74 réponses à ce sujet

[philiposophy]

I think I understand why blood magic is castigated the way it is, but I do not believe that it is fair that it is treated in the manner that it is.

Here's why I think it is hated:

1. The link to Tevinter. The Magisters were the first it seems to master blood magic and they built their empire on it. This link explains not only why mages in general are feared by the populace but also why blood mages in particular are looked upon as evil. The (ab)use of it by such brutal tyrants has left a lasting impression upon Thedas.

2. In the Chant of Light, Andraste says famously "magic exists to serve man, and never to rule over him." I believe this explains why Templars and the Chantry see blood magic as especially evil - because it can control minds. If blood magic was used to this effect, it would be "magic ruling over man" rather than serving him.


Now, my own view is that blood magic isn't especially less dangerous than "acceptable" spells that include setting people alight, freezing them solid and causing earthquakes. Singling it out like this seems mighty unfair. I also think that the use of it is an extremely important thing. A blood mage like Jowan uses his own blood to power his spells, as will any Wardens who take the specialization. Casting certain spells, namely the healing ones, with one's own lifeforce powering it is actually an extremely selfless thing to do, but this sort of thing will never be appreciated while the standard reaction to the mere mention of blood magic is abject horror and demand for death.


This post is based on something I posted on the Character Discussion Forum thread on blood magic. Y'all are welcome to join us there!

/shameless promotion

Modifié par philiposophy, 22 novembre 2010 - 11:34 .

[Mnemnosyne]

atunnei wrote...

My issue is Blood Magic is wrong, but being a necromancer and animating the dead is ok?

It's my understanding that spells that animate the dead in Thedas simply animate remains like a puppet.  They don't bind the dead person's soul to their body, nor do they summon another spirit/demon to inhabit the corpse.  In that case it's not really doing anything bad.

[TanithAeyrs]

Just to throw out another thought, neither the Wardens nor the Dalish seem to have any particular problem with blood magic. I have played characters on both sides of the blood magic is evil/is okay spectrum and was able to justify both. Personally, I think my Dalish Warden may have the best view - it is simply another tool - how you use it is as important as if you use it.

[naledgeborn]

philiposophy wrote...

I think I understand why blood magic is castigated the way it is, but I do not believe that it is fair that it is treated in the manner that it is.

Here's why I think it is hated:

1. The link to Tevinter. The Magisters were the first it seems to master blood magic and they built their empire on it. This link explains not only why mages in general are feared by the populace but also why blood mages in particular are looked upon as evil. The (ab)use of it by such brutal tyrants has left a lasting impression upon Thedas.

2. In the Chant of Light, Andraste says famously "magic exists to serve man, and never to rule over him." I believe this explains why Templars and the Chantry see blood magic as especially evil - because it can control minds. If blood magic was used to this effect, it would be "magic ruling over man" rather than serving him.


Now, my own view is that blood magic isn't especially less dangerous than "acceptable" spells that include setting people alight, freezing them solid and causing earthquakes. Singling it out like this seems mighty unfair. I also think that the use of it is an extremely important thing. A blood mage like Jowan uses his own blood to power his spells, as will any Wardens who take the specialization. Casting certain spells, namely the healing ones, with one's own lifeforce powering it is actually an extremely selfless thing to do, but this sort of thing will never be appreciated while the standard reaction to the mere mention of blood magic is abject horror and demand for death.


This post is based on something I posted on the Character Discussion Forum thread on blood magic. Y'all are welcome to join us there!

/shameless promotion

This.
I think it's the notoriety of the Old Tevinter Imperium that's f---ed up Blood Magic and magic in general for all mages. I get the impression that most mages would be isolationists anyway if given the chance, Niall and Jowan being examples in this case. And you bring up an excellent point, the Blood Mage healer is the most selfless of all mages. You've inspired me to make an new character.

[Face of Evil]

I've heard the argument that blood magic is no worse or dangerous than any other form of magic. Except that's not really true. Blood magic is effectively a cheat code for mages.

Here's the thing: normal magic relies on the use of mana. No matter how skilled a mage is, eventually they run out of mana and have to chug a lyrium potion to replenish their mana. But no one can carry an unlimited number of lyrium potions, and as such, normal magic has a limit.

Blood magic gets around that limitation by allowing the mage to substitute health for life force. Which may not sound so bad, but since blood mages can take the life force of others without their consent, that means their power is effectively limitless with a sufficient number of slaves.

No, nothing requires it to be used in that way, but how often does that kind of power not lead to corruption? We can discuss theoretical example of "good" blood magic healers all you want, but currently all the historical evidence points to the evils of blood magic, which has been used time and time again to fuel some of the worst atrocities in history.

Even if you don't believe that the Chantry's version of how the darkspawn were created, it is historical fact that blood magic was used to destroy Arlathan and oppress the elves. Within the game itself, the use of blood magic led to the demonic invasion of Warden's Keep, the creation of Zathrian's werewolf curse and the Baroness' crimes against the people of the Blackmarsh. None of these things would have been possible without blood magic.

Factor in the mind control and the association with demons, and you can see why the Chantry's fears about blood magic are entirely justified.

Modifié par Face of Evil, 28 novembre 2010 - 10:52 .

[IanPolaris]

Face of Evil wrote...

Factor in the mind control and the association with demons, and you can see why the Chantry's fears about blood magic are entirely justified.

No it's not.  In many of the cases you cite (esp the more recent ones), it's the Chantry's brain-dead revulsion to any magic they 'label' as blood-magic (whether it really is or isn't) as the true root of the problem.  For example, the Malificar you capture during the Tower Quest has a perfect response to Wynne when Wynne says (re blood magic) that some things are never worth the cost.  She (the malificar) says, "You don't really believe that do you Wynne?  Change rarely comes without bloodshed.  Andraste didn't write the Tevinter Imperium a sternly worded letter.  She freed the slaves, toppled the Imperium, and gave us the Chantry, but people died for it."

The point here was that Uldred's revolt happened BECAUSE the Chantry tried to stifle all blood magic instead of regulating it, and as such give Uldred a perfect way to form a powerful underground within the circle using magic that no one else (other than your blood-mage warden) knows how to counter.

The tragedy in Redcliff is similiar.  Had the Chantry not villified magic so harshly and for so long, Isolde wouldn't have felt afraid of admitting that her son was a mage and getting him the proper training openly.  Instead she tried to hide it.....with perfectly predictable and 'unfortunate' consequences.

I could go on and on and on, but honestly the only nation that has a rational approach to magic and how to regulate it is Tevinter.  It's not blood magic that's evil and the Chant of Light doesn't in fact say so (the Chantry merely MISinterprets certain stanzas to say so).  Rather it's the mind control that blood magic permits that is evil according to the chant of light, and in this the Imperial Chantry has it right (and the regular chantry is shooting itself in the foot).

Eventually the Libertarians are going to take over a critical mass of Mage Circles and then we will see a civil war between the Mages and the Chantry (possibly with Orzammar siding with the Mages) and that will be really, really, ugly.

-Polaris

[Face of Evil]

IanPolaris wrote...

The point here was that Uldred's revolt happened BECAUSE the Chantry tried to stifle all blood magic instead of regulating it, and as such give Uldred a perfect way to form a powerful underground within the circle using magic that no one else (other than your blood-mage warden) knows how to counter.

Uh, no. The revolt in the Circle of Magi tower came as a result of the Chantry's oppression of mages, not blood magic. The rebellious mages only turned to blood magic as a means to an end, as it gave them the power to fight back.

You are confusing the two issues. Whether or not the Chantry is right to treat mages as they do is an entirely separate debate from the restrictions on blood magic, and it's too dangerous to allow anyone to freely use it.

I consider the Chantry's restrictions on mages to be too harsh, but I support their ban on blood magic. There is no reason any mage HAS to practice blood magic.

IanPolaris wrote...

The tragedy in Redcliff is similiar.  Had the Chantry not villified magic so harshly and for so long, Isolde wouldn't have felt afraid of admitting that her son was a mage and getting him the proper training openly.  Instead she tried to hide it.....with perfectly predictable and 'unfortunate' consequences.

Again, that has nothing to do with the rights and wrongs of blood magic, and I'd hardly call her son making a deal with a demon that in turn raised an undead army a "perfectly predictable" consequence.

IanPolaris wrote...

Eventually the Libertarians are going to take over a critical mass of Mage Circles and then we will see a civil war between the Mages and the Chantry (possibly with Orzammar siding with the Mages) and that will be really, really, ugly.

Orzammar is in no position to fight the Chantry and open revolt by the mages will result in their mass slaughter. What you will see is a bloodbath.

But again, that is an entirely separate debate.

Modifié par Face of Evil, 28 novembre 2010 - 11:03 .

[IanPolaris]

Face of Evil,



Other than mind-control, there is nothing intrinsic about blood magic that a priori makes it more evil than any other kind of magic. In fact I could even make a case that mind-control magic can be good under the correct circumstances. There is no reason you can't play a good and ethical blood mage but the chantry refuses to recognize this! (The Imperial Chantry OTOH does recognize this).



Do I think that Blood Magic is more dangerous and more prone to abuse than normal magic? Absolutely.



Do I think that Blood Magic should be forbidden from those that haven't proven they can handle it? Absolutely.



Do I think it should be banned without question especially with the brain-dead way the Chantry is doing it? Absolutely not.



Blood magic needs to be controlled an regulated both by Templars (after being reformed themselves) and by other practicioners of blood magic. Only the strongest willed and best trained Mages should be permitted to use it, but it shouldn't be banned....especially since it's far too tempting if it is for precisely those mages that shouldn't have it in the first place.



I am not conflating the anti-Blood Magic stance with the anti-Magic stance of the Chantry. If anyone is doing that it's the Chantry itself which probably wants to ban all magic because they probably (in their hearts) consider all magic to be blood magic but can't quite pull that out.



As for Orzammar, it has it's own fortified locations, thousands of trained soldiers, it's own independant supply of Lyrium and strong alliances with many human nations and groups such as Fereldan and the Grey Wardens.....AND they control the lyrium that the Chantry needs for it's own Templars.



If Orzammar gives refuge to mages during a Libertarian Schism invoking an Exalted March, it's by no means guaranteed that the Chantry would win. The Dwarves have many advantages (esp with Bhelen as king) that the Elves of the Dales did not....



-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

Face of Evil wrote...
Again, that has nothing to do with the rights and wrongs of blood magic, and I'd hardly call her son making a deal with a demon that in turn raised an undead army a "perfectly predictable" consequence.

I would.  So would Morrigan and pretty much every other non-Malificar but Apostate Mage.  Jowan is exactly the sort of person that should NOT have been executed just for dabbling in blood magic.  That doesn't mean he should be permitted to continue his studies (he's not the sort of mage you want with blood magic), but I defy anyone to call Jowan evil just becasue he's a blood mage.  An borderline idiot, perhaps, but fundamentally a good person, and this is exactly why the chantry is far too heavy handed even with blood magic.

If Jowan were punished for learning bloodmagic (but not to death), he wouldn't have been available for Isolde to hire (and Logain to corrupt/extort).

If Jowan weren't available, Conner wouldn't have been in a half-trained state that gave him just enough talent to summon a demon in his dreams during a point of crisis when his father was poisoned....a weakness that demons look for in all mages.

So by getting half-baked improper training because Isolde wanted to "protect' her son, and then having him thrust into a highly stressful sitution, the result was as predictable as gravity.  The young Conner took the easy way out to help his father likely because he truly wasn't aware of the danger and didn't have the strength or training to resist even if he did.

Isolde is primarily responsible for what happened at Redcliff, but the Chantry is also to blame.

-Polaris

[BHRamsay]

IanPolaris wrote...

For example, the Malificar you capture during the Tower Quest has a perfect response to Wynne when Wynne says (re blood magic) that some things are never worth the cost.  She (the malificar) says, "You don't really believe that do you Wynne?  Change rarely comes without bloodshed.  Andraste didn't write the Tevinter Imperium a sternly worded letter.  She freed the slaves, toppled the Imperium, and gave us the Chantry, but people died for it."

-Polaris

I've always found her rant and the one delivered by Avernus to be a tad self-serving. She's killed Maker Knows how many including apprentices and assorted Tower personell who's only crime was being in the wrong place at the wrong time and instead of owning her choices she hides behind a soft argument that lets her whitewash her guilt. Avernus does the same thing. It speaks to a certain weakness of character no doubt the same weakness that allowed them to be tempted to commit their various crimes in the first place.

If Andraste was anything like Joan of Arc (and we are hit over the head with the comparison so often she might as well be) she went to her death with WAY more dignity then does our morally murky bloodmage slash wannabe revolutionary. Uldred has the right of it, better she and her fellows died then have to live with the terrible burden of responsability.

Avernus squats up in in his tower feeding on his own ego after rejecting the Chantry's Dogma but all that he's really done is give himself permission to commit acts of staggering brutality and cowerdice. The man did some questionable things but rather then own HIS choices he's conjured a moral framwork that lets him look down his nose at anyone who might want to call him on his crap.

Say what you will about Wynne and others who spout chantry dogma, Wynne doesnt use her power to torture and kill Dog or Alister to create some minor spell or nor does she grovel and beg for your pity or understanding after trying to kill you. On both occasions when she can and will try and end your life she makes it very clear why she is doing it and she does it knowing full well what the end result might be.

Wynne owns her choices both good and not so good.

Modifié par BHRamsay, 28 novembre 2010 - 05:35 .

[Wulfram]

I don't see anything in Blood magic that makes it worth getting on the bad side of the Chantry for. Unless you have a King who needs mind controlling, anyway.



Whether it's actually particularly dangerous or evil I'm open to further evidence of.

[BHRamsay]

Blood Magic by itself might not be evil but the people who use it and promote its use seems to be Not-of-the-good.

Of course that can be said about all magic -- and no doubt is said, judging by the way the Chantry lowers the boom anyone who gives even the HINT of straying off the path.



I will add my voice to the chorus of those who hope DA2 will further the debate. Maybe if we can see some genuinely good people using blood magic that might blunt the impression we have thus far had that blood magic use = bad mage.

[naledgeborn]

I see a lot of Chantry sympathizers here. I myself got nothing against the Andrastian dogma but the oppressive regime exploiting it is no better than Maleficarum. And if anyone for one second would think that a Divine or Revered Mother, ect. knew that the future of the Chantry and their power was between a rock and a hard place and hung in the hands of a Blood Mage and that they wouldn't turn to it is extremely naive. The Chantry wouldn't flinch or hesitate in using Blood Magic if they knew it would procure it power and followers.

Modifié par naledgeborn, 28 novembre 2010 - 06:25 .

[BHRamsay]

I don't know about anyone else but I' consider myself less a Chantry Sympathizer then a Chantry Apologist.



Maybe naledgeborn will get to see his scenario play out in DA2 I don't see Hawk becoming the great leader and Champion he/she is supposed to be without dealing with the intrigues of the Chantry.

[Reika]

I prefer to keep my head down when it comes to the Chantry, but given my druthers would slowly enact change. Unless you can get a sympathetic Revered Mother or Grand Cleric to go all Martin Luther on the main Chantry in Val Royeaux.

[BHRamsay]

Yet another reason I am eager to help Dagna of Orzamarr. her acceptance into the circle creates just the type of change your talking about.



... and lets face it, the threat of a exalted march seems kind of toothless when you realize such an act would mean fighting Orzamarr's entire Warrior caste on their own turf backed up by all the apostates who have taken shelter in the Orzamarr circle. ... the phrase that comes to mind is BLOODBATH.

[Mnemnosyne]

Dwarves don't exactly have a lot of forces to spare.  Their military forces are pretty much fully occupied with fighting the darkspawn at all times, and apparently defending themselves from each other.  Admittedly, they could probably shut their doors and keep out any human army sent after them.  Question then would be how prepared they are for years of siege.  One of the members of the Assembly mentions that half their houses would go bankrupt without the surface trade, or something to that effect, which makes it sound as though Orzammar is in no position to have their access to the surface cut off for an extended period of time.  It seems likely the dwarves would kick the mages right out if the Chantry actually took military action against them, because the mages probably aren't doing enough for the dwarves to justify standing up to that kind of pressure.

Their only bargaining chip may be their control of lyrium, which may or may not be a strong bargaining chip, depending on how crucial it is for the lyrium to keep flowing.  If the Chantry has sufficient stockpiles to keep their templars well-supplied for the duration, then that bargaining chip is almost meaningless.  It also depends on whether the Chantry has any trade with Kal-Sharok established.  If they do, then Orzammar doesn't have complete control of the lyrium trade, and has no strong bargaining chip at all.

[IanPolaris]

BHRamsay wrote...

Say what you will about Wynne and others who spout chantry dogma, Wynne doesnt use her power to torture and kill Dog or Alister to create some minor spell or nor does she grovel and beg for your pity or understanding after trying to kill you. On both occasions when she can and will try and end your life she makes it very clear why she is doing it and she does it knowing full well what the end result might be.

Wynne owns her choices both good and not so good.

No she doesn't.  Wynne is a class 1 hypocrit that does stab your warden in the back, does make horrific and hypocritical decisions, and willingly risks all of Fereldan and even all of Thedas if you (the warden) don't happen to match up with her unrealistic expectations.  Be a blood mage and make the GOOD choices and save the circle (with the original dialog enabled) and you see just how sweet and understanding a person Wynne really is who would never force others to her will....NOT!

Don't hold Wynne up as a paragon of virtue.  She is anything but, and IMHO she might well be a pride-abomination that doesn't even realize it.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

BHRamsay wrote...

Blood Magic by itself might not be evil but the people who use it and promote its use seems to be Not-of-the-good.

Jowan was not a fundamentally good person?

Please.

-Polaris

[Wulfram]

Jowan was a fundamentally idiotic person. I shudder to think of him being allowed to use normal magic, let alone blood magic.

[naledgeborn]

IanPolaris wrote...
Don't hold Wynne up as a paragon of virtue.  She is anything but, and IMHO she might well be a pride-abomination that doesn't even realize it.
-Polaris

*round of applause*

[IanPolaris]

Wulfram wrote...

Jowan was a fundamentally idiotic person. I shudder to think of him being allowed to use normal magic, let alone blood magic.

True, but he was NOT an evil person nor did blood magic  make him so unlike what the Chantry would have you believe.

-Polaris

[Face of Evil]

IanPolaris wrote...

Blood magic needs to be controlled an regulated both by Templars (after being reformed themselves) and by other practicioners of blood magic. Only the strongest willed and best trained Mages should be permitted to use it, but it shouldn't be banned....especially since it's far too tempting if it is for precisely those mages that shouldn't have it in the first place.

But why? Why is it even necessary for mages to practice blood magic? Is magic not already sufficiently powerful? Are there evil entities that can only be combated through blood magic, or injuries that can only be healed through its use?

You can rail on about how blood magic can be used for ethical purposes, but your only justification for allowing the use of blood magic is because it's "too tempting," as though mages weren't capable of controlling themselves around the sweet, sweet temptation of forbidden knowledge.

By your logic, only the mages who can resist the allure of using blood magic should be allowed to use blood magic.

But we're not talking about legalizing pot or lowering the legal drinking age by a year. We're talking about allowing mages access to a school of magic that is almost exclusively taught by demons and has been used to fuel the worst atrocities in history. Even the most basic use of blood magic is intrinsically harmful to the mage or to others, and blood mages can use their abilities to dominate the wills of others.

IanPolaris wrote...

True, but he was NOT an evil person nor did blood magic  make him so unlike what the Chantry would have you believe.

Oh, so true. He only, like, lied to his girlfriend about using blood magic and tried to murder Arl Eamon to save his own skin. And really, they jail people for attempted murder? Do they give out Nobel Prizes for attempted chemistry?

Your moral compass is seriously skewed if you think Jowan is a better person than Wynne. Jowan may not have set out to intentionally hurt anyone, but when the chips were down, he was still willing to resort to murder and betrayal to save his own sorry life.

He was more agreeable than most, and willing to fight for redemption. I gave him that chance and sent him into the Fade to battle the desire demon, but I still recommended he be handed over to the Circle of Magi
afterward.

BHRamsay wrote...

... and lets face it, the threat of a exalted march seems kind of toothless when you realize such an act would mean fighting Orzamarr's entire Warrior caste on their own turf backed up by all the apostates who have taken shelter in the Orzamarr circle. ... the phrase that comes to mind is BLOODBATH.

Did you miss the part about how the dwarves are dying out?

Modifié par Face of Evil, 28 novembre 2010 - 09:21 .

[IanPolaris]

[quote]Face of Evil wrote...

[quote]IanPolaris wrote...

Blood magic needs to be controlled an regulated both by Templars (after being reformed themselves) and by other practicioners of blood magic. Only the strongest willed and best trained Mages should be permitted to use it, but it shouldn't be banned....especially since it's far too tempting if it is for precisely those mages that shouldn't have it in the first place.[/quote]

But why? Why is it even necessary for mages to practice blood magic? Is magic not already sufficiently powerful? Are there evil entities that can only be combated through blood magic, or injuries that can only be healed through its use?

You can rail on about how blood magic can be used for ethical purposes, but your only justification for allowing the use of blood magic is because it's "too tempting," as though mages weren't capable of controlling themselves around the sweet, sweet temptation of forbidden knowledge.

By your logic, only the mages who can resist the allure of using blood magic should be allowed to use blood magic.

But we're not talking about legalizing pot or lowering the legal drinking age by a year. We're talking about allowing mages access to a school of magic that is almost exclusively taught by demons and has been used to fuel the worst atrocities in history. Even the most basic use of blood magic is intrinsically harmful to the mage or to others, and blood mages can use their abilities to dominate the wills of others.
[/quote]

Bluntly speaking, Blood magic should be permitted for the same reason that soldiers are permitted to use Machine Guns and Automatic Assault Rifles while civilians are not.  Unless you permit it you cede far too much tactical advantage to those that do.

This is what makes blood magic so attractive to those that rebel against the Chantry!  They know that it's more powerful bang for buck than any other magic out there and the Chantry Circle mages have no counter for it.

This is the real reason you "decriminalize" blood magic...so you can regulate it and fight it's unsanctioned use....and given that only blood magic is really good at mind control, that makes it the perfect tool to keep criminals in line (esp magical ones).

[quote]
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...

True, but he was NOT an evil person nor did blood magic  make him so unlike what the Chantry would have you believe.[/quote]

Oh, so true. He only, like, lied to his girlfriend about using blood magic and tried to murder Arl Eamon to save his own skin. And really, they jail people for attempted murder? Do they give out Nobel Prizes for attempted chemistry?
[/quote]

Last time I checked lying to your GF is not an evil act and given her reaction, the lie is totally understandable.  Also Jowan did not attempt to "murder" Arl Eamon.  His legitament lord deputized him to EXECUTE Arl Eamon.  Jowan is no more guilty of attempted murder than an Army Sniper is, perhaps less.  Again, it doesn't come close to an evil act and certainly had NOTHING to do with blood magic!

[quote]
Your moral compass is seriously skewed if you think Jowan is a better person than Wynne. Jowan may not have set out to intentionally hurt anyone, but when the chips were down, he was still willing to resort to murder and betrayal to save his own sorry life.
[/quote]

And Wynne is willing to let Ferdan burn and fall to the darkspawn just so her moral hands can be clean.  It's clear who is the better person, and it's not Wynne.  Not by a long shot.  Jowan never tries to kill you.  Wynne might try fewer than four times during the game (five if you are a bloodmage with the original dialog activated).

Jowan is a far better and far more ethical person than Wynne ever will be.  At least he's not a hypocrit.

[quote]
He was more agreeable than most, and willing to fight for redemption. I gave him that chance and sent him into the Fade to battle the desire demon, but I still recommended he be handed over to the Circle of Magi
afterward.[/quote]

I agree that handing him over to the circle is appropriate, but the best answer would be to conscript/recuit him (that was the original intent for Jowan btw).  Jowan is willing to own to his mistakes in the end.  Wynne has her head so far up her self-rightous posterier that she can't even admit to making mistakes.

[quote]BHRamsay wrote...

... and lets face it, the threat of a exalted march seems kind of toothless when you realize such an act would mean fighting Orzamarr's entire Warrior caste on their own turf backed up by all the apostates who have taken shelter in the Orzamarr circle. ... the phrase that comes to mind is BLOODBATH. [/quote]

Did you miss the part about how the dwarves are dying out?[/quote]

Dwarves are plenty strong enough especially if Bhelen is king and they have golems to hold off an Exalted March.

-Polaris

[BHRamsay]

IanPolaris wrote...

BHRamsay wrote...

Say what you will about Wynne and others who spout chantry dogma, Wynne doesnt use her power to torture and kill Dog or Alister to create some minor spell or nor does she grovel and beg for your pity or understanding after trying to kill you. On both occasions when she can and will try and end your life she makes it very clear why she is doing it and she does it knowing full well what the end result might be.

Wynne owns her choices both good and not so good.

No she doesn't.  Wynne is a class 1 hypocrit that does stab your warden in the back, does make horrific and hypocritical decisions, and willingly risks all of Fereldan and even all of Thedas if you (the warden) don't happen to match up with her unrealistic expectations.  Be a blood mage and make the GOOD choices and save the circle (with the original dialog enabled) and you see just how sweet and understanding a person Wynne really is who would never force others to her will....NOT!

Don't hold Wynne up as a paragon of virtue.  She is anything but, and IMHO she might well be a pride-abomination that doesn't even realize it.

-Polaris

... You want to tell me Avernus would be any different. He risked a hell of a lot more and achieved a hell of a lot less and barely apologizes for what he's done.

I held Wynne up not as a "paragon of virtue" but as someone willing to own her choices which your little blood mage most certainly does not do. Neither does Zathrian who doesn't own  up to his screw-ups until his own people have been so poisoned by those choices as to make them a threat to your mission to save Ferelden.

And since we are now going to throw the H word around lets cast an eye toward Morri who condems any act of altuism but is quick to send you into a dangerous confrontaion with Flemeth for no real reward.

Your supposed to confront and kill a dangerously powerful mage out of the kindness of your heart , a principle that she has been cussing you out for.  --- I do find it a little ironic that Wynne calls the Warden on it if he tricks Morrigan by taking Flemeths Grimiore without actually killing the old woman and yet Wynne is labled by her haters as a dogmatic hypocrite.