57 réponses à ce sujet

[Xilizhra]

Do you think that the Circle of Magi should operate independently from the Chantry?

Simply put, I think they should, but I'm more interested in hearing other opinions.

[LobselVith8]

The Circle of Magi should be emancipated from the Chantry. There's no reason that these armed and armored drug addicts should be watching over men, women, and children. There are also examples in Thedas that show mages have lived among non-mages without Chantry involvement: The Dalish clans are lead by mages, and those mages descend from the leaders of Arlathan and the Dales. Rivain is said (in the codex written by Genitivi) to have mages in positions of authority. The Haven Chantry is lead by Father Eirik, and Kolgrim's knowledge about the Urn may possibly be a result of magical ability on his part. People want to be free - no person is going to accept being a thrall to an institution for any reason, and the incident at the Circle Tower is proof of that. The Chantry's current status of hunting down mages has conditioned any free mages to turn to blood magic and worse in order to survive against the templars that threaten them.

[Xilizhra]

This sums up my opinion rather more eloquently than I could be arsed to. Thanks.

[LobselVith8]

You're welcome!

[yangthecat]

I've always been for emancipation of the mages. Just because a person has an ability that might make them dangerous is not a good reason to lock them up.

[ejoslin]

It's also for the mages' protection, though. Wynne predicts for every child that is sent to the tower, another is murdered. Mages are truly hated.

[yangthecat]

It seems to me that locking up the people who murder mage children out of hatred would be a better way to protect them. Putting the criminals in jail rather than the victims.

It's the Chantry that preaches hatred and fear of mages, so I don't really buy that they are interested in protecting mages from the results of the fear and hatred they foment.

[LobselVith8]

ejoslin wrote...

It's also for the mages' protection, though. Wynne predicts for every child that is sent to the tower, another is murdered. Mages are truly hated.

Wynne also mentions in Awakening that the Chantry would commit genocide against the mages if they couldn't control them.

[ejoslin]

yangthecat wrote...

It seems to me that locking up the people who murder mage children out of hatred would be a better way to protect them. Putting the criminals in jail rather than the victims.
It's the Chantry that preaches hatred and fear of mages, so I don't really buy that they are interested in protecting mages from the results of the fear and hatred they foment.

They don't exactly have that kind of system of law and order in place.  You have your military, most of whom hate the mages as much as the local populace.  Lords may distribute justice, but at the same time, they have to keep their people happy.

Not to mention that mages really can be a threat.  Wynne got caught, WYNNE, when she set a boy on fire.  She's not even sure how it happened.

Edit: Besides, does anyone ever suggest abolishing the circle or not locking mages up?  I don't think so.  The closest you get is Alistair/Anora may grant the boon to ask the chantry to grant the Ferelden circle autonomy.  But as far as I know, they're still going to lock mages up there and stuff.  But they would be given the chance to police themselves.

But it would never happen anyway.

Modifié par ejoslin, 20 octobre 2010 - 08:01 .

[Aeowyn]

And people hate mages because of the Chantry. I'd imagine most common folk aren't that well educated and most people who aren't well educated usually fear that which they don't understand. The Chantry keeps spewing out propaganda that all mages are dangerous and that they need to be locked up.

Are all mages dangerous? No

Can mages become dangerous? Yes

But locking a mage in a Tower with minimum freedom usually makes them more inclined to actually break free. So they desire a life in freedom, "oh hey its a desire demon".

Sure the Tower is good in the way that they learn to control their magic and are able to study, but it is my opinion that they should have the option to leave if they so wished.

Truly they are fighting fire with fire here.

[ejoslin]

Aeowyn wrote...

And people hate mages because of the Chantry. I'd imagine most common folk aren't that well educated and most people who aren't well educated usually fear that which they don't understand. The Chantry keeps spewing out propaganda that all mages are dangerous and that they need to be locked up.
Are all mages dangerous? No
Can mages become dangerous? Yes
But locking a mage in a Tower with minimum freedom usually makes them more inclined to actually break free. So they desire a life in freedom, "oh hey its a desire demon".
Sure the Tower is good in the way that they learn to control their magic and are able to study, but it is my opinion that they should have the option to leave if they so wished.
Truly they are fighting fire with fire here.

Regardless of whom's to blame, things are the way they are.  Unless the religion is willing to undergo dramatic changes (and there's no indication that it is), then mages will continue to need protection.

Then you have the problem that many mages like living in the tower and the way things are.  SO you have the religion of the land, the local populace, AND quite a few of the mages supporting the system.  It's a system that protects mages as well as imprisons them.

And you point out that they educate and take care of the mages.  They're not starved, beaten, it doesn't seem abuse would be tolerated -- at least, not within the circle (templars hunting apostates is another thing).  The system is not all bad.

Actually, the Chantry is such a mix of good and bad, it really is surprising.  You can't paint it as good OR evil.  For all the bad things you can name, you can counter with good.

[Aeowyn]

Yes, but still there should be an option for the mages who want to leave, to leave.

[ejoslin]

Aeowyn wrote...

Yes, but still there should be an option for the mages who want to leave, to leave.

It couldn't happen without a massive social upheaval.  Even if they wouldn't be hunted by the chantry, they would have to live in hiding.

[yangthecat]

ejoslin wrote...

yangthecat wrote...

It seems to me that locking up the people who murder mage children out of hatred would be a better way to protect them. Putting the criminals in jail rather than the victims.
It's the Chantry that preaches hatred and fear of mages, so I don't really buy that they are interested in protecting mages from the results of the fear and hatred they foment.

They don't exactly have that kind of system of law and order in place.  You have your military, most of whom hate the mages as much as the local populace.  Lords may distribute justice, but at the same time, they have to keep their people happy.

Not to mention that mages really can be a threat.  Wynne got caught, WYNNE, when she set a boy on fire.  She's not even sure how it happened.

Edit: Besides, does anyone ever suggest abolishing the circle or not locking mages up?  I don't think so.  The closest you get is Alistair/Anora may grant the boon to ask the chantry to grant the Ferelden circle autonomy.  But as far as I know, they're still going to lock mages up there and stuff.  But they would be given the chance to police themselves.

But it would never happen anyway.

I'm taking this discussion as purely theoretical, not practical. I know there is another discussion on elsewhere about the boon and its implementation, but I'm just talking about the justice of locking people up who haven't committed any crime.
While mages are potentially dangerous I don't believe the potential for harm justifies a life imprisonment sentence. Certainly mage children should be schooled to learn to control their powers so they don't accidentally set people on fire, but keeping them locked up forever once they have learned self-control is not justified.
As for the protection argument, people hate mages because the Chantry has taught people to fear and hate mages. Certainly just letting them all free suddenly would probably cause a backlash against the freed mages. But if people were allowed to have mages as neighbors and friends and see that they don't go around turning people into toads for no reason, they would come to hate them less, and there would be fewer lynchings.

[Brockololly]

ejoslin wrote...

Aeowyn wrote...

Yes, but still there should be an option for the mages who want to leave, to leave.

It couldn't happen without a massive social upheaval.

[Aigyl]

I agree that mages should be allowed to police themselves and the templars should be told to leave, or at least only have a minor say in the running of the Circle and keep a few around in case of a random abomination - basically the Mage boon.

Buuuut, to be honest I have to agree that for the most part, mages need to be kept away from the populace, for both party's safety. If my next-door neighbour could set me on fire with a flick of a hand if he were to lose his temper, or be at risk of turning into an abomination at any moment and mindlessly slaughter my family and friends, I'd be a tad nervous. Likewise I wouldn't be surprised if an angry frightened mob showed up at his house one night and he was murdered in the confusion because people would naturally fear what could happen, even if the mage was a very self-controlled nice guy.

So yeah, I do think the Circle towers are necessary. The Chantry's iron grip on them and the Rite of Tranquility are another matter.

[Riona45]

ejoslin wrote...

Wynne predicts for every child that is sent to the tower, another is murdered.

And how would Wynne know if that was accurate?  She's not omniscient.  She's also a bit biased--she not only sees the tower as "home" (and apparently pretty much always has), she also doesn't seem to understand why other mages wouldn't.

Modifié par Riona45, 21 octobre 2010 - 02:47 .

[Patchwork]

The thing of it is most mages would stay in the tower of their own free will it's basic human nature to stay with the 'pack'. Once they've passed their Harrowing why not let them go if they choose to go? Otherwise what is the point of an ultimate test if the result is continued imprisonment?

In the Tower is an acceptance mages would struggle to find elsewhere. It's the lack of choice in the matter, of only being allowed to go outside, to walk the grounds even, if your good little Chantry drone, which makes the Tower intolerable. That and being stared at by lyrium addled soldiers conditioned to hate and fear everything you are.

[Maria13]

Should it not be possible to 'test' the mages that wish to be set free prior to releasing them if they pass? A sort of probation board if you will, it seems to me that only very few are going to be a danger to others...

And the rite of tranquility should be outlawed, especially since the Chantry seems to benefit financially from the Formari's skills with lyrium...

Modifié par Maria13, 21 octobre 2010 - 12:37 .

[ejoslin]

Hmmm, though the numbers Wynne quotes are speculative, she does speak convincingly of the lynch mobs.



I do have to wonder, are mages in the tower really in danger from the templars? You hear nothing of the mages there being mistreated. Apostates, yeh, but not the mages in the tower.



I do wonder if the Chantry would hesitate to have a Divine March against Ferelden if they seriously pushed the issue of granting the circle autonomy. You know if Orzammar allows a circle to be formed (interesting how mages themselves will form a circle) they even contemplate one against Orzammar, which would be very VERY bad for the Chantry.



I also wonder how much threat a autonomous circle would be. There are ambitious people everywhere, and if the Circle was able to rise up... You just best hope that the person who they're following is not too evil or insane.

[Xilizhra]

Hm. Social upheaval would be a good thing indeed; perhaps some sort of crisis that mages were uniquely qualified to deal with? Or would it take something else?

[Aeowyn]

Hm ejoslin. Maybe not in the game, but I quote from Gaider's The Calling:



"They [the templars] were far more interested in gloweing at any younger mages who passed by. He'd seen two, one not much younger than himself, and another a girl who couldn't have been more than ten years old. They had nervously walked by one of the heavily armored templars and the man had all but spit on them. Both of them had squealed in fear, cluthing their leather tomes to their chests as they ran off. The templar had chortled with amusement."



Sure it doesn't prove that all templars are that way, but obviously a lot of mages just want to live in freedom. Wynne is very much biased, and she disapproves when the PC says that they are glad to be rid of the Circle.

Let's take Anders for example. He escaped 7 times and eventually says that he wouldn't be surprised if they would've branded him as a maleficar so they could execute him. And why, because he wanted to live away from the Circle?

The Harrowing is a test in itself, to see if the mage has a strong enough mind to resist demons. I think that after they have completed the Harrowing they should be able to choose. And alot of common people wouldn't be able to tell the difference between a mage and a non-mage.

Yes there is the risk that some just want more power, but isn't there always that kind of risk no matter where you look?

[ejoslin]

Except the mages are far more powerful than anyone else in game.

I'm going to assume that Uldred and the blood mages following him had passed their Harrowing.

Maybe Gregoir keeps better control over his templars. Because there is nothing in the game that indicated that the mages were afraid of the templars.

Demons are drawn to mages because of their connection to the fade I would assume.

I'm not saying ALL mages want to stay within the circle. What I said was this:

Non-mages want mages locked up.
Many mages also feel that they're a danger and most need to be locked up (*cough* Wynne).
Mages themselves are in danger from local populaces when discovered.
Mages have an awful lot of power, and cannot always control it.
In the one city where Mages can really be outside of Chantry control, they themselves form a circle rather than living among the dwarves.

Mages also seem to have a bit more freedom of movement. There are things in game that indicate that they're prisoners, but others that indicate that not all of them actually are. Zevran talks about the mage he's sent to assassinate in his second mission -- presumably she's not kept in the mage tower as she had enough freedom to meddle in politics. Howe has mages working directly for him. Wynne is always seeking ways to leave the tower.

Edit: Formatting

Modifié par ejoslin, 21 octobre 2010 - 01:12 .

[Tigress M]

Xilizhra wrote...
Do you think that the Circle of Magi should operate independently from the Chantry?

Yes.  I do not believe the same organization that touts the evils of magic should be in control of said magic.  That's about as biased as you can get.  

However, I do believe there needs to be some body capable of policing the mages, ie, the Templars, who are trained in combating them.  But, mages should not be locked up for their "protection"; that reeks of racial discrimination arguments that were so prevalent here in the US in the much too recent past.  

To me, it's a vicious spiral:

Chantry touts the evils of magic, which
alarms the common people, thereby
putting the mages in danger, which
allows the Chantry to step in and "save" the mages with the backing of the entire nation, which results in
the mages being locked up, which leads to
mage disgruntlement, thereby
causing mages to seek freedom, which results in
apostates - both those fleeing the circle as well as those never joining the circle, which can lead to
untrained and uncontrollable mages who become possessed, which...
just goes to "prove" that magic is evil.  

(rinse and repeat)

Yes, there should be a place mages can go to learn to control their power.  Yes, there should be Templars (not run by the Chantry though) who can take down a rogue mage.  But no, mages outside the tower should not be hunted down like rabid dogs unless they have brought harm to others.  

[Dean_the_Young]

Racial discrimination in the US wasn't based on the fact that any given black person was capable of boiling anyone's blood at will or could on any given bad day or in bad straights might lose or trade control and become a WMD attacking the populace.



Conner wasn't even a trained mage, and certainly wasn't malevolent, and he nearly destroyed Redcliffe, and more.





Everyone has very good basis for fearing mages in general. And mages have basis for fearing the public as well. Don't akin that to a system based on lesser measures due to skin color and assumed inferiority.