1503 réponses à ce sujet

[ShrinkingFish]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Uldred was possessed within the tower when he tried to summon demons to help him fight the council. A Pride Demon was apparently powerful enough to force the possession through (At least from Nial's description the possession didn't sound voluntary).

Yes. Uldred let down his defenses and so lost himself to possession. His own hubris and desperation destroyed him.

My question of, "what would have happened if he had been possessed outside the tower?" was purely a hypothetical one intending to question the true quality of the Templar's assumed control over abominations.

[Lotion Soronarr]

ShrinkingFish wrote...
Yes, I do believe the Templars were actually called the "Inquisition" before the Orelsian Chantry reorganized them and formed the Templars.

But even before that, before Andraste even, there were successful controls of abominations.

The question is - how, by whom, and how sucesfull?

I think blood magic is outlawed for more reasons than just its inheret danger. Yes, abuses follow easily along with Blood Magic, but they do not follow by necessity. And some do appear to be trustworthy in their use of Blood Magic. Jowan being an example if he is freed from Arl Eamon's estate.

And Jowan's "stupidity" is also questionable. I think he absolutely did what was right by him. It just didn't turn out as he had hoped. And depending on the results he actually ends up pretty alright due to his choices, so it may even be considered an intelligent choice for him.

Unintended consequences? It doesn't matter.
Anyone possesing mind control power is a danger to everyone else...by his very nature he cannot be trusted.
It is only common sense that every singel king will want to see it eradicated, lest he falls under that persons control.

Never said totally. I said about as effective as the Chantry's and the Templar's methods, meaning the Harrowing and the Circle. Please try to avoid putting words in my mouth.

Apologies. They way oyu worded it it looked like oyu ment totaly.
Eitehr way, we don't really have a basis for comparison to say how effective those methods are.

As the Templars at the Circle were incapable of dealing with Uldred and were mostly mind controlled en masse and eventually forced to lock him and the rest of them inside the Circle walls I doubt very much that the small (when compared to Templar forces at the Circle) contingent of Templars sent to accompany Uldred and the mages to Ostagar would have had any sort of ability to slay him. And the likelyhood of the entire army mobilizing quickly enough to deal with him would also be unlikely, especially since he retained the ability to mind control masses of people at once. Likely giving him more than enough cover to escape into the world.

Uldred wasn't alone in the tower, and he is in the middle of an army camp. Time to mobilize? He's sorounded by soldiers from all side. The nearest ones were a few feet away.

And why are you assuming it's Uldred that controlled everyone in the Circle? I don't think mind control is as simple as that. Besides, wasn't the veil torn/weakened in the Circle tower? Certanly paly a factor.

But I agree...useless speculation that gets us nowhere.

That we know of, indeed. If mages become possessed and turn into abominations and no one ever hears about them... then are they a problem?

That the player hears about. I never got the impression from the game and codexes that abomination hunts are a rare occurence.

And we have no idea how organized or unorganized hedge mages could be or are as we have seen little evidence of their practices. Perhaps they are capable of rigid controls and securities. Perhaps they are organized. Just because we haven't seen them doesn't mean they aren't there, it just means they're doing their job and remaining invisible. Abominations don't really help people remain unseen and it would bequeath an organization intent on secrecy to have methods of dealing with such problems. It makes sense to me that these methods would exist, especially since the damages of possessed mages outside the Circle are so relatively minimal compared to the number of mages existing outside the Circle.

Given their dispersal and methods of communication, a large, well-organized and effective prevention messure is impossible. Look at the Collective for an example - and they seem to put a lot of importance on following the chantry practices and security. And their way of dealing with blood mages or abomination is grossly ineffective. No way to get warning across fact. No way to organize a hunting/containment force quickly. No way to contain it quickly.
No telephons, no telepathy, no teleportation, mages spread over a huge area, and the fastest method of travel is a horse. It doesn't effectively work because it CANNOT effectively work.

And again - an abomination appearing does in no way implicate the Collective. No one knows from where the abomination has come, and most peopel dont' even know the collective exist. A rampagin abomination would little to destroy the secrecy of the organization - it would just be attribtued to a crazy blood mage or hedge wmage, as usual.

I never suggested that the Chantry is bad, what they do is bad, or that they are wrong in what they do in any regard.

I never said you did..nor was that quote directed at you.

[LobselVith8]

Reaverwind wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...
Mages live in fear at the Circle. That was the reason behind the revolt, to toss out the templars and gain freedom for the Circle of Ferelden. The inability of the templars to handle it, while a Mage Warden could clean up the mess that Greagoir couldn't, makes it more clear that mages can govern themselves

No. All the situation at the Circle did was prove how royally mages can fubar situations.

And how incompetent the templars are at handling abominations.

DaerogTheDhampir wrote...

Not all mages live in fear at the Circle. Some do, sure, but not all. Probably some general fear of the templars, but the templars in game were pretty civil. In Witch Hunt, the mage even complained that the head templar while Gregoir was gone acted like his mother when the templar asked the mage to be careful while he went off with the Warden.

And Cullen mentions to the Mage Warden that he's heard many of his fellows talk about how much they enjoy killing people. The fact that templars have absolutely no oversight means that an emotionally unhinged Cullen can rule the Circle in fear if the Greagoir died and the Circle was culled.

DaerogTheDhampir wrote...

Mages can govern themselves. The Tevinter Imperium has always had mage rulers. However, that is the point in a way. Some oversight is desired to ensure that what happened in the past doesn't happen again. Should this oversight be the Chantry? Currently, they are the only international organization that can do this. By privatizing the Circles to their respective Kings/Queens and such, the Circle of Magi is then shattered, as it is an international organization. So, until another can be formed, the Chantry is the only one that can offer oversight. The enchanters still make the policy for the Circles.

The enchanters have absolutely no say if the Knight-Commander says otherwise; like when Irving had to abide by Greagoir's edict in the Magi Origin.

DaerogTheDhampir wrote...

Don't know why the Collective was picked on earlier, that small organization seemed nice. They couldn't do a lot on their own without drawing too much attention, but their stated goal is to improve the image of magic and not have the Chantry work so hard on its own.
As for the ruler of Fereldan saying the mages have earened their right to govern themselves, I just found that to be completely stupid, personally. I don't see how they did. There is a revolt, and then the mage Warden comes in to clean up. How does that mean they earned it? A senior enchanter led the revolt, someone who is part of running the Circle, and then someone who doesn't help run the Circle comes in to clean up. So, how did the Circle earn it? My canon mage picks the Grey Warden monument every time so far. Just my opinion.

A mage Warden proves it by saving the nation, and potentially the entire world, which goes against all the dogma of the Chantry - who teach that mage is a curse (as Greagoir says at the beginning of the Magi Origin). And while Uldred and his fellow mages rebelled against the templars, the very same templars who are supposed to be handling those situations were completely unprepared, while the same mage Warden who Greagoir wanted to punish (regardless of whether the Warden was acting on Irving's orders or not, no less) can clean up the mess and deal with the abominations and Uldred himself.

As for the rebellion, are you really surprised? There was a revolt because mages live under armed and armored drug addicts who have absolutely no oversight and the mages in question wanted their freedom. It's no different than when Andraste fought against the Tevinter Imperium with Shartan to free the slaves. Personally, I ask for the Circle to be given its independence; I don't want to be Teyrn, I want the mages to be given its freedom.

[LobselVith8]

[quote]Riona45 wrote...

[quote]DaerogTheDhampir wrote...

Very true. I did say it was just my opinion at the end of my post as well.[/quote]

I know.  I posted mainly to underline the point about the boon in question being specifically for a mage PC, because your post didn't really address that.  You mentioned that mages have helped in every Blight--true, but in the case of this Blight, the mage PC didn't just help, she played the pivotal role.  She was the one who made it possible to stop the Blight in such a short period of time.

PS:  The mage boon isn't the only case in which the Warden can ask to aid "their kind"--several other boons aim to do that as well.[/quote]

Thank you for this post.
[quote]Sir JK wrote...

Uhm, I'd just like to point one thing out very clearly: the only mage organisation where we know how mages are trained and prepared is the circle. We barely know anything about how other organisations handle magic.
Circle: Harrows and watches.
Dalish: Not enough data
Collective: Not enough data
Qunari: Keeps their mages leashed and in cages, cuts out their tounges and considers them to be little more than beasts of war. Other than that, not enough data.
Cult of Andraste: Not enough data
Pre-templar humanity: Not enough data

We simply don't know how any of those other groups treat their mages at all. You might be right in that the Templar's aren't as necessary as the chantry makes them out to be. But you may also be wrong. There's no right and wrong here, no facts. Just opinion.
Using the collective or the Dalish as examples to functioning non-templar controlled magic communities is problematic... since you have no idea why that is. [/quote]

We know all of them are still standing, we know abominations didn't destroy the world, we know that the Disciples and the Dalish clans have lived for centuries with mages among them, and no abominations have wiped either of them off the face of Thedas. Using the data on how malicious the Chantry treats the mages: stealing their children from them the moment the child is born (and we don't even know if it's to place the baby in an orphanage or to murder them), forcing mages to become tranquil to have emotionless rune crafting slaves, some Circles preventing mages from marrying, and having drug addicts with swords of mercy watching over men, women, and children is hardly an ideal situation.

The Dales proved that mages and non-mages can live together without mages being persecuted or killed by each other. Considering that Thedas is still standing without an abomination outbreak and Dalish clans have mages among them without being extinct as a result of abominations, I think it's clear that the Chantry isn't necessary to deal with the mages. Considering that over 700 years, the Rite has been used against Circles by the templars, it's clear that not every mage is going to accept having their freedom taken away from them because religious dogma dictates that Tevinters caused the Blights.

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Well about the Tevinter Imperium there is the story about the Magisters often mutated beyond recognition of kith and kind. Which seems to hint heavily at the fact that many of the Magisters of old Tevinter was in fact abominations.[/quote]

It was a result of a long exposure to lyrium, as the codex on lyrium states when discussing its impact on templars and mages.

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Lyrium hasn't mutated the Dwarfs beyond the fact they are "little people" and are still recognizable, also this has happened over several centuries not just a mage's lifetime. Templars take Lyrium their entire lives without any mutation. Direct contact with raw Lyrium is deadly to a mage not mutating. I don't buy it was Lyrium exposure, but we will probably never know.[/quote]

You realize dwarves who live underground are relatively immune to lyrium (unless exposed directly to it and then turn lyrium addled). There's also the case of Sandal, who apparently wiped out an entire room of darkspawn and his father said he may have been directly exposed to lyrium, and we can infer that it may have changed Sandal fundamentally.
[quote]Sir JK wrote...

[quote]tool_bot wrote...

Not really. The whole point is that templars aren't needed which all those cases more or less 'prove'
[/quote]

But you don't know why. If the Dalish kill all their mages beyond the keeper and the first then no, they don't need any. The cult of Andraste might actually go through cycles of training mages and on rare occassions one of them falls and they violently have to put it down, it cannot be confirmed or denied. Also, remember that the Tevinter templars are not lyrium enhanced (but still templars).

If you're arguing that the Templars specifically aren't technically needed, then yes. You're completely correct. But that does not mean the alternatives are better for the mages, mind. I for one think the qunari way sounds a lot worse, but it is an alternative yes.
[/quote]

Or allowing the mages to preside over themselves, as Alistair and Anora agree it's a good idea. And regarding the Dalish killing the mages - are you serious? Kill the mages? That's ridiculous. Elves are said to be more magically attuned than humans. The Keepers of the clans are all mages, and preside over mage and non-mage alike. Small clans wander across Thedas under the guidance of the Keeper and the First. Why kill off the mages when the Keeper will inevitably perish, and there will need to be new apprentices to vie for the position of First when the current First becomes the new Keeper?
[quote]lobi wrote...

Also during loghain fight if blood magic could be seen (even if you won) they would burn you at stake.[/quote]

In a scene cut from the game, Wynne called the Warden out if the Warden used blood magic. She said she didn't recognize the magic used, but that it was unsettling. It's possible the specialized blood magic bestowed by the desire demon is radically different than the blood magic that the Circle is accustomed to.
[quote]General Malor wrote...

I wouldn't go to for an all out war but I would like to make changes to the Chantry. I mean...it's actually right still. What with Andrastae being real. So I guess my problem isn't so much the Chantry but with the Templars. If there was a way to change the Templars from jailers of the mages to bodyguards for them I would go for that. Just imagine being a mage and walking out in the world with your own personal guardian to protect you from the simple minded fools that you can encounter. Kinda have them work to dissuade and stop hostilities before they can start.[/quote]

Andraste being a real person doesn't make the Chantry right. Some people think Andraste herself was a mage. There were multiple Cults of Andraste running around hundreds of years ago, after all, before one was made the "official" religion of Orlais by the Emperor. And as long as templars have authority over every mage in the Circle, including the First Enchanter, then mages will always be little more than slaves to the Chantry.
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]tool_bot wrote...

Weren't you and Lotion arguing we should tolerate bad things happening so long as it's within a certain acceptable range? Why doesn't that apply here?[/quote]

Depends...we've seen how much damage a single, untrained CHILD mage (who's powers are still weak) can do. Hunderds of dead.
How many mages there are in Ferelden?

Lock up a hunderd mages or risk the deaths of thousands on a daily basis?
IMHO, not worth the risk. [/quote]

I think the Dalish feel the same way about the Chantry after the fall of the Dales, a nation where mages and non-mages lived side by side without destroying one another.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]tool_bot wrote...

And we already know there are methods more effective then what the Circle teaches to prevent possession. (We see how easily Morrigan is able to brush aside spirits.) While I understand we can't assume the Dalish have these, they are very successful at preserving their mages and they seem to surpass anything Circle Mages can do.[/quote]

No, we don't. You assume too much. Jsut because Morrigan is not possesed, doens't mean she has some super-special methods to prevent possesion. After all, the Warden is a circle mage, and he doesn't get posesed either.
Also, we know way too little about the Dalish and how they deal with mages. [/quote]

We know the Keepers and the First are mages, and preside over the entire clan. We know the Dales was an entire nation with mages and non-mages living side by side without an abomination destroying everything. Disciples of Andraste may have been around for as long as 900 years with mages and non-mages living side by side, and no templar or Chantry oversight needed.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]tool_bot wrote...

Theft of Chantry property? No. It would be undermining their control and authority in an area they feel the Maker has given them complete control. And it would also be just another excuse to force a monarch in line.
[/quote]

Pharse it as you wish, it doesn't change what it is. The Cirlces are under Chatnry control and they run them. Ergo, they belong to the Chatnry.

[/quote]

So following your line of thought: the mages are slaves of the Chantry.
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Technically, everyone in Thedas can become possessed (with the exception of the dwarves). It's merely that only mages can turn into abominations if possessed. On that line of reasoning, every person in Thedas is a potential danger to the other, because a demon can possess them. They can even inhabit dead bodies.[/quote]

Non-mages are far less likely to be possesed (IIRC, most likely to happen in places where the veil has been torn), and the possesion doesn't result in the abominations. [/quote]

The possibility still exists, since anyone can be possessed (except dwarves).

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

I think tool_bot meant Morrigan's ability to discern that she was in the Fade as an apostate while Wynne wasn't able to despite all her training as a Circle mage. The existance of the many Dalish clans under the guidance of mages and the co-existance of mages with non-mages among the Disciples, who may have been around for at least 900 years, illustrates that the templars and the Chantry are unnecessary.[/quote]

Ecept that many other Circle mages resist possesion too (mage warden among them), and that we readlly don't know has been happening ion hte last 900 years with the Dalish and  Disciples. For all we know, they could just let their abominations run loose in the countryside and let the templars take care of them. [/quote]

So they pat the abominations on the head and wave them off while the abominations completely ignore everyone around them to go in the vicinity of some nearby templars? Really?

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Actualyl that IS a effective way of conatainment. did any of the many abominations in the tower escape to harm peopel outside? No.
Can the collective boast the same? No.

Their method is "put a wanted add". How can that be effective in any way?
a) They have no guarantee anyone will answer the add.
They don't even know WHEN the add will be answered..if at all. And time is of the essence.
c) No containment - And given that they are spread out so far, by the time one of them becomes and abomination, getting the word around, getting the contract out, finding someone, getting to the location - by that time the abomination will probably be long gone. Distance and travel time matter!

Effective? Yeah right.

[/quote]

Yeah, asking a Grey Warden to help them is absolutely ridiculous. It's not like they saved the world four times over or anything like that...

[LobselVith8]

[quote]DaerogTheDhampir wrote...

[quote]Riona45 wrote...

[quote]DaerogTheDhampir wrote...
As for the ruler of Fereldan saying the mages have earened their right to govern themselves, I just found that to be completely stupid, personally. I don't see how they did. There is a revolt, and then the mage Warden comes in to clean up. How does that mean they earned it? A senior enchanter led the revolt, someone who is part of running the Circle, and then someone who doesn't help run the Circle comes in to clean up. So, how did the Circle earn it?[/quote]

Uh, they weren't talking about the debacle at the Circle, they were talking about the heroic deeds of the mage Warden.  I thought that was pretty obvious.[/quote]

Sure the Warden has earned a boon and can ask for whatever s/he wants, I just didn't see why the ruler said the mages/Circle earned it. They helped in the Blight, sure, but mages/Circles have in every Blight since the Circle was formed.[/quote]

In other words, the mages earned the right to be free four times prior to the Fifth Blight?

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Mages live in fear at the Circle. That was the reason behind the revolt, to toss out the templars and gain freedom for the Circle of Ferelden. The inability of the templars to handle it, while a Mage Warden could clean up the mess that Greagoir couldn't, makes it more clear that mages can govern themselves: the ruler of Ferelden admits as much in the royal ceremony at the end of DA:O.

And the incident wouldn't have happened if mages were governing themselves - despite hundreds of years of templars culling the Circles, mages will always fight for freedom, it's universal. The fact that we're debating this is a testament to the fact that there will always be people who believe that mages should be given their freedom, and no debate is ever going to change that.[/quote]

The oppinion of the ruler of Ferelden is irrelevant. [/quote]

How is the proclamation made by the ruler of all Ferelden, during the royal ceremony honoring the Mage Warden aka the Hero of Ferelden who saved the world from the Blight, irrelevant?

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Mages governing the circle is a BAD idea for many reasons - but the chief one is that the people one the top can turn into abominations just as easily as any other mage. Abominations runing the Circle of Magi? Yes, great idea. [/quote]

You mean like the Keepers presiding over the Dalish? Kolgrim and his ancestors presiding over the Disciples for hundreds of years? The Keepers of the Dales being mages? Or the ancient elven mages of Arlathan and Thedas? Yeah, apparently it works, so it is a great idea.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

And yes, some people will never be happy. Some peopel will always want more. So?
Some things wil lalways happen. There will always be people desperate or twisted enough to commit crimes. Should we abolish the police then? [/quote]

Are you surprised that people living under tyranny want freedom? And you're comparing the police to templars?The police aren't drug addicts without any oversight, who openly discuss how much they like murdering the people they're presiding over.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Oh, an interesting quote from Davod Gaider:

[quote]David Gaider wrote...

I think there's a bit of a bias against organized religion in these parts (bad organized religion! bad!) which leads some to look on anything the Chantry does with suspicion. No doubt it doesn't help that the Chantry is a big organization with political power, and thus given to corruption much like in our own Middle Ages. The fact that it's mostly benevolent in its nature and sees what it does as necessary if unfortunate is compared to the fact that they are taking freedom away from those poor mages-- and anything that deprives freedom is also automatically bad (we're a comfy, democratic lot here on the internet, I suppose).[/quote]

[/quote]

Regarding the Chantry, given that comment, it's odd that Alistair thinks the Chantry purposefully makes templars addicted to lyrium to control them and doubts that it's even effective, and was disgusted with the Harrowing that he witnessed. Regarding the mages, the Magi boon is possible in Dragon Age: Origins because the Mage Warden and the ruler of Ferelden agree that the mages have earned the right to govern themselves.


[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

The Grey Wardens do have a reputation across Thedas, they are fighting the darkspawn in Ostagar with the King, and the Blackstone Irregulars mention that everyone is taking about the Warden.[/quote]
That doesn't change the fact that they are leaving every single task they got for him up to chance. They just figured that since the GW's were in town maybe they could clean up their mess. [/quote]
The Grey Wardens stop Blights and save the world from the Archdemon. I'm taking a wild guess they figured the Warden could handle it.

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
Mages live in fear at the Circle. That was the reason behind the revolt, to toss out the templars and gain freedom for the Circle of Ferelden. The inability of the templars to handle it, while a Mage Warden could clean up the mess that Greagoir couldn't, makes it more clear that mages can govern themselves: the ruler of Ferelden admits as much in the royal ceremony at the end of DA:O.[/quote]
Uhm... A Templar Warden can also take care of the problem.............. You realize the ONLY reason the Warden can take care of the problem is because of a neat little thing called "plot shield". [/quote]
Templar Warden? There's Cousland, Mage, Elven and Dwarven Wardens... I didn't realize there was a Templar Origin story. Tell me about it.
And a little thing called canon makes it clear that Greagoir and the templars failed in their duty.

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
And the incident wouldn't have happened if mages were governing themselves - despite hundreds of years of templars culling the Circles, mages will always fight for freedom, it's universal. The fact that we're debating this is a testament to the fact that there will always be people who believe that mages should be given their freedom, and no debate is ever going to change that.[/quote]
The fact that we are debating this is equally proof of that there will be some people who thinks that mages got a responsibility to the rest of the world. And while not perfect, the system in order works. [/quote]
That must explain the Uldred rebellion and the inability of the templars to handle him. As Greagoir himself admits, they were completely unprepared.

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
The Dalish are also hunted by templars.[/quote]
That's because they are technically apostates as long as they aren't in their own country. [/quote]
According to the Dalish, they no longer have a country thanks to the Chantry.

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

There are plenty of examples why they can, though: There's also the Dales, the Disciples of Andraste, the Dalish, the original elves of Arlathan and Thedas...[/quote]
We got no proof whatsoever that there were no kind of oversight at all in any of these cases. Nor do we have proof that there were. So all of those examples are very poor, and can't be used in the argument for or against supervision of magics. [/quote]
Poor? Mages are in positions of power. Kolgrim and Elric presided over people. There are plenty of mages working alongside both of them. Ancient elves were said to be great wielders of magic, as shown by the memories of the Arcane Warrior in its phylactery. The Keepers are in charge of the clans, and the First is the next in line. Both of them are mages. Several elves vied for the position to be Zathrian's First. There's no mention of any version of the templars among the Dalish, and the Keeper has full authority over the clan and passing on the elven lore. That's your proof right there.

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Scholars? You were the one who said they were Chantry property.[/quote]
The Circle as an institution is. The people within it are just lifetime members. And for so-called "slaves" they are better off than most every peasant in the rest of Thedas. [/quote]
I'm certain many slave owners have used the same excuse when the topic of freedom came up.

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
There is plenty of reason to change it; there will always be revolts as long as the Chantry treats the mages as their property, as you termed it, and no one should own another person. I'm arguing that Chantry and templar oversight isn't necessary; you're arguing that some mages can turn into abominations. The ruler of Ferelden admits that the mages have earned the right to govern themselves.[/quote]
I'm also arguing that the Mages of the Circle doesn't even have it half as bad as you try to make it out to be. The only bad thing for them is the denial of keeping their children and limited acces to outside areas.[/quote]

That must explain the hundreds of years of templars culling the Circles.

[ShrinkingFish]

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]ShrinkingFish wrote...
Yes, I do believe the Templars were actually called the "Inquisition" before the Orelsian Chantry reorganized them and formed the Templars.

But even before that, before Andraste even, there were successful controls of abominations.[/quote]

The question is - how, by whom, and how sucesfull?
[/quote]

That is a very good question and we lack the information to adequately answer it. If either of us try to we'd be dealing purely in hypotheticals, unfortunately. I hope we have the opportunity to learn more about them sometime in the future.

[quote]
[quote]
I think blood magic is outlawed for more reasons than just its inheret danger. Yes, abuses follow easily along with Blood Magic, but they do not follow by necessity. And some do appear to be trustworthy in their use of Blood Magic. Jowan being an example if he is freed from Arl Eamon's estate.

And Jowan's "stupidity" is also questionable. I think he absolutely did what was right by him. It just didn't turn out as he had hoped. And depending on the results he actually ends up pretty alright due to his choices, so it may even be considered an intelligent choice for him.[/quote]

Unintended consequences? It doesn't matter.
Anyone possesing mind control power is a danger to everyone else...by his very nature he cannot be trusted.
It is only common sense that every singel king will want to see it eradicated, lest he falls under that persons control.
[/quote]

Exactly. Blood magic is mostly against the law because it threatens the power of the Chantry and the power of the various Monarchy's of the world. Blood mages can take direct control over individuals and so destabalize the systems of power erected around the operating organizations. It is in the interests of those who hold the power to outlaw blood magic because, above all else, they want to keep their power.

And just because an individual is a blood mage does not mean he cannot be trusted. It is entirely possible for an individual to hold that power and be trustworthy. It all depends on the individual. Though I do agree that it would be unwise to place your trust in a powerful blood mage without due trials.

[quote]
[quote]
Never said totally. I said about as effective as the Chantry's and the Templar's methods, meaning the Harrowing and the Circle. Please try to avoid putting words in my mouth.[/quote]

Apologies. They way oyu worded it it looked like oyu ment totaly.
Eitehr way, we don't really have a basis for comparison to say how effective those methods are.
[/quote]

Sorry about that. And apology accepted. I'll try to make my wording more clear in the future.

And true, we have no real numbers to go off of. I just make a general assumption based on how great a danger the Chantry claims abominations are and how much of a problem they were previous to Chantry controls. It appears to me that either the Chantry is not the only effective control against abominations or that abominations do not pose nearly as big a threat as the Chantry claims.

But this is just personal conjecture and there is not measurable evidence to support the claim as the events in DA:O are an insufficiant sampling. Making it impossible to draw accurate conclusions in either direction.

[quote]
[quote]
As the Templars at the Circle were incapable of dealing with Uldred and were mostly mind controlled en masse and eventually forced to lock him and the rest of them inside the Circle walls I doubt very much that the small (when compared to Templar forces at the Circle) contingent of Templars sent to accompany Uldred and the mages to Ostagar would have had any sort of ability to slay him. And the likelyhood of the entire army mobilizing quickly enough to deal with him would also be unlikely, especially since he retained the ability to mind control masses of people at once. Likely giving him more than enough cover to escape into the world.
[/quote]

Uldred wasn't alone in the tower, and he is in the middle of an army camp. Time to mobilize? He's sorounded by soldiers from all side. The nearest ones were a few feet away.

And why are you assuming it's Uldred that controlled everyone in the Circle? I don't think mind control is as simple as that. Besides, wasn't the veil torn/weakened in the Circle tower? Certanly paly a factor.

But I agree...useless speculation that gets us nowhere.
[/quote]

Yeah, there were a lot of factors to consider there. But I was under the impression that the possessed Uldred sundered the Viel in order to draw scores of demons through it. That he was the first card to tumble and so brought the entire circle crumbling around him. And all I was pointing out was that the Circle is a more stable house of cards than an army encampment out in the hills.

The likelyhood of him becoming possessed at Ostagar was clearly nonexistant... otherwise it would have happened.

I was just raising hypothetical questions for the sake of troubling the issue. Not meaning to imply the hypothrtical is the way things are.

[quote]
[quote]
That we know of, indeed. If mages become possessed and turn into abominations and no one ever hears about them... then are they a problem?[/quote]

That the player hears about. I never got the impression from the game and codexes that abomination hunts are a rare occurence.
[/quote]

I didn't get the impression that they were a common one either. I believe the game leaves the question ambiguous.

[quote]
[quote]
And we have no idea how organized or unorganized hedge mages could be or are as we have seen little evidence of their practices. Perhaps they are capable of rigid controls and securities. Perhaps they are organized. Just because we haven't seen them doesn't mean they aren't there, it just means they're doing their job and remaining invisible. Abominations don't really help people remain unseen and it would bequeath an organization intent on secrecy to have methods of dealing with such problems. It makes sense to me that these methods would exist, especially since the damages of possessed mages outside the Circle are so relatively minimal compared to the number of mages existing outside the Circle.[/quote]

Given their dispersal and methods of communication, a large, well-organized and effective prevention messure is impossible. Look at the Collective for an example - and they seem to put a lot of importance on following the chantry practices and security. And their way of dealing with blood mages or abomination is grossly ineffective. No way to get warning across fact. No way to organize a hunting/containment force quickly. No way to contain it quickly.
No telephons, no telepathy, no teleportation, mages spread over a huge area, and the fastest method of travel is a horse. It doesn't effectively work because it CANNOT effectively work.

And again - an abomination appearing does in no way implicate the Collective. No one knows from where the abomination has come, and most peopel dont' even know the collective exist. A rampagin abomination would little to destroy the secrecy of the organization - it would just be attribtued to a crazy blood mage or hedge wmage, as usual.
[/quote]

I did not mean to imply that the Collective is the best that free mages can offer. And I did not site them as an example of a clear and effective abomination control group outside the Chantry.

I agree that their organization seems largely ineffective. Though in truth we know very little about them outside of the favors they ask of outsiders. Perhaps that is not their go-to point to get problems solved but maybe their last ditch chance at it when others are incapable or unwilling to react. We don't really know for sure. That's the thing about secret organizations.

And I think you missed my point of abominations harming the interests of hedge mage groups. I did not mean to imply that an abomination would immediately reveal the location of a secret mage organization, but rather that such occurances would insense the general public and incourage the Templars to continually seek out and destroy apostates.

It would be in the hedge mage's interests, therefore, to prevent abominations from occuring, as the less they occur then the less Templars seek them out, and therefore the less Templars find the apostate groups.

Eliminating that, hedge mages would still hold a keen interest in anti-possession methods and steps as none of them wish to become possessed. It would therefore make sense for these groups to persue abominations securities for their own well being.

Regardless, mages outside the Chantry would certainly not ignore the abomination problem entirely and just let it occur whenever it did. Such does not serve them any purpose or good at all.

[quote]
[quote]
I never suggested that the Chantry is bad, what they do is bad, or that they are wrong in what they do in any regard.
[/quote]

I never said you did..nor was that quote directed at you.

[/quote]

Ah, haha. Can't blame me for taking it as such, can you?

But yes, I agree with Mr. Gaider in that. People tend to judge the Chantry poorly just because it is an organized religion. I personally do not think the entire organization should be destroyed as it does a lot more good than evil. I hold to the opinion that my choices in DA2 will largely revolve around Hawke's personal experiences with the Chantry. If the Templars of Kirkwall choose to give my sister Bethany a hard time for being an Apostate, you'd better believe I;m going to defend her.

[Vandicus]

Help them. They pay me to do jobs that help people. They don't do much evil in the world. They help in the case of Blights sometimes as a unifying banner. They DO do a lot of good in the world.



Honestly I'd probably only help them in the case of a job offer. They're a bit too preachy for me. On the other hand, to compare it to the other two major religions, the Tevintir Chantry and the Qun, its about the best that could be expected from me. I'd flat ouf refuse to help the Tevintir Chantry and in fact work against them when I could, while I'd actively try to destroy the Qun. I view the Tevintir Chantry as minorly harmful, a tool of political power that has relatively little effect as a mage heirarchy previously existed, while I view the Qun as a much more powerful tool that is used to dominate the lives of thousands of individuals, whether they like it or not. Its even worse than the dwarvish caste system. I mean at least in the dwarf caste system people had the opportunity to join the legion of the dead or marry into the nobility by virtue of fertility, not to mention the possible rise of Bhelen making a difference, but in the Qun a person's only hope would be to run away.



"Magic was created to serve man, not to rule over him." I say the same about religion. The Tevintir Imperium uses their Chantry as a justification for holding power, while the Qun is a crazy heirarchical system where people are extremely depersonalized and are in physical danger if they refuse to believe in it.

[Daerog]

LobselVith8 wrote...

DaerogTheDhampir wrote...

Riona45 wrote...

DaerogTheDhampir wrote...
As for the ruler of Fereldan saying the mages have earened their right to govern themselves, I just found that to be completely stupid, personally. I don't see how they did. There is a revolt, and then the mage Warden comes in to clean up. How does that mean they earned it? A senior enchanter led the revolt, someone who is part of running the Circle, and then someone who doesn't help run the Circle comes in to clean up. So, how did the Circle earn it?

Uh, they weren't talking about the debacle at the Circle, they were talking about the heroic deeds of the mage Warden.  I thought that was pretty obvious.

Sure the Warden has earned a boon and can ask for whatever s/he wants, I just didn't see why the ruler said the mages/Circle earned it. They helped in the Blight, sure, but mages/Circles have in every Blight since the Circle was formed.

In other words, the mages earned the right to be free four times prior to the Fifth Blight?

That is opinion. I don't think helping with the Blight means the Circle should be independent. I don't see how battling monsters means that they no longer need oversight. Then again, others will disagree, but that was just my opinion on the matter.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Mages governing the circle is a BAD idea for many reasons - but the chief one is that the people one the top can turn into abominations just as easily as any other mage. Abominations runing the Circle of Magi? Yes, great idea.

You mean like the Keepers presiding over the Dalish? Kolgrim and his ancestors presiding over the Disciples for hundreds of years? The Keepers of the Dales being mages? Or the ancient elven mages of Arlathan and Thedas? Yeah, apparently it works, so it is a great idea.

Kolgrim was a reaver, not a mage. The Reavers could have acted like the templars of that area for all we know. Don't know if the mages didn't have oversight in Arlathon. Keepers do preside over their respective dalish clans, but it is more like a handful of mages, not a huge population. There are currently hundreds/thousands of mages within the Circle of Magi, to just give them free reign is not the same thing as Keepers having power. The best example of mages running things is the Tevinter Imperium, which is also the example people will use against mages governing. It can happen, but the Tevinter Imperium is no paradise either.

Are you surprised that people living under tyranny want freedom? And you're comparing the police to templars?The police aren't drug addicts without any oversight, who openly discuss how much they like murdering the people they're presiding over.

Not all view it as tyranny. Some do, some don't. While the Libertarians are a very vocal group, there isn't much indicating that they are in the majority. The Templars do have oversight, I believe the Seekers oversee the different parts of the Chantry. Soldiers in modern day also talk about killing people with no negative feelings about it. I believe it is something of a coping mechanism. It is a part of their job, so some cope with it by joking about it in order to not focus on the part that they are taking human/elf life. There are plenty of templars who do care for the mages, and I'll point out Hadley as one.

LobselVith8 wrote...
The Dalish are also hunted by templars.

That's because they are technically apostates as long as they aren't in their own country.

According to the Dalish, they no longer have a country thanks to the Chantry.

Exactly, they don't have one, doesn't give them a free pass to break the law in the countries they roam in. Giving them their own land in DA:O is certainly a nice thing.

Modifié par DaerogTheDhampir, 30 septembre 2010 - 11:55 .

[Sir JK]

LobselVith8: My problem with those arguments is that you don't know they treat their mages better. All you see is that there have been no broken circle situation in the game and seem to use that as evidence that there they never have any problem whatsoever (or that's what it seems like, I do apologise if I'm interpreting you wrong) . But we can't know that.



If you argue that the collective/dalish are better for the sole fact that they don't restrict the freedom for mages as much, that I can accept. That's a fair and reasonable argument.



But saying that the templars are incompetent (especially since the only real comparison we have is the plot-armour protected warden, everyone looks incompetent next to the warden) and unnecessary is baseless claims. There is nothing at all that suggest they are either and/or that the other mage communities have better systems in place. You have no facts that support that at all. You may still hold that opinion of course, that's perfectly acceptable. But it's not supported by facts.

[ShrinkingFish]

Sir JK wrote...

LobselVith8: My problem with those arguments is that you don't know they treat their mages better. All you see is that there have been no broken circle situation in the game and seem to use that as evidence that there they never have any problem whatsoever (or that's what it seems like, I do apologise if I'm interpreting you wrong) . But we can't know that.

If you argue that the collective/dalish are better for the sole fact that they don't restrict the freedom for mages as much, that I can accept. That's a fair and reasonable argument.

But saying that the templars are incompetent (especially since the only real comparison we have is the plot-armour protected warden, everyone looks incompetent next to the warden) and unnecessary is baseless claims. There is nothing at all that suggest they are either and/or that the other mage communities have better systems in place. You have no facts that support that at all. You may still hold that opinion of course, that's perfectly acceptable. But it's not supported by facts.

Just a short commentary of "facts" within Dragon Age: Origins.

We, as players, have experienced very little of the world and know only what we have seen through the Warden's eyes. We only know the the world by way of the experiences of a single person. Or, if you wanted to include all the origins, we know extremely little of the world from six different, very limited, perspectives.

It is impossible to argue any facts outside the direct experience of the Warden, because everything outside this experience is left to conjecture. Keep in mind that nothing in the Codex can be treated as immutible fact as it was all written by people within the world and therefore are entirely scewed by the personal biases and agendas of the writers. All we have, really, is a large collection of opinions and points of view that we have the privilege of interpreting as we will.

As such this entire discussion is largely pointless because it deals almost entirely in hypotheticals. Arguments for methods of keeping the dangers of mages in check outside those of the Chantry are as legitimate as any denial that they exist as we do not know in either case.

They could exist. But that does not mean they do. We simply have no idea.

The absence of evidence is not, necessarily, the evidence of absence.

As such, these discussions disolve into arguments of opinion which can never be resolved. The arguments simply jump back and forth indefinitely because neither side has enough hard evidence to sway the opinions of their opposition as both side's arguments are based almost entirely on theories that lack sufficient proof to support them.

In summation: "facts" really have little bearing on these discussions. If facts governed the thinking and arguments of these exchanges then the exchanges would not be taking place at all. These are arguments of opinion and beliefs, neither of which require facts to support them (unfortunately) and can be created entirely within the mind of the believer.

[Riona45]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Riona45 wrote...

DaerogTheDhampir wrote...

Very true. I did say it was just my opinion at the end of my post as well.

I know.  I posted mainly to underline the point about the boon in question being specifically for a mage PC, because your post didn't really address that.  You mentioned that mages have helped in every Blight--true, but in the case of this Blight, the mage PC didn't just help, she played the pivotal role.  She was the one who made it possible to stop the Blight in such a short period of time.

PS:  The mage boon isn't the only case in which the Warden can ask to aid "their kind"--several other boons aim to do that as well.

Thank you for this post.

You're welcome!  I enjoyed writing it.

[Schneidend]

I resent only the Chantry's ridiculous amount of political power and the casual misuse thereof. I have nothing against most of the faithful, but when a Revered Mother has the audacity and hubris to think she can just say "nah" when a Grey Warden invokes the Right of Conscription, I tend to get upset. My Hawke will make certain the Chantry presence in Kirkwall keeps its hands out of secular matters.

[Lotion Soronarr]

LobselVith8 wrote...
And how incompetent the templars are at handling abominations.

Exceptions prove the rule.
And, just so we clear on this, their "faliure" is largely debatable.

Evn IF they did fail utterly, that hardly proves anything. Youd need more than one single example to prove a trend.

And Cullen mentions to the Mage Warden that he's heard many of his fellows talk about how much they enjoy killing people. The fact that templars have absolutely no oversight means that an emotionally unhinged Cullen can rule the Circle in fear if the Greagoir died and the Circle was culled.

You are like a broken record, repeating hte sme sentance again and again and again..like it will somehow make a difference if you repeat it a 100 times.
Both of those points have been adressed a dozen times by now.

You cna find bloodthirsty people in every military organization . it proves NOTHING.
You have no prrof templars have no oversight.
So NO and NO.

The enchanters have absolutely no say if the Knight-Commander says otherwise; like when Irving had to abide by Greagoir's edict in the Magi Origin.

What can Irwing do against evidence? There are rules and laws. A blood mage is either killed or made tranquil. Jowan knows this and was caught doing blood magic.
It's rather simple really.

[Lotion Soronarr]

LobselVith8 wrote...

We know all of them are still standing, we know abominations didn't destroy the world, we know that the Disciples and the Dalish clans have lived for centuries with mages among them, and no abominations have wiped either of them off the face of Thedas.

This proves nothing. You know too little to make such claims. We don't know how exactly they deal with the abominations, nor how many abominations happened and how big the death toll was...nor how many mages there were among the population.

No, they weren't destroyed - but that doesn't mean they weren't weakened or bloodied by occasional abomination attacks.
And who said Abominations will destroy all life and kill everyone? The fact the the Dalish and the Disciples are still there doens't mean there is no problem.
How do you know that every once and a while an abomination kills several dozens of them - not enough to destroy them, but enough to make it a serious problem. Or how do you know that some dalish clans were not destroyed by abominations?
You don't. We simply have too little data on this.

The possibility still exists, since anyone can be possessed (except dwarves).

It's like comparing a nuke to a regular tank shell, or comparing the chance of winning a lottery with the chance to guess heads or tails.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Ecept that many other Circle mages resist possesion too (mage warden among them), and that we readlly don't know has been happening ion hte last 900 years with the Dalish and  Disciples. For all we know, they could just let their abominations run loose in the countryside and let the templars take care of them.

So they pat the abominations on the head and wave them off while the abominations completely ignore everyone around them to go in the vicinity of some nearby templars? Really?

Yeah, asking a Grey Warden to help them is absolutely ridiculous. It's not like they saved the world four times over or anything like that...

I'm speechless...uranium has less density than you. IT DOES NOT MATTER.

Do you not realise that putting a wanted add is NOT EFFECTIVE?
The Warden may not have time or might not want to do. There is no guarantee the Warden will do anything or even look at the job bag. No guarantee he willl look at the job today or tomorrow or that he will do the job now or AT ALL. Reling fully on the skills and judgment of a compelte stanger is NOT effective, fast or smart.
They could jsut as well pray to the Maker

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 01 octobre 2010 - 07:54 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

LobselVith8 wrote...
How is the proclamation made by the ruler of all Ferelden, during the royal ceremony honoring the Mage Warden aka the Hero of Ferelden who saved the world from the Blight, irrelevant?

Because they're not really suited to making suchdecisions. It's like the president deciding the winner of the nobel prize - sure, he has the political power, but he really has no proper basis or knowledge to judge in the first place.

You mean like the Keepers presiding over the Dalish? Kolgrim and his ancestors presiding over the Disciples for hundreds of years? The Keepers of the Dales being mages? Or the ancient elven mages of Arlathan and Thedas? Yeah, apparently it works, so it is a great idea.

You mentioend the keepers twice....broken record.

You know too little to say how well it works. Also, you should really look into the concept of scale-out and see that some things that work on a small scale, do not work at a large scale.
Controling 2 mages and controling 100 - completely different.

Are you surprised that people living under tyranny want freedom? And you're comparing the police to templars?The police aren't drug addicts without any oversight, who openly discuss how much they like murdering the people they're presiding over.

Neither are the templars.
OR should I say - they are, but in your head only.

Hm..what would you say if I told you that police officers who use drugs nad like murdering perps exist??
SHOCK!!!!! POLICE IS TYRANTS!

*snip*

Blah, blah, blah...
David Gaider said it, ergo, it is Word of God. Deal with it.

[Lotion Soronarr]

ShrinkingFish wrote...
Exactly. Blood magic is mostly against the law because it threatens the power of the Chantry and the power of the various Monarchy's of the world. Blood mages can take direct control over individuals and so destabalize the systems of power erected around the operating organizations. It is in the interests of those who hold the power to outlaw blood magic because, above all else, they want to keep their power.

And just because an individual is a blood mage does not mean he cannot be trusted. It is entirely possible for an individual to hold that power and be trustworthy. It all depends on the individual. Though I do agree that it would be unwise to place your trust in a powerful blood mage without due trials.

I'd say the danger is begger than just kings and monarch. A blood mage may fancy that pesants wife and use mind control on her. EVERYONE is threatened by it. Worst of all, that pwoer is stealthy.
Do you trust that blood mage because you really trust him, or did he just use mind control on you so you consider him your best bud?

The abuse potential of such power is astronomical and intoxicating. Jowan didn't reach that level of power yet, but if he did, I 'm willing to bet it would corrupt him.

Nah, I can't think of any trials that would make me trust a blood mage.

And true, we have no real numbers to go off of. I just make a general assumption based on how great a danger the Chantry claims abominations are and how much of a problem they were previous to Chantry controls. It appears to me that either the Chantry is not the only effective control against abominations or that abominations do not pose nearly as big a threat as the Chantry claims.

Hm..don't know about that. Connor is a good example of hte amount of damage a single abomination cna cause. It's like  a ramapaging army - a whole, large and prosperous village destroyed, every mand, woman and child killed...and by a child abomination no less. Connor wasn't a powerfull mage...I shudder to think the damge if he was.

Granted, abomination like that might be rarer, but it's hard to say. There's nothing in the Codexes stating how often abominations occur and how deadly their attacks are in general.

Given that we have no "civilian death toll to abomination attacks" of before and after chantry control methods, we really don't have much to go on.
altough logic would dictate that Circle should reduce that number drasticly, given the containment.

Eliminating that, hedge mages would still hold a keen interest in anti-possession methods and steps as none of them wish to become possessed. It would therefore make sense for these groups to persue abominations securities for their own well being.

Regardless, mages outside the Chantry would certainly not ignore the abomination problem entirely and just let it occur whenever it did. Such does not serve them any purpose or good at all.

Of course. It's just that I doubt that their methods can be effective given the circumstances.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Schneidend wrote...

I resent only the Chantry's ridiculous amount of political power and the casual misuse thereof. I have nothing against most of the faithful, but when a Revered Mother has the audacity and hubris to think she can just say "nah" when a Grey Warden invokes the Right of Conscription, I tend to get upset. My Hawke will make certain the Chantry presence in Kirkwall keeps its hands out of secular matters.

Interesting thought here...hubris and ego...dont' Grey Wardens have one..where't you basicly thinking here "I'm a GREY WARDEN. How DARE she disrespect me? How DARE she say no to this? Everoyne sez I'm great! Everyone must allow me the Right of Conscription!"

Ironicly she uses the same mindset.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Well to be fair the codex says that Abominations are rare. Thankfully. But even though they are rare, one single abomination destroys an entire town (and shows intend to conquer the world on a sidenote), so the even the threat of one is terrible no matter how rare. Just imagine the ****storm Redcliffe would have been if it had beena Pride Demon, instead of a Desire Demon, who found Conner.

[ShrinkingFish]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

ShrinkingFish wrote...
Exactly. Blood magic is mostly against the law because it threatens the power of the Chantry and the power of the various Monarchy's of the world. Blood mages can take direct control over individuals and so destabalize the systems of power erected around the operating organizations. It is in the interests of those who hold the power to outlaw blood magic because, above all else, they want to keep their power.

And just because an individual is a blood mage does not mean he cannot be trusted. It is entirely possible for an individual to hold that power and be trustworthy. It all depends on the individual. Though I do agree that it would be unwise to place your trust in a powerful blood mage without due trials.

I'd say the danger is begger than just kings and monarch. A blood mage may fancy that pesants wife and use mind control on her. EVERYONE is threatened by it. Worst of all, that pwoer is stealthy.
Do you trust that blood mage because you really trust him, or did he just use mind control on you so you consider him your best bud?

The abuse potential of such power is astronomical and intoxicating. Jowan didn't reach that level of power yet, but if he did, I 'm willing to bet it would corrupt him.

Nah, I can't think of any trials that would make me trust a blood mage.

Fair enough. You don't have to trust them.

But I am not as convinced that the power would necessarily corrupt everyone who practiced it. There are plenty of examples of blood mages that did not abuse their power. And I'd bet the other way in terms of Jowan, I imagine he would never fall to that level of corruption.

I think the main reason so many mages become corrupt and evil through blood magic is simply because they set out to seize that power in the first place. They saw what blood magic could offer them and actively sought it out. I don't think it is necessarily true that power corrupts but definitely true that power attracts the corruptible. Jowan did not seek blood magic for that power, he sought it as a desperate attempt to avoid being made Tranquil. And his altruistic nature throughout the entire game suggest he is not so much the evil sort.

And yes, I agree that the dangers are indeed to everyone, I was just pointing out the "why" of it being illegal on a political scale, why the Chantry fears blood magic and why Kings and Queens would support the Chantry in this.

And true, we have no real numbers to go off of. I just make a general assumption based on how great a danger the Chantry claims abominations are and how much of a problem they were previous to Chantry controls. It appears to me that either the Chantry is not the only effective control against abominations or that abominations do not pose nearly as big a threat as the Chantry claims.

Hm..don't know about that. Connor is a good example of hte amount of damage a single abomination cna cause. It's like  a ramapaging army - a whole, large and prosperous village destroyed, every mand, woman and child killed...and by a child abomination no less. Connor wasn't a powerfull mage...I shudder to think the damge if he was.

Granted, abomination like that might be rarer, but it's hard to say. There's nothing in the Codexes stating how often abominations occur and how deadly their attacks are in general.

Given that we have no "civilian death toll to abomination attacks" of before and after chantry control methods, we really don't have much to go on.
altough logic would dictate that Circle should reduce that number drasticly, given the containment.

It is said however that an abomination's strength is not dependant on the strength of the mage but on the demon that possesses him and how apt that demon is at harnessing magical energies. Plus, Connor's example is an extraordinary one. This was when the armies and knights of that very same village were absent, the Arl himself was dieing, and there was literally no one but the servants to stand in the way of the abomination's power. Had the knights been present the damages would have been minimal as the majority of Connor's power seemed to be his ability to sunder the Viel and summon demons en mass to possess everyone within the castle walls. All the deaths were caused by these lesser demons that simply obeyed Connor's will. His personal power was significantly minimal, seemingly able to dominate the minds of lesser willed men and little else.

And yes, I would agree with you that the Circle would reduce the numbers drastically given the containment... but that is if they were not otherwise contained before. We don't know if before the Chantry mages and abominations were free wandering and randomly occuring dangers or if, previous to the Circle, other organizations also had methods of dealing with the abomination threat.

Granted, in the absence of knowledge of other methods of control, I default to the Chantry's methods. They seem affective given the current circumstances.

Eliminating that, hedge mages would still hold a keen interest in anti-possession methods and steps as none of them wish to become possessed. It would therefore make sense for these groups to persue abominations securities for their own well being.

Regardless, mages outside the Chantry would certainly not ignore the abomination problem entirely and just let it occur whenever it did. Such does not serve them any purpose or good at all.

Of course. It's just that I doubt that their methods can be effective given the circumstances.

Well... we don't really know the circumstances, do we? All we've seen is an outsiders perspecitive on a single fringe group. There are others... there must be. And we don't know what alternatives they offer.

My only point is perhaps there is an alternative method to mage control other than the Chantry's Circles. We simply do not know of any other way, besides the Qunari method (which if we're talking effectiveness of reducing public threat of mages I think they got it spot on), to protect the public from the dangers of mages as well as avoiding the inevitable abuses to mages themselves.

I am certainly not advocating a complete dissemination of the Circles and the Chantry's control over mages without any acceptable alternative in the offing. I ackowlendge that the Chantry is a (mostly) benevolent organization who only does what they feel in necessary, performing lesser evils for the sake of the greater good. The only thing I suggest is that if there is a better way, one less prone to abuses and corruption, then it is worth persuing.

Certainly the Chantry does not have a monopoly on what is right...

[ShrinkingFish]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Well to be fair the codex says that Abominations are rare. Thankfully. But even though they are rare, one single abomination destroys an entire town (and shows intend to conquer the world on a sidenote), so the even the threat of one is terrible no matter how rare. Just imagine the ****storm Redcliffe would have been if it had beena Pride Demon, instead of a Desire Demon, who found Conner.

Well... to be fair, I do not believe Connor would have been susceptable to a pride demon. His possession was a result of his desire to save his father's life. He made the deal with the demon in order to fix the demon's help in saving his father. This need made him vulnerable to the Desire Demon's manipulations. I do not believe a Pride Demon would have had the same hold on him.

And that leads to the ultimate protection against possession... the ideal mage is free from hunger, rage, desire, sloth and pride. If they have none of these things within them then demons will have no leverage to control them. It seems to be made clear that demons cannot simply force their way into a mage, but that the mage must be willing on some level to let the demon in. As evidence I site Uldred's actions in the Harrowing Chamber where he was forcing mages to accept the demons that possessed them. Free from the tendencies that these demons feed upon I imagine a mage would be quite safe from them.

So... this actually leads me to a new hypothesis. That the ideal containment for mages is that they are all shipped off to monestaries and become monks under the watchful eyes of the Templars. Once the mages become full fledges aesthetic monks then they can wander the world as they will. Reporting once every year to their monastery to meditations and spiritual inspection.

Also... I do believe the main reason the Chantry does not teach their mages to be monks but rather has them learn to shoot fire from their fingertips and heal grevious wounds in the heat of battle is because for them, the Chantry, the mages are another potential weapon to be harnessed and used as they see fit. To be unleashed, if you will, against the Chantry's enemies. Such as the Qunari, perhaps....

Edit: I might have to start my own thread with this theory.... what do you guys think?

Modifié par ShrinkingFish, 01 octobre 2010 - 10:17 .

[Herr Uhl]

Schneidend wrote...

I resent only the Chantry's ridiculous amount of political power and the casual misuse thereof. I have nothing against most of the faithful, but when a Revered Mother has the audacity and hubris to think she can just say "nah" when a Grey Warden invokes the Right of Conscription, I tend to get upset. My Hawke will make certain the Chantry presence in Kirkwall keeps its hands out of secular matters.

Like how you, the warden, meddle in politics?

[LobselVith8]

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

We know all of them are still standing, we know abominations didn't destroy the world, we know that the Disciples and the Dalish clans have lived for centuries with mages among them, and no abominations have wiped either of them off the face of Thedas. [/quote]

This proves nothing. You know too little to make such claims. We don't know how exactly they deal with the abominations, nor how many abominations happened and how big the death toll was...nor how many mages there were among the population. [/quote]

Haven is a populated town, the Dales nearly won against the Orlesians and only lost because other Andrastian nations got involved, the ancient elves were populated enough to live across Thedas, and the Dalish clans are spread across Thedas. Given the leadership role of the Keepers, who are mages, and Kolgrim's ability to know whether the Ashes were destroyed or not (which can we inferred to be magical) and Father Eirik being a mage, obviously alternatives to the Chantry and the templars work.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

No, they weren't destroyed - but that doesn't mean they weren't weakened or bloodied by occasional abomination attacks.
And who said Abominations will destroy all life and kill everyone? The fact the the Dalish and the Disciples are still there doens't mean there is no problem.
How do you know that every once and a while an abomination kills several dozens of them - not enough to destroy them, but enough to make it a serious problem. Or how do you know that some dalish clans were not destroyed by abominations?
You don't. We simply have too little data on this. [/quote]

Except the data we have illustrates that alternatives to the templars work, and that mages can live among non-mages. The Dales were a nation of mages and non-mages. Arlathan had mages and non-mages. Haven has mages and non-mages, and Eirik is an obvious example of a mage in a leadership position. The Dalish have mages as leaders. Many mages were among the Disciples, and Kolgrim may have had some magical ability as he can tell whether the Ashes were destroyed or not. There were ancient elves who were mages (Arcane Warriors). There are evident alternatives to the Chantry, but obviously support the Chantry model.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

The possibility still exists, since anyone can be possessed (except dwarves).[/quote]

It's like comparing a nuke to a regular tank shell, or comparing the chance of winning a lottery with the chance to guess heads or tails. [/quote]

Except that Arlathan, the Dales, the Disciples, and the Dalish have mages among them, and their alternative to the Chantry evidently works.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Ecept that many other Circle mages resist possesion too (mage warden among them), and that we readlly don't know has been happening ion hte last 900 years with the Dalish and  Disciples. For all we know, they could just let their abominations run loose in the countryside and let the templars take care of them. [/quote]

So they pat the abominations on the head and wave them off while the abominations completely ignore everyone around them to go in the vicinity of some nearby templars? Really?

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Yeah, asking a Grey Warden to help them is absolutely ridiculous. It's not like they saved the world four times over or anything like that...[/quote]

I'm speechless...uranium has less density than you. IT DOES NOT MATTER. [/quote]

So you respond with personal attacks because I disagree with you? Because unless you didn't notice, there have been others here who disagreed as well. If you can't keep your composure and debate this, let's simply end it. We obviously aren't going to agree on this issue.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Do you not realise that putting a wanted add is NOT EFFECTIVE?
The Warden may not have time or might not want to do. There is no guarantee the Warden will do anything or even look at the job bag. No guarantee he willl look at the job today or tomorrow or that he will do the job now or AT ALL. Reling fully on the skills and judgment of a compelte stanger is NOT effective, fast or smart.
They could jsut as well pray to the Maker

[/quote]

They were giving them to the Grey Warden of an order that has saved Thedas four times over. I'd warrant that they felt this was someone capable of handling it.


[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
How is the proclamation made by the ruler of all Ferelden, during the royal ceremony honoring the Mage Warden aka the Hero of Ferelden who saved the world from the Blight, irrelevant?[/quote]

Because they're not really suited to making suchdecisions. It's like the president deciding the winner of the nobel prize - sure, he has the political power, but he really has no proper basis or knowledge to judge in the first place. [/quote]

Rulers are not suited to make decisions about their own citizens?

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

You mean like the Keepers presiding over the Dalish? Kolgrim and his ancestors presiding over the Disciples for hundreds of years? The Keepers of the Dales being mages? Or the ancient elven mages of Arlathan and Thedas? Yeah, apparently it works, so it is a great idea.[/quote]

You mentioend the keepers twice....broken record.

You know too little to say how well it works. Also, you should really look into the concept of scale-out and see that some things that work on a small scale, do not work at a large scale.
Controling 2 mages and controling 100 - completely different. [/quote]

I mention them as they are an example of an alternative to the Chantry's methods. It works. And the Dales and Arlathan had more than two mages.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Are you surprised that people living under tyranny want freedom? And you're comparing the police to templars?The police aren't drug addicts without any oversight, who openly discuss how much they like murdering the people they're presiding over.[/quote]

Neither are the templars.
OR should I say - they are, but in your head only.

Hm..what would you say if I told you that police officers who use drugs nad like murdering perps exist??
SHOCK!!!!! POLICE IS TYRANTS! [/quote]

And I'm assuming you're going to add that they have no oversight and murder fourteen year old runaways?

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]
*snip*[/quote]

Blah, blah, blah...
David Gaider said it, ergo, it is Word of God. Deal with it.
[/quote]

You mean like the Architect having only one hand according to Gaider, but having two in the actual game? I guess you should've told them they can't do that because of the Word of God.
 
[quote]DaerogTheDhampir wrote...

That is opinion. I don't think helping with the Blight means the Circle should be independent. I don't see how battling monsters means that they no longer need oversight. Then again, others will disagree, but that was just my opinion on the matter. [/quote]

The opinion of the ruler of Ferelden, to be accurate, but historically, Arlathan, the Dales, the Disciples, the Dalish, none of them have Chantry oversight and they managed fine. They're the alternative, showing that mages can govern themselves/

[quote]DaerogTheDhampir wrote...

Kolgrim was a reaver, not a mage. The Reavers could have acted like the templars of that area for all we know. Don't know if the mages didn't have oversight in Arlathon. Keepers do preside over their respective dalish clans, but it is more like a handful of mages, not a huge population. There are currently hundreds/thousands of mages within the Circle of Magi, to just give them free reign is not the same thing as Keepers having power. The best example of mages running things is the Tevinter Imperium, which is also the example people will use against mages governing. It can happen, but the Tevinter Imperium is no paradise either.
[/quote]

Kolgrim also knew when the Ashes were destroyed, and it can be inferred it was by magical means. And the Dales had more than a handful of mages in their entire nation. So did Arlathan. There were elven mages who were Arcane Warriors, after all. And as I've cited many other examples than Tevinter, they aren't the best example: Arlathan, Dales, the Disciples, and the Dalish clans have had mages in leadership positions.

[quote]DaerogTheDhampir wrote...

Not all view it as tyranny. Some do, some don't. While the Libertarians are a very vocal group, there isn't much indicating that they are in the majority. The Templars do have oversight, I believe the Seekers oversee the different parts of the Chantry. Soldiers in modern day also talk about killing people with no negative feelings about it. I believe it is something of a coping mechanism. It is a part of their job, so some cope with it by joking about it in order to not focus on the part that they are taking human/elf life. There are plenty of templars who do care for the mages, and I'll point out Hadley as one. [/quote]

Are there any Seers in the Circle Tower? No. Only Greagoir, who has more authority than Irving. There's no one mages can turn to if templars abuse their authority, like an enraged Cullen does as Knight-Commander if the Circle is culled, ruling the Circle in fear. And as Cullen admits in the Magi Origin, some templars said they talk about it with glee, and given that the Mage Warden can state s/he thought all templars enjoyed killing mages, it's obviously a POV that some mages share.

[quote]DaerogTheDhampir wrote...

Exactly, they don't have one, doesn't give them a free pass to break the law in the countries they roam in. Giving them their own land in DA:O is certainly a nice thing.[/quote]

According to the Dalish, that's because of religious persecution by the Chantry, who sent in templars and started a war with them, then took their land.
 
[quote]Sir JK wrote...

LobselVith8: My problem with those arguments is that you don't know they treat their mages better. All you see is that there have been no broken circle situation in the game and seem to use that as evidence that there they never have any problem whatsoever (or that's what it seems like, I do apologise if I'm interpreting you wrong) . But we can't know that. [/quote]

I'm not saying they have no issues, I'm saying they have mages in leadership positions, so they serve as a working alternative to the Chantry's solution, which I find better than living under armored drug addicts who have no oversight. An insane Cullen can end up ruling the Circle in fear if the Circle is culled, after all.

[quote]Sir JK wrote...

If you argue that the collective/dalish are better for the sole fact that they don't restrict the freedom for mages as much, that I can accept. That's a fair and reasonable argument.

But saying that the templars are incompetent (especially since the only real comparison we have is the plot-armour protected warden, everyone looks incompetent next to the warden) and unnecessary is baseless claims. There is nothing at all that suggest they are either and/or that the other mage communities have better systems in place. You have no facts that support that at all. You may still hold that opinion of course, that's perfectly acceptable. But it's not supported by facts.[/quote]

You didn't see what that was in response to, did you? That statement was said in response to someone making a broad statement about mages being unable to control themselves, and I retorted that under that line of reasoning, the templars must be incompetent. In all seriousness, I don't see a point to this debate. No one is changing their stance. Plenty continue to extol the current method used on mages, and others see it as offensive. I have argued against the system used by the Chantry with the templars, and I've also argued that I'm not saying all templars are evil or anything of the sort. I'm arguing the same line of thought as Alistair and Anora: mages have earned the right to govern themselves.

[aaniadyen]

Hey guys, let's all convince ourselves we're right and everyone else is a raving idiot based off of information we assume is true!



Oh...you already beat me to it. Now I feel inadequate.

[ShrinkingFish]

aaniadyen wrote...

Hey guys, let's all convince ourselves we're right and everyone else is a raving idiot based off of information we assume is true!

Oh...you already beat me to it. Now I feel inadequate.

Welcome to the internets.

[EmperorSahlertz]

THe whole point about the Collective being inadequate is not that they ask the Warden. It is that they leave it up to the Warden who MIGHT NOT EVEN WANT TO HELP. What if the Warden declines? They are completely inadequate at handling their own affairs clearly, otherwise why bother asking for help.