DR is basically blood magic:

Warden: Just what sort of ritual is this?
Morrigan: It is old magic, from a time before the Circle of Magi was created.
Morrigan: Some might call it blood magic, but that is but a name. There is far more to fear in this world than names.

[Herr Uhl]

Brockololly wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...
Edit 2: Here, my dev quote:

Sheryl Chee wrote...

Yes, there was crazy spell business. If you really pester Morrigan for details, she will say that it is a blood magic ritual. She also says that this was her whole purpose, to conceive a child with the soul of the old god. Morrigan is not a charity, she's not going to help you do the ritual and let you have this baby so that you can save Alistair from the absolute horror of sleeping with a really good-looking woman with no strings attached. Wow. How awful.

Right- and this is the in game dialogue where Morrigan says the DR is basically blood magic:

Warden: Just what sort of ritual is this?
Morrigan: It is old magic, from a time before the Circle of Magi was created.
Morrigan: Some might call it blood magic, but that is but a name. There is far more to fear in this world than names.

Yup, but I wanted a dev-quote since RazorX seemed to think them infallible. That she just flat-out admits to it being blood magic wouldn't be enough to make her a maleficar since Gaider said she wasn't one.

[LobselVith8]

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

How an extraordinarily naïve point of view you got.

First you claim the collective task us with protecting them, yet fail to disclaim that they are indeed suffering from the threat of possession. Ergo they do suffer the threat. [/quote]

You neglect to mention that there's only one single quest that tasks the Warden with fighting mages, and none of them are abominations. There aren't any mages in the Mages Collective who are under the threat of possession, unless you're confused about the Lake Calenhad quest Thy Brother's Killer, that tasks the Warden to head into in the Bercilian Forest, where the Warden fights a group of maleficarum who murdered a member of the Mages Collective. Before you call someone naive, get your facts straight.

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Second, everything Flemeth says and do, and what Morrigan claims can not be trusted, matter of fact is: We know squat about either and their plans. Flemeth isn't even human, so the whole "taking voer their bodies" might also just be a scam, or mean something completely different. [/quote]

Whether or not Morrigan can be trusted is a matter of faith. I think she can be trusted, and I see no reason why she would lie about Flemeth. In fact, she's supposed to leave the party if she finds out Flemeth wasn't killed, but the game is bugged about that sequence. She's completely upfront about the dark ritual, after all, and gives the Warden a choice in the matter.

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Third, doubtful. Sten did not come across as an exagerating type. And he never says the embrace abominations, only that they become abominations.
And about the ancient Tevinter: That's the whole point of their evil empire, many of the ruling magistrates were possibly abominations. [/quote]

Sten also thinks that women can't become warriors and is naive about the concept of people wanting to be something more in life. The view he gives about Ferelden completely misses the point when it comes to the poverty of the elves and the caste system of the dwarves. Sten makes assumptions about things he really can't understand because of his upbringing as a Qunari, including his views on mages. The Qunari also have a bias against mages.

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Fourth, yes there were other apprentices hoping to become the First. After the First is chosen, what happens to these apprentices? There are no other mages in the clan, then the Keeper and his First. Chances are they are killed or sent away.
And again, how do you know that the Cult of Andraste didn't have any abominations from time to time? You don't. Just because we don't see it, doesnt mean it isn't there. [/quote]

I doubt that the developers are going to introduce a ton of mages for accuracy, and we only get to know a handful of mages as it is. There are limitations with the developers making a game that can't completely capture the realism of a city or a group of people living in the wilderness (ergo, the lack of restrooms that we know exist from the Magi Origin). Unless you're suggesting that untried, inexperienced mages are allowed to become leaders of entire clans on their own? 

So what you're saying is that even if the Dragon Andraste worshippers got abominations, templars are completely unnecessary to deal with them?

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

And lets end a general misconception right here: Templars are not there to prevent a possession. They are there to kill the resultant abomination. Just because the Templars aren't present in other cultures does not mean they don't have to deal with abominations.[/quote]

It only means that templars aren't necessary to deal with abominations, since DA:O can have a Magi Warden defeat the abominations with three other companions while the templars do nothing but wait and pray.

[quote]Herr Uhl wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quote]Herr Uhl wrote...

[quote]MariSkep wrote...

They were deep into Orlesian territory and obviously hadn't recieved a surrender. Where they supposed to turn around and go home? [/quote]

Yes. Or not go there at all.
[/quote]

You mean the Dalish should have allowed themselves to be killed by the Orlesians? That doesn't make any sense.[/quote]

Try and hold out and keep Orlais as your only enemy instead of getting the whole andrastian part of Thedas on your throat. Settle with what you've got.

The Dalish were doing a good amount of killing too, it wasn't an ethic cleansing and 6 elves that thought, yeah, let's try and attack them to end this. Look at the example of Ferelden, if they would have kept going past the Frostbacks, how likely is it that Ferelden would exist in DAO?

And yes, I realize that this is a terribly late reply.

Edit: Most wars between evenly matched sides don't end with one side taking it all. It ends with one side giving concessions to the one that is winning. The winner takes said offer, since the losses in trying to claim the rest of the lands for total conquest outweighs the gain you would have of that compared to the concessions.
[/quote]

The Dalish were killing the people who were trying to kill them, as in any war, and I never claimed either side was trying to commit ethical cleansing, only that the Chantry is partly responsible for the war between Orlais and the Dales. And there's no reason that the Dalish shouldn't have pursued the Orlesians into their city if they thought it would mean victory - its easy to look back and say that it was the wrong move after everything has already been said and done, but considering that no one aided Orlais at the start of the war, it's impossible for the Dalish to know what would have happened when they tried to win the war by going further into Orlais, especially if the Orlesians started the war with the Dales.

[quote]Sir JK wrote...

I'd like to point one thing out: Most of the wrongs, mistakes and such committed by the chantry and it's affiliates can be attributed to human weakness and error. Even if the chantry is removed form the equation most of the problems will remain... they will be gone for a bit perhaps when the balance of power readjusts itself, but they will return. There will always be someone that opresses, always be someone that acts on xenophobia, always someone that jumps to false conclusions, always someone that become fanatically committed to a cause and always people that do horrors.

Removing the chantry won't rid us of those. It might affect who does it however, it might be monarchs that calls for culture-destroying wars. It might be mages that opress. It might be merchants that use lyrium to control people.
It will happen, getting rid of the chantry won't help there.[/quote]

Except if the mages are revolting against the Chantry, their defeat could mean their independence.

[quote]KnightofPhoenix wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
It's true that some revolutions tend to place people in power who tried to overthrow a dictator and end up becoming one themselves (the Cuban revolution against Batista by Castro come to mind), but there are also examples like the Hati revolution that freed the slaves or the American revolution that emancipated the colonies from the King. Mages are never going to be free unless they fight for it. Even a Magi Warden who saves all of Ferelden isn't enough to get the local Circle of Magi to be given independence because the Chantry refuses the boon. For over 700 years, mages have lived under the boot of the templars and the Chantry. Unless there is a revolution, they'll never be free.
[/quote]

You are talking about mass popular revolutions and comparing them to a revolution from a minority that is hated and feared not only by the Chantry but by the people themselves. All you are doing is subjecting all mages in all nations to even more oppression and hatred, if not outright annihilation not necessarily by the Chantry but by angry mobs.

Unless you want to assume your radical position even further and say that you want all mages to be feared, hated and killed everywhere so that they may wake up and starting fighting too. That would be what a radical would say and there is certain pertinence in that argument. Well except armies of Templars and the confinement of mages in towers makes them easy targets for annulment.

Take a step back and realise that you are talking about a feared minority. Feared because of religious beliefs that cannot be overthrown by violence, all that ends up doing is confirming it. 

[/quote]

Prejudical views don't change by doing nothing. Your suggestion is to sit idly by while people continue to view the world as it is in their POV - mages as monsters and elves as subhuman. Change doesn't happen unless people fight for it. The Chantry won't even allow the Magi boon when a Mage Warden has saved all of Ferelden, so mages should be content with being under the boot of the Chantry when one of their own has stopped the end of the world? I disagree. They've been little more than slaves for over 700 years, fighting the Chantry's wars and being turned into tranquil so magical items can be crafted on command, but that won't change unless they fight for their freedom.

[Mykel54]

I think some people think that Morrigan´s ritual is not blood magic because it is not inherently evil (like mind control) and what it does is save your life. But thing is, it is still blood magic because morrigan says so.



Another example of "good" blood magic is when the tevinter mage in the alienage offers to increase your health, throught a blood magic ritual, that is good for you and is still blood magic. I think the main difference is that with morrigan´s ritual you can´t see any "evil downside", at least in the short-term, while with the tevinter mage, you inmediately see the downside (the tevinter has to kill the elves to give you the extra health).



I think it is also important to remember that blood magic is not the only thing prohibited by the chantry, there are also "forbidden arts" (that is what the game calls it) that are not usable. My guess is that it refers to other skills such a shapeshifting, that are not taught in the council of mages but still there are mages who practice them.



To be honest i don´t think we have enough information to judge exactly what kind of blood magic Morrigan used in the dark ritual, because everyones see mind control as wrong, but about saving a warden life and preserving an old god? That doesn´t seem so evil. So in conclusion, if morrigan used a spell powered by blood, instead of mana (that is the whole definition of blood magic) then she is a maleficar, otherwise, she is an apostate.

[LobselVith8]

Herr Uhl wrote...

RazorrX wrote...

Mykel54 wrote...

Morrigan says that her "dark ritual" would be called by some "blood magic", therefore, Morrigan knows and can practice blood magic, and so, she is a maleficar.

According to David Gaider - she is not a maleficar.  That stuff was quoted by him.

He is human too, and can do wrong. I don't think that the dark ritual is something approved by the chantry 

Morrigan is a mage who knows magic that the Circles aren't even aware exists - like her ability to change her shape, which a Dalish Warden can admit is a practice also done by the Dalish mages. I think Gaider's comment referenced that Morrigan doesn't really use blood magic in combat like Jowan does in his attempt rescue Lily - what she's talking about is an old ritual that existed before the creation of the Circles.

Also, Templars use blood magic sanctioned by the Chantry - what do you think the phylactery is?

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Urazz wrote...
Depends on the violence I think.  The little revolt Uldred did is doomed to fail because the mages were using blood magic and was doomed to fail.  If the mages try to keep their revolution peaceful with the only violence being that they only use enough force to defend themselves (and no blood magic) then they would be able to more successfully gain their freedom I think.

The reason why I suggest they have to use some force is that the world of dragon age is more in a medieval/rennaissance and thus the civilization on Thedas is a bit uncivilized compared to ours.

And can you guarantee that they won't use blood magic during the strains of war? Desperate people do desperate things.
They don't even have to use blood magic to confirm the fear of the Chantry and of the entire populace and thus resort to even more oppression and paranoia. What people here seem to miss is that the general average people of Thedas are fearful of magic and a mage revolution will turn that into outright hatred. 

And I am fully aware what time period DA is in. Doesn't change the argument. Minority revolutions won't end well considering how they have armies of Templars watching them and they are all confined in one place.

Do the mages have to stand up for themselves? Absolutely, I despise Chantry loyalists. But to attempt to break the Chantry? Won't happen, unless something out of the ordinary happens. 

Grey Wardens use blood magic, as Duncan admits in the Magi Origin. I don't think it's evil. And the Uldred revolt ended badly because Uldred used demonology to bring forth demons - we don't even know if he knew blood magic or not.

[KnightofPhoenix]

LobselVith8 wrote...
Prejudical views don't change by doing nothing. Your suggestion is to sit idly by while people continue to view the world as it is in their POV -

No, go back and read what I said. I suggested moderate reform over time, with mages demanding more rights and freedoms as they demonstrate that they are not necessarily dangerous and that they can help the others. It will take time. But it has a far larger chance of succeeding than a revolution that will end up in either another tyranny, and / or the worsening of the mage situation.

This "fight for freedom" will only make people hate and fear mages more and give the Chantry even more justification to harden its grip.

And of course the Chantry is not going to accept the boon of making the Circle autonomous. It's actually quite a stupid boon. How one mage saving the world must translate into an abrupt transition to freedom is beyond me. The events in Origins also proved why the Circles play a vital role in protecting the others from mages and the mages from the others.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 22 septembre 2010 - 05:05 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

LobselVith8 wrote...
Grey Wardens use blood magic, as Duncan admits in the Magi Origin. I don't think it's evil. And the Uldred revolt ended badly because Uldred used demonology to bring forth demons - we don't even know if he knew blood magic or not.

No do I and it's irrlevent. The Chantry does and the majority of people do.
Most of his followers were maleficar who used blood magic, so he probably was.

And what's the guarantee that mages won't use demonology like Avernus?
People sometimes do desperate thing, especially when they get themselves into a war that threatens their existence.

[Herr Uhl]

LobselVith8 wrote...

The Dalish were killing the people who were trying to kill them, as in any war, and I never claimed either side was trying to commit ethical cleansing, only that the Chantry is partly responsible for the war between Orlais and the Dales. And there's no reason that the Dalish shouldn't have pursued the Orlesians into their city if they thought it would mean victory - its easy to look back and say that it was the wrong move after everything has already been said and done, but considering that no one aided Orlais at the start of the war, it's impossible for the Dalish to know what would have happened when they tried to win the war by going further into Orlais, especially if the Orlesians started the war with the Dales.

They couldn't predict that attacking the seat of the chantry wouldn't make other andrastian countries to react?

It seems natural as an effect of that to me.

[LobselVith8]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...
Prejudical views don't change by doing nothing. Your suggestion is to sit idly by while people continue to view the world as it is in their POV -

No, go back and read what I said. I suggested moderate reform over time, with mages demanding more rights and freedoms as they demonstrate that they are not necessarily dangerous and that they can help the others. It will take time. But it has a far larger chance of succeeding than a revolution that will end up in either another tyranny, or the worsening of the mage situation.

This "fight for freedom" will only make people hate and fear mages more and give the Chantry even more justification to harden its grip.

And of course the Chantry is not going to accept the boon of maing the Circle autonomous. It's actually quite a stupid boon. How one mage saving the world must translate into an abrupt transition to freedom is beyond me. The events in Origins also proved why the Circles play a vital role in protecting the others from mages and them ages from the others.

Moderate change is never going to happen - the Chantry will never relinquish its hold on the mages. It's been hundreds of years and nothing has changed for the mages - the Rites themselves to cull the Circles have been done for over 700 years by the command of the Grand Cleric, since Divine Galatea in the 83rd Glory Age. The Chantry will never allow mages to be free as long as their institution stands.

The events in Origins show that that abominations tend to happen as a result of the Chantry - Uldred becomes an abomination through his knowledge of demonology during a revolution to free the mages, and Isolde's tragedy with Connor transpired because she didn't want to lose her son to the Circle, so how do the events in Origins justify the oppression of the mages? The Chantry oversight practically forces mages to become blood mages and abominations in an attempt to survive against the templars.

[KnightofPhoenix]

LobselVith8 wrote...
Moderate change is never going to happen - the Chantry will never relinquish its hold on the mages. It's been hundreds of years and nothing has changed for the mages - the Rites themselves to cull the Circles have been done for over 700 years by the command of the Grand Cleric, since Divine Galatea in the 83rd Glory Age. The Chantry will never allow mages to be free as long as their institution stands.

It's quite a big absolute your throwing down there.
Economic and political changes that are bound to happen on both the domestic and exterior fronts can result in the curving of the Chantry as an institution. The weakening of Orlais is one such event that can curve its power. Changing attitudes and new ideas arising can also amount to change.
It will obviously require activism, by mages such as the mage collective and non-mages alike. But non-violent activism.  

The best way to show the masses that their opinion of mages is wrong, is precisely not to prove their fears by violently trying to change their beliefs.

LobselVith8 wrote...
The events in Origins show that that abominations tend to happen as a result of the Chantry - Uldred becomes an abomination through his knowledge of demonology during a revolution to free the mages, and Isolde's tragedy with Connor transpired because she didn't want to lose her son to the Circle, so how do the events in Origins justify the oppression of the mages? The Chantry oversight practically forces mages to become blood mages and abominations in an attempt to survive against the templars.

Uldred's action prove why a revolution isn't the way to go. and how the Tower contained his madness. 
Gossipers everywhere saying that mages should be eradicated is proof that the Circle protect the mages from the outside world.

And who said anything about justification? Read what I am saying. I said that they are valuable for the time being. Whether they are justified or not is not the issue. Changing it by force is going to do nothing but precisely justify the Circle Towers in the eyes of the Chantry and more importantly the general populace.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 22 septembre 2010 - 05:21 .

[LobselVith8]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...
Grey Wardens use blood magic, as Duncan admits in the Magi Origin. I don't think it's evil. And the Uldred revolt ended badly because Uldred used demonology to bring forth demons - we don't even know if he knew blood magic or not.

No do I and it's irrlevent. The Chantry does and the majority of people do.
Most of his followers were maleficar who used blood magic, so he probably was.

And what's the guarantee that mages won't use demonology like Avernus?
People sometimes do desperate thing, especially when they get themselves into a war that threatens their existence.

The Chantry views magic is a curse, and has taught people the same thing for hundreds of years.

What's the guarantee that mages won't turn to blood mage or make deals with demons in order to survive against templars? Who can say that other mothers won't make the same decision Isolde did to protect their children from the Chantry? As you said, people do desperate things when their existance is threatened.

Herr Uhl wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

The Dalish were killing the people who were trying to kill them, as in any war, and I never claimed either side was trying to commit ethical cleansing, only that the Chantry is partly responsible for the war between Orlais and the Dales. And there's no reason that the Dalish shouldn't have pursued the Orlesians into their city if they thought it would mean victory - its easy to look back and say that it was the wrong move after everything has already been said and done, but considering that no one aided Orlais at the start of the war, it's impossible for the Dalish to know what would have happened when they tried to win the war by going further into Orlais, especially if the Orlesians started the war with the Dales.

They couldn't predict that attacking the seat of the chantry wouldn't make other andrastian countries to react?

It seems natural as an effect of that to me.

I'm certain attacking the nation of the Chantry was probably a bad idea, too. Of course, if Orlais started the war, then they had little choice - fight back or die.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Moderate change is never going to happen - the Chantry will never relinquish its hold on the mages. It's been hundreds of years and nothing has changed for the mages - the Rites themselves to cull the Circles have been done for over 700 years by the command of the Grand Cleric, since Divine Galatea in the 83rd Glory Age. The Chantry will never allow mages to be free as long as their institution stands.

It's quite a big absolute your throwing down there.
Economic and political changes that are bound to happen on both the domestic and exterior fronts can result in the curving of the Chantry as an institution. The weakening of Orlais is one such event that can curve its power. Changing attitudes and new ideas arising can also amount to change.
It will obviously require activism, by mages such as the mage collective and non-mages alike. But non-violent activism.  

The best way to show the masses that their opinion of mages is wrong, is precisely not to prove their fears by violently trying to change their beliefs.

I'm not talking about changing their beliefs, I'm talking about emancipating the mages from bondage. They can't raise their children, they can't marry in some Circles, they are imprisoned for having magical abilities, and they might be turned into tranquils - emotionless drones who live merely to make magical items on command. What kind of life is that? Hundreds of years have passed, and no economic or political change has transpired to change the lot of mages in the slightest - they are always under the heel of the Chantry. Revolution can get them freedom while hoping for change is likely to bring 700 years of the same treatment.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

The events in Origins show that that abominations tend to happen as a result of the Chantry - Uldred becomes an abomination through his knowledge of demonology during a revolution to free the mages, and Isolde's tragedy with Connor transpired because she didn't want to lose her son to the Circle, so how do the events in Origins justify the oppression of the mages? The Chantry oversight practically forces mages to become blood mages and abominations in an attempt to survive against the templars.

Uldred's action prove why a revolution isn't the way to go. and how the Tower contained his madness. 
Gossipers everywhere saying that mages should be eradicated is proof that the Circle protect the mages from the outside world.

And who said anything about justification? Read what I am saying. I said that they are valuable for the time being. Whether they are justified or not is not the issue. Changing it by force is going to do nothing but precisely justify the Circle Towers in the eyes of the Chantry and more importantly the general populace.

The issue is that I don't think the Chantry has any value - they are trying to export their authority throughout all of Thedas, in the name of the Maker. Rather than allow them to use their religion to control every continent across Thedas, I think they should be defeated.

Mages have the power to liberate themselves - had Uldred not used demonology, the revolution at the Circle might have succeeded, and the blood mages may have defeated the templars.

[Sir JK]

LobselVith8:

It seems I failed to make my point clear again...

The things you accuse the chantry of and object to... are all caused because the people in the chantry are human. As long as the mages interact with humans, those things will always make themselves present.

It does not matter if those humans are chantry, nobles, peasants or other mages. These kinds of things will always happen.

A good example is the present Tevinter Imperium. It is ruled by mages that control the Imperial Chantry. And yet, mages don't have it much better there.  ( Do note: 3 links)
There the opression of the mages by the chantry have been replaced by opression by more powerful mages through their chantry. The human weakness making itself reminded that it is not limited to any one organisation. If you destroy the chantry... the freedom you seek will soon be abused by someone else. That might be the king, the qunari, grey wardens, elves, fellow mages and/or someone we have yet too see. Unless of course your freed mages turn out to be the ones opressing others.

The chantry is not the root of all evil in the world and destroying them won't bring paradise to the world.

Modifié par Sir JK, 22 septembre 2010 - 05:39 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

LobselVith8 wrote...
The Chantry views magic is a curse, and has taught people the same thing for hundreds of years.

What's the guarantee that mages won't turn to blood mage or make deals with demons in order to survive against templars? Who can say that other mothers won't make the same decision Isolde did to protect their children from the Chantry? As you said, people do desperate things when their existance is threatened.

So the best way to avoid that is avoid getting in a existence threatening situation, aka a revolution.

LobselVith8 wrote...
 Hundreds of years have passed, and no economic or political change has transpired to change the lot of mages in the slightest - they are always under the heel of the Chantry. Revolution can get them freedom while hoping for change is likely to bring 700 years of the same treatment.

Sigh, going in circles.
First, we don't know how old the mage collective is, but it's probabyl a new thing. That could bring change.
Second the political and economic changes in the past centuries naturally didn't favor the mages, because of the schism with the Tevinter imperium.

Revolution will most likely result in the worsening of their lot, the Chantry tightening its grip and several Towers annulled at will. Not to mention what angry mobs would do to mage children.
Even if this revolution succeeds in one place (and assumign thery can hold back the inevitable retaliation), mages from other places will suffer more.

LobselVith8 wrote...
The issue is that I don't think the Chantry has any value - they are trying to export their authority throughout all of Thedas, in the name of the Maker. Rather than allow them to use their religion to control every continent across Thedas, I think they should be defeated.

Mages have the power to liberate themselves - had Uldred not used demonology, the revolution at the Circle might have succeeded, and the blood mages may have defeated the templars.

What you think of the Chantry is irrelevent. Reality is, it's an insitution that will not be removed this easily, considering the support it has from governments and the general populace.

You think Uldred would have succeeded?
Let me tell you what would have happened. After the Blight, the Chantry would have ordered them to stand down. If they refuse, Templars would be sent. You think Ferelden is going to risk war for mages? Doubtful. If they did, exalted marches declared.

In the meantime, all other mages would be looked at with more paranoia, the Templars would tighten their grip. The general populace would be afraid and would naturally side with the Chantry.

Uldred is crushed and all his followers executed. All other mages will now have to endure even more oppression because of what one revolutionary did . 

Even Anders realises the dangers of such thought.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 22 septembre 2010 - 05:46 .

[LobselVith8]

Sir JK wrote...

LobselVith8:

It seems I failed to make my point clear again...

The things you accuse the chantry of and object to... are all caused because the people in the chantry are human. As long as the mages interact with humans, those things will always make themselves present.

It does not matter if those humans are chantry, nobles, peasants or other mages. These kinds of things will always happen.

A good example is the present Tevinter Imperium. It is ruled by mages that control the Imperial Chantry. And yet, mages don't have it much better there.  ( Do note: 3 links)
There the opression of the mages by the chantry have been replaced by opression by more powerful mages through their chantry. The human weakness making itself reminded that it is not limited to any one organisation. If you destroy the chantry... the freedom you seek will soon be abused by someone else. That might be the king, the qunari, grey wardens, elves, fellow mages and/or someone we have yet too see. Unless of course your freed mages turn out to be the ones opressing others.

The chantry is not the root of all evil in the world and destroying them won't bring paradise to the world.

I understand your point, but while people are inherently flawed, allowing an organization that is using religion to trample on other people who have different faiths and treat mages as little more than slaves is problematic for me. For over 700 years, nothing has changed, and the Chantry has destroyed the Dales and is warring with the Qunari. True, the alternative that might arise could be just as bad as the Chantry, but if nothing is done, then nothing will change.

Freedom is always something to strive for, even if it's difficult to grasp and if it takes a while to attain. The Chantry has had the mages under their boot for more than 700 years. Nothing is likely to change - even a heroic Grey Warden from the Circle of Magi can't liberate the Ferelden Circle. I don't think that reform for the Chantry is at all possible - none of the Divines have done anything to promote the equality of the elves, respecting other religions, or giving the mages their independence. Nothing is likely to change in the next 700 years, except a more powerful Chantry and more people being forced to fall in line with the true believers.

In DA2, we play as Hawke. Why couldn't an altruistic Hawke lead a mage rebellion in Kirkwall, emancipate the Circle of Magi and take on the Chantry? We, as Hawke, making careful decisions, could create a society where mages aren't under the boot of the Chantry and we can prevent the oppression that exists in Tevinter Imperium.

[Herr Uhl]

LobselVith8 wrote...

I'm certain attacking the nation of the Chantry was probably a bad idea, too. Of course, if Orlais started the war, then they had little choice - fight back or die.

Yes, and since Orlais started it, no other nation gave a crap as long as the chantry did survive. Once they made an attempt at killing the divine, s**t got real.

If you read my prior post, you see what I would consider being the sensible choice. The fact that they were winning (this is speculation from me) gave the elven leaders hubris, so they wanted to restore the old ways. If they were sensible, they wouldn't try to conquer all of Orlais, at that point it wasn't fight or die, they were winning.

[LobselVith8]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...
The Chantry views magic is a curse, and has taught people the same thing for hundreds of years.

What's the guarantee that mages won't turn to blood mage or make deals with demons in order to survive against templars? Who can say that other mothers won't make the same decision Isolde did to protect their children from the Chantry? As you said, people do desperate things when their existance is threatened.

So the best way to avoid that is avoid getting in a existence threatening situation, aka a revolution.

A revolution is better than hoping that the economy and the social conditions change in their favor. 700 years and the Chantry is still powerful, extending their influence throughout Thedas, and the elves and the mages are still at the bottom.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

 Hundreds of years have passed, and no economic or political change has transpired to change the lot of mages in the slightest - they are always under the heel of the Chantry. Revolution can get them freedom while hoping for change is likely to bring 700 years of the same treatment.

Sigh, going in circles.
First, we don't know how old the mage collective is, but it's probabyl a new thing. That could bring change.
Second the political and economic changes in the past centuries naturally didn't favor the mages, because of the schism with the Tevinter imperium.

Revolution will most likely result in the worsening of their lot, the Chantry tightening its grip and several Towers annulled at will. Not to mention what angry mobs would do to mage children.
Even if this revolution succeeds in one place (and assumign thery can hold back the inevitable retaliation), mages from other places will suffer more.

The Mages Collective is more focused on keeping free mages safe, not changing the laws of the Chantry or bringing change to the Circles.

And in the aftermath of a revolution, the mages can have their own nation, free from the Chantry, a beacon of hope for mages throughout Thedas.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

The issue is that I don't think the Chantry has any value - they are trying to export their authority throughout all of Thedas, in the name of the Maker. Rather than allow them to use their religion to control every continent across Thedas, I think they should be defeated.

Mages have the power to liberate themselves - had Uldred not used demonology, the revolution at the Circle might have succeeded, and the blood mages may have defeated the templars.

What you think of the Chantry is irrelevent. Reality is, it's an insitution that will not be removed this easily, considering the support it has from governments and the general populace.

I never claimed the Chantry could be defeated easily, only that I think it should be defeated.

[Sir JK]

LobselVith8 wrote...

I understand your point, but while people are inherently flawed, allowing an organization that is using religion to trample on other people who have different faiths and treat mages as little more than slaves is problematic for me. For over 700 years, nothing has changed, and the Chantry has destroyed the Dales and is warring with the Qunari. True, the alternative that might arise could be just as bad as the Chantry, but if nothing is done, then nothing will change.

I understand why you might dislike it, and to be honest I'm not too fond of it either. You have my respect for arguing for humane treatment of everyone, even if I disagree with how you think that will be achieved. I'm mostly arguing against some of your arguments, because I think they are unreasonable or oversimplified.

But know that humans are dynamic things, the chantry is constantly changing according to the times. If the leadership needs or want something, the chantry will change to accomodate that (but it's so big that it's slooow...). If the mages rises up and tries to hurt the chantry, they will change to be much worse to the mages they can control (or just reach).

Nothing is likely to change - even a heroic Grey Warden from the Circle of Magi can't liberate the Ferelden Circle.

To be honest... the heroic Grey Warden is a lot less important in the grand scheme of things than one might think. It's like expecting a man that was awarded the highest military medal to be able to completely change his homes political landscape...  Now if a really powerful king, or better yet, the Orlesian emperor demands it... then things might start to happen. What matters is political power... not heroic achievements.

none of the Divines have done anything to promote the equality of the elves

You don't know that. There is nothing that indicates anything one way or the other here.

respecting other religions

Well... the qunari are out to destroy them so that one is understandable. The dalish religion, I'd expect that there is still emotional baggage from the March on the Dales so that would explain that (but not excuse it). But the chantry does not seem to forcefully try to convert the dwarves... or even sends missionaries (Burkel seems to be acting on his own accord). Not until the dwarves actually tries to destroy the dwarven chantry does the Chantry act against them

Nothing is likely to change in the next 700 years, except a more powerful Chantry and more people being forced to fall in line with the true believers.

I don't think the chantry will get more powerful... sooner or later it will start to limit the rulers of the nations and then it's power will start to drop... like a rock. Only really pious sovereigns will ever allow the chantry to hold them back. Once they have an alternative to rely on (the middle class in the cities) the chantry's position will change. Possibly for the better for mages.

In DA2, we play as Hawke. Why couldn't an altruistic Hawke lead a mage rebellion in Kirkwall, emancipate the Circle of Magi and take on the Chantry? We, as Hawke, making careful decisions, could create a society where mages aren't under the boot of the Chantry and we can prevent the oppression that exists in Tevinter Imperium.

I definantely want to have the option to try that (assuming the plot have room for it). I want it to be difficult, possibly bloody, put forward lots of problem caused by the loss of chantry and by the more influental mages (like some mages abusing their powers and some extreme libertarians even trying to depose you, their liberator because they think you hold them back) and lots of other things.
A viable option, but showing the full problems of trying to change society, even for the better.

[KnightofPhoenix]

LobselVith8 wrote...
A revolution is better than hoping that the economy and the social conditions change in their favor. 700 years and the Chantry is still powerful, extending their influence throughout Thedas, and the elves and the mages are still at the bottom.

Activism and taking opportunity of inevitable change is better than risking annihilation and creating more hatred and oppression.

The Chantry has in fact weakened, due to the Schism.

LobselVith8 wrote...
The Mages Collective is more focused on keeping free mages safe, not changing the laws of the Chantry or bringing change to the Circles.

And in the aftermath of a revolution, the mages can have their own nation, free from the Chantry, a beacon of hope for mages throughout Thedas.

The Mage collective is trying to prove that mages can self police. That can bring about changes in attitude vis a vis mages.

A beacon of hope? More like a nation that is going to invite several exalted marches (who is going to fight for mages?), its own population fearing a mage tyranny and rebelling (and its elites not wanting to risk war for mages), and mages from across Thedas suffering more oppression because of increased paranoia from both the Chantry and the people.

Well done.

LobselVith8 wrote...
I never claimed the Chantry could be defeated easily, only that I think it should be defeated.

Yea well, I like to focus more on what *is* and to deal with it appropriately, rather than what "should be" done.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 22 septembre 2010 - 06:17 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

How an extraordinarily naïve point of view you got.

First you claim the collective task us with protecting them, yet fail to disclaim that they are indeed suffering from the threat of possession. Ergo they do suffer the threat. [/quote]

You neglect to mention that there's only one single quest that tasks the Warden with fighting mages, and none of them are abominations. There aren't any mages in the Mages Collective who are under the threat of possession, unless you're confused about the Lake Calenhad quest Thy Brother's Killer, that tasks the Warden to head into in the Bercilian Forest, where the Warden fights a group of maleficarum who murdered a member of the Mages Collective. Before you call someone naive, get your facts straight.

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Second, everything Flemeth says and do, and what Morrigan claims can not be trusted, matter of fact is: We know squat about either and their plans. Flemeth isn't even human, so the whole "taking voer their bodies" might also just be a scam, or mean something completely different. [/quote]

Whether or not Morrigan can be trusted is a matter of faith. I think she can be trusted, and I see no reason why she would lie about Flemeth. In fact, she's supposed to leave the party if she finds out Flemeth wasn't killed, but the game is bugged about that sequence. She's completely upfront about the dark ritual, after all, and gives the Warden a choice in the matter.

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Third, doubtful. Sten did not come across as an exagerating type. And he never says the embrace abominations, only that they become abominations.
And about the ancient Tevinter: That's the whole point of their evil empire, many of the ruling magistrates were possibly abominations. [/quote]

Sten also thinks that women can't become warriors and is naive about the concept of people wanting to be something more in life. The view he gives about Ferelden completely misses the point when it comes to the poverty of the elves and the caste system of the dwarves. Sten makes assumptions about things he really can't understand because of his upbringing as a Qunari, including his views on mages. The Qunari also have a bias against mages.

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Fourth, yes there were other apprentices hoping to become the First. After the First is chosen, what happens to these apprentices? There are no other mages in the clan, then the Keeper and his First. Chances are they are killed or sent away.
And again, how do you know that the Cult of Andraste didn't have any abominations from time to time? You don't. Just because we don't see it, doesnt mean it isn't there. [/quote]

I doubt that the developers are going to introduce a ton of mages for accuracy, and we only get to know a handful of mages as it is. There are limitations with the developers making a game that can't completely capture the realism of a city or a group of people living in the wilderness (ergo, the lack of restrooms that we know exist from the Magi Origin). Unless you're suggesting that untried, inexperienced mages are allowed to become leaders of entire clans on their own? 

So what you're saying is that even if the Dragon Andraste worshippers got abominations, templars are completely unnecessary to deal with them?

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

And lets end a general misconception right here: Templars are not there to prevent a possession. They are there to kill the resultant abomination. Just because the Templars aren't present in other cultures does not mean they don't have to deal with abominations.[/quote]

It only means that templars aren't necessary to deal with abominations, since DA:O can have a Magi Warden defeat the abominations with three other companions while the templars do nothing but wait and pray.

[quote]Herr Uhl wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quote]Herr Uhl wrote...

[quote]MariSkep wrote...

They were deep into Orlesian territory and obviously hadn't recieved a surrender. Where they supposed to turn around and go home? [/quote]

Yes. Or not go there at all.
[/quote]

You mean the Dalish should have allowed themselves to be killed by the Orlesians? That doesn't make any sense.[/quote]

Try and hold out and keep Orlais as your only enemy instead of getting the whole andrastian part of Thedas on your throat. Settle with what you've got.

The Dalish were doing a good amount of killing too, it wasn't an ethic cleansing and 6 elves that thought, yeah, let's try and attack them to end this. Look at the example of Ferelden, if they would have kept going past the Frostbacks, how likely is it that Ferelden would exist in DAO?

And yes, I realize that this is a terribly late reply.

Edit: Most wars between evenly matched sides don't end with one side taking it all. It ends with one side giving concessions to the one that is winning. The winner takes said offer, since the losses in trying to claim the rest of the lands for total conquest outweighs the gain you would have of that compared to the concessions.
[/quote]

The Dalish were killing the people who were trying to kill them, as in any war, and I never claimed either side was trying to commit ethical cleansing, only that the Chantry is partly responsible for the war between Orlais and the Dales. And there's no reason that the Dalish shouldn't have pursued the Orlesians into their city if they thought it would mean victory - its easy to look back and say that it was the wrong move after everything has already been said and done, but considering that no one aided Orlais at the start of the war, it's impossible for the Dalish to know what would have happened when they tried to win the war by going further into Orlais, especially if the Orlesians started the war with the Dales.

[quote]Sir JK wrote...

I'd like to point one thing out: Most of the wrongs, mistakes and such committed by the chantry and it's affiliates can be attributed to human weakness and error. Even if the chantry is removed form the equation most of the problems will remain... they will be gone for a bit perhaps when the balance of power readjusts itself, but they will return. There will always be someone that opresses, always be someone that acts on xenophobia, always someone that jumps to false conclusions, always someone that become fanatically committed to a cause and always people that do horrors.

Removing the chantry won't rid us of those. It might affect who does it however, it might be monarchs that calls for culture-destroying wars. It might be mages that opress. It might be merchants that use lyrium to control people.
It will happen, getting rid of the chantry won't help there.[/quote]

Except if the mages are revolting against the Chantry, their defeat could mean their independence.

[quote]KnightofPhoenix wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
It's true that some revolutions tend to place people in power who tried to overthrow a dictator and end up becoming one themselves (the Cuban revolution against Batista by Castro come to mind), but there are also examples like the Hati revolution that freed the slaves or the American revolution that emancipated the colonies from the King. Mages are never going to be free unless they fight for it. Even a Magi Warden who saves all of Ferelden isn't enough to get the local Circle of Magi to be given independence because the Chantry refuses the boon. For over 700 years, mages have lived under the boot of the templars and the Chantry. Unless there is a revolution, they'll never be free.
[/quote]

You are talking about mass popular revolutions and comparing them to a revolution from a minority that is hated and feared not only by the Chantry but by the people themselves. All you are doing is subjecting all mages in all nations to even more oppression and hatred, if not outright annihilation not necessarily by the Chantry but by angry mobs.

Unless you want to assume your radical position even further and say that you want all mages to be feared, hated and killed everywhere so that they may wake up and starting fighting too. That would be what a radical would say and there is certain pertinence in that argument. Well except armies of Templars and the confinement of mages in towers makes them easy targets for annulment.

Take a step back and realise that you are talking about a feared minority. Feared because of religious beliefs that cannot be overthrown by violence, all that ends up doing is confirming it. 

[/quote]

Prejudical views don't change by doing nothing. Your suggestion is to sit idly by while people continue to view the world as it is in their POV - mages as monsters and elves as subhuman. Change doesn't happen unless people fight for it. The Chantry won't even allow the Magi boon when a Mage Warden has saved all of Ferelden, so mages should be content with being under the boot of the Chantry when one of their own has stopped the end of the world? I disagree. They've been little more than slaves for over 700 years, fighting the Chantry's wars and being turned into tranquil so magical items can be crafted on command, but that won't change unless they fight for their freedom. [/quote]
First of all, the collective quest I'm refering to is "Have You Seen Me" Where you go in search of the mage Renold, who turns out to have been killed by his apprentice, who is an abomination. And there you have it. Proof that even collective mages gets possessed. The fact that they willingly defend blood mages, and possibly even practice it themselves just makes me want to destroy them all even more. So before you call BS next time, perhaps YOU shoulod do your research, yes?

Everything Morrigan has done to us through the game shows to be deception, so why should we trust her with anything she says? Only once she's gotten what she wanted can she be trusted to tell just a hint of truth, which is why I'm willing to believe her in Witch Hunt, but not in Origins.

And Templars aren't needed to kill Abominations, not at all. They are just the very best of the best at that specific task.

[Reaverwind]

LobselVith8 wrote...

I never claimed the Chantry could be defeated easily, only that I think it should be defeated.

Defeated? It's a religious institution that spans multiple countries and supported by the masses. It's even supported by some of those elves you bemoan. The only way to bring it down is to remove that support, and martyring its defenders (which is exactly how the common people will view violence against the Chantry) is going to do the exact opposite.

Modifié par Reaverwind, 22 septembre 2010 - 06:33 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

MariSkep wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...

They couldn't predict that attacking the seat of the chantry wouldn't make other andrastian countries to react?

It seems natural as an effect of that to me.

I know I said I'd leave this argument but,

the Dales were attacking a city (capitol city from what I understand) of someone they had been fighting for some time. That's what you do when you push that far into someone's territory and they refuse to surrender. You take out its seat of power.

It would have been against any other nation than Orlais. But the Elves, brilliant tactical minds that they are, forgot to think about religion and what power it holds. Any one with half a brain could have predicted that attacking Val Royaux would awaken the sleeping giant. It just seems like a classic case of hubris. The Dalish thought they were more powerful than they really were and paid the price.

[LobselVith8]

[quote]Sir JK wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

I understand your point, but while people are inherently flawed, allowing an organization that is using religion to trample on other people who have different faiths and treat mages as little more than slaves is problematic for me. For over 700 years, nothing has changed, and the Chantry has destroyed the Dales and is warring with the Qunari. True, the alternative that might arise could be just as bad as the Chantry, but if nothing is done, then nothing will change.[/quote]

I understand why you might dislike it, and to be honest I'm not too fond of it either. You have my respect for arguing for humane treatment of everyone, even if I disagree with how you think that will be achieved. I'm mostly arguing against some of your arguments, because I think they are unreasonable or oversimplified.

But know that humans are dynamic things, the chantry is constantly changing according to the times. If the leadership needs or want something, the chantry will change to accomodate that (but it's so big that it's slooow...). If the mages rises up and tries to hurt the chantry, they will change to be much worse to the mages they can control (or just reach). [/quote]

You're welcome to disagree with me, of course. However, I don't agree that the Chantry is changing. They were fighting wars with the Dales and the Tevinter Imperium over religious differences. The Chantry has treated the mages the same way for over 700 years, they outright refuse the Magi boon that Ferelden requests, and the Divine contemplates an Exalted March against Orzammar for harboring free mages outside Chantry oversight.

[quote]Sir JK wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Nothing is likely to change - even a heroic Grey Warden from the Circle of Magi can't liberate the Ferelden Circle.

[/quote]

To be honest... the heroic Grey Warden is a lot less important in the grand scheme of things than one might think. It's like expecting a man that was awarded the highest military medal to be able to completely change his homes political landscape...  Now if a really powerful king, or better yet, the Orlesian emperor demands it... then things might start to happen. What matters is political power... not heroic achievements. [/quote]

This shows how powerful the Chantry is, and why I think someone needs to step in. There's no oversight since the Divine has all this power because virtually all humans on Thedas believe in the Maker, and the Chantry can do no wrong because they act in the name of the Maker. Templars are above even the nobility of Ferelden, as the Grand Cleric makes clear in the Landsmeet when she condemns Teryn Loghain for imprisoning the brother of Bann Alfstanna of the Waking Seas. Even the King and Queen of Ferelden, with all their political power, are powerless to do anything about the Circle of Magi located in their own nation; they don't have the clout to overrule the Chantry, and that illustrates how powerful the Chantry is - even the ruler of Ferelden has to acquise to their ruling.

[quote]Sir JK wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

none of the Divines have done anything to promote the equality of the elves
[/quote]

You don't know that. There is nothing that indicates anything one way or the other here. [/quote]

I disagree. The reason that the Dales and Orlais went to war was in large part because the elves refused to abandon their gods to worship the Maker, and despite all their clout, none of the Divines have done anything to help the situation regarding the alienages or the mistreatment of the elves. In fact, they struck Shartan from the canticle in the Chant of Light after the war with the Dales. The Chantry doesn't even do anything about the people who get hurt because of the laws in Orlais:  Liselle, the flower merchant in the Denerim Market District, says that the lives of the elves in the alienages in Orlais are much harsher than the elves in Denerim. The chevaliers are permitted to rape the lower born without persecution. Despite the fact that the Chantry is located in Orlais and has significant clout throughout Thedas - enough to tell the ruler of Ferelden 'no' for the Magi boon, after all - they do nothing to change the plight of the elves and the women who are not of the nobility. They didn't even declare a war on the Tevinter Imperium for its use of slaves - they only declared an Exalted March when they decided that Andraste was not the Bride of the Maker, but an ordinary human.

[quote]Sir JK wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

respecting other religions
[/quote]

Well... the qunari are out to destroy them so that one is understandable. The dalish religion, I'd expect that there is still emotional baggage from the March on the Dales so that would explain that (but not excuse it). But the chantry does not seem to forcefully try to convert the dwarves... or even sends missionaries (Burkel seems to be acting on his own accord). Not until the dwarves actually tries to destroy the dwarven chantry does the Chantry act against them [/quote]

I agree about the Qunari, but the situation with the Dales and the Tevinter Imperium indicates that they would try to force the issue. Orzammar is a different situation, because the templars and the Circles throughout Thedas depend on the lyrium trade with the dwarves, so they can't afford to go to war with the dwarves the same way they went to war with the Tevinter Imperium or the Dales.

[quote]Sir JK wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Nothing is likely to change in the next 700 years, except a more powerful Chantry and more people being forced to fall in line with the true believers.
[/quote]

I don't think the chantry will get more powerful... sooner or later it will start to limit the rulers of the nations and then it's power will start to drop... like a rock. Only really pious sovereigns will ever allow the chantry to hold them back. Once they have an alternative to rely on (the middle class in the cities) the chantry's position will change. Possibly for the better for mages. [/quote]

It's been around for hundreds of years, and even its support of the Orlesian occupation didn't deter the people of Ferelden from their religious faith. They've been around for hundreds of years, since their inception nine Ages ago during the Divine Age of Justinia I.
 
[quote]KnightofPhoenix wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

A revolution is better than hoping that the economy and the social conditions change in their favor. 700 years and the Chantry is still powerful, extending their influence throughout Thedas, and the elves and the mages are still at the bottom.[/quote]

Activism and taking opportunity of inevitable change is better than risking annihilation and creating more hatred and oppression.

The Chantry has in fact weakened, due to the Schism. [/quote]

How has the Chantry weakened? Because Tevinter established the Imperial Chantry with its Black Divine? Only Tevinter recognizes the Black Divine, everyone else in Thedas accepts the Chant of Light and the White Divine of Orlais. Circles are under Chantry control and exist throughout Thedas, with mages being used by the Chantry against the invading Qunari forces. Despite the Chantry support for the occupation in Ferelden that took place 30 years prior to DA:O, the people still follow the Divine of Orlais. I don't see how their power has waned in the slightest.

[quote]KnightofPhoenix wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

The Mages Collective is more focused on keeping free mages safe, not changing the laws of the Chantry or bringing change to the Circles.

And in the aftermath of a revolution, the mages can have their own nation, free from the Chantry, a beacon of hope for mages throughout Thedas.[/quote]

The Mage collective is trying to prove that mages can self police. That can bring about changes in attitude vis a vis mages.

A beacon of hope? More like a nation that is going to invite several exalted marches (who is going to fight for mages?), its own population fearing a mage tyranny and rebelling (and its elites not wanting to risk war for mages), and mages from across Thedas suffering more oppression because of increased paranoia from both the Chantry and the people.

Well done. [/quote]

Considering that no one is really aware of what the Mages Collective is doing, which is why they ask the Warden to bribe Knight-Commander Harrith, I don't see who is going to be convinced that the mages can regulate their own when their operation is technically illegal (Defending the Collective/Defying the Collective).

A nation of mages going against the Chantry? Tevinter had several Exalted Marches against it by the Chantry, and unlike the Dales, they're still standing.

[quote]KnightofPhoenix wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

I never claimed the Chantry could be defeated easily, only that I think it should be defeated.[/quote]

Yea well, I like to focus more on what *is* and to deal with it appropriately, rather than what "should be" done.

[/quote]

Maybe DA2 will come out and allow the possibility of Hawke declaring war on the Chantry with an army of mages, considering that it's likely the Free Marches have their own Circle of Magi (and Orlais even has six of them). If the mages of the Circles in Orlais also defected, and fought for freedom with the mages in the Free Marches under Hawke, I don't see why it isn't possible for a victory to be had. It's pure speculation, of course, but it's a plausible choice for DA2 to present, especially with Wynne revealing that the Circles throughout Thedas want independence from the Chantry, so perhaps that will be a significant part of Hawke's tale - side with the Chantry, or the Circle of Magi.
 
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

First of all, the collective quest I'm refering to is "Have You Seen Me" Where you go in search of the mage Renold, who turns out to have been killed by his apprentice, who is an abomination. And there you have it. Proof that even collective mages gets possessed. The fact that they willingly defend blood mages, and possibly even practice it themselves just makes me want to destroy them all even more. So before you call BS next time, perhaps YOU shoulod do your research, yes? [/quote]

Excuse me, but since when is Heshir referenced as a member of the Mages Collective? Only Renold is mentioned as a member of the Collective. The Mages Collective hasn't seen him for some time. There's no reference of Heshir being a member. He has no clear ties to the Collective anymore than the three apprentices from the Notice of Termination quest, none of whom reference the Collective at all. Ergo, no mages who are members of the Collective get possessed (that we're aware of).

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Everything Morrigan has done to us through the game shows to be deception, so why should we trust her with anything she says? Only once she's gotten what she wanted can she be trusted to tell just a hint of truth, which is why I'm willing to believe her in Witch Hunt, but not in Origins. [/quote]

Everything? Isn't that an exaggeration? She tells the Warden about Flemeth, her history (including the incident with the golden mirror), she openly states her opinions about what actions the Warden should take, and she's upfront about the dark ritual (including that she will leave once the Archdemon is slain). She has her own motives, and she doesn't reveal everything (since virtually everyone else keeps their own secrets about parts of their life), so I don't see how you can say everything she's done is merely deception on her part.

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

And Templars aren't needed to kill Abominations, not at all. They are just the very best of the best at that specific task.[/quote]

Yes, A Broken Circle proved that beyond a shadow of a doubt.

[quote]Reaverwind wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

I never claimed the Chantry could be defeated easily, only that I think it should be defeated.[/quote]

Defeated? It's a religious institution that spans multiple countries and supported by the masses. It's even supported by some of those elves you bemoan. The only way to bring it down is to remove that support, and martyring its defenders (which is exactly how the common people will view violence against the Chantry) is going to do the exact opposite. [/quote]

I take it you're not well aware of human history and the fall of a multitude of religions since mankind's inception on this planet. Many religions have collapsed over time. Ancient Egypt, Greece, and Rome worshipped a myraid of deities, from the sun god Ra to the Father of Gods and Men called Zeus. In the realm of DA:O, the Chantry had taken the place of old religions that worshipped the gods, including the Old Gods. Even the invading Qunari were able to convert many members of the Chantry to the Qun during their occupation.

[LobselVith8]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

MariSkep wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...

They couldn't predict that attacking the seat of the chantry wouldn't make other andrastian countries to react?

It seems natural as an effect of that to me.

I know I said I'd leave this argument but,

the Dales were attacking a city (capitol city from what I understand) of someone they had been fighting for some time. That's what you do when you push that far into someone's territory and they refuse to surrender. You take out its seat of power.

It would have been against any other nation than Orlais. But the Elves, brilliant tactical minds that they are, forgot to think about religion and what power it holds. Any one with half a brain could have predicted that attacking Val Royaux would awaken the sleeping giant. It just seems like a classic case of hubris. The Dalish thought they were more powerful than they really were and paid the price.

If the Dalish retreated into the Dales as much as we're told, it's difficult to even say if they were aware of the religious significance of the Chantry. It's known that the Chantry wanted to convert them and they adamantly refused. We know relatively little about them, and much of what we're told is colored by the fact that it's told by humans who evidently look down on the Dales as heathens for not falling in line with the other Andrastian nations. The Dalish may not have suspected that an attack on Val Royeaux would bring the other nations to respond; perhaps the Dalish thought that, since the Orlesians had provoked the attacks (if that was the case), then none of the other nations would interfere since they didn't during the first part of the attack between the Orlesians and the Daish.