499 réponses à ce sujet

[IanPolaris]

BelgarathMTH wrote...

ROFLMAO.

Nyah, nyah! Deal! Bleah! Deal!

ROFLMAO.

This whole thread has degenerated into a playground game of king of the hill!!!

This is so funny! All of us are obviously intelligent people here! We need to lighten up.

The irony of this post is clearly lost on you.  Enough said.

-Polaris

[KnightofPhoenix]

BelgarathMTH wrote...

:lol:=]:P=]:lol::lol::O

That is probably the most emotion intensive response in this thread

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

With mana clash and the anti-magic school, I think a mage police would in fact be better equipped than Templars, to deal with other mages. But of course: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

This here. Spirit is my favorite school, and I can happily say I've greased more mages with a single spell than all the templars in the circle ever could.

I'm not terribly worried about who's going to police the prisoners, either. Seeing how becoming an abomination is considered by most any mage to be a very undesirable outcome, the mages themselves perhaps have more motive and personal drive to find ways to prevent this, or fight it, than the Chantry's rather hamfisted and generally ineffective methods.

If it is a worry that mages might get into positions of power and abuse it, I say keep the current prhibitions on mages holding titles or public office. Ban them from positions of influence, such as advisor to important figures.

That's why I want to know about Ancient Tevinter dammit! Why were we in the semi civilized Ferelden anyways?

Because the developers have an unholy fascination with dogs and people who love them?

I, howeverm agree, I want to see Tevinter society, as well as ancient Tevinter, covered more in the future. Even after converting to the Chantry, they still maintained a magocracy, even forming their own Chantry. They have to have some system in place, given that they are ruled by mages, that prevents or deals with abominations effectively, if they have been in this biz for thousands of years.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...
If it is a worry that mages might get into positions of power and abuse it, I say keep the current prhibitions on mages holding titles or public office. Ban them from positions of influence, such as advisor to important figures.

Power is not dependent on formal positions. Power can be informal. Add blood magic to the mix and it is a real risk, from the perspective of those who seek to avoid a magocracy.

I personally don't really mind a magocracy in principle, especially if I was a mage. But it is a legitimate concern and at the end of the day, no system can be invulnerable and perfect, there will always be loopholes and people who exploit them.

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

That's why I want to know about Ancient Tevinter dammit! Why were we in the semi civilized Ferelden anyways?

Because the developers have an unholy fascination with dogs and people who love them?

It seems to be part of the modern trend that valorises the barbaric and primitive against the civilised. While it's a good excersize for civilizations to engage in self-criticism, I think it's becoming excessive these days (cough Avatar cough). 

[Dean_the_Young]

Don't even get started on Avatar!



Though seeing the nations of Earth return and employ orbital bombardment would have an element of diabolic comupance against Jack or John or whatever his name was.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Don't even get started on Avatar!

Though seeing the nations of Earth return and employ orbital bombardment would have an element of diabolic comupance against Jack or John or whatever his name was.

I am all for exterminatus

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Power is not dependent on formal positions. Power can be informal. Add blood magic to the mix and it is a real risk, from the perspective of those who seek to avoid a magocracy.


I personally don't really mind a magocracy in principle, especially if I was a mage. But it is a legitimate concern and at the end of the day, no system can be invulnerable and perfect, there will always be loopholes and people who exploit them.

There's potential for disaster in any scenario. However, I prefer to pick the ones that offer many routes and outlets for dealing with or making the most of magic. For starters, it would be in the best interests of most countries to have their Circles directly controlled by, or answerable to, the Crown instead of the Chantry. At a minimum.

It seems to be part of the modern trend that valorises the barbaric and primitive against the civilised. While it's a good excersize for civilizations to engage in self-criticism, I think it's becoming excessive these days (cough Avatar cough). 

Blame the hippies. The legacy of the Baby Boomers is that they will teach their kids to glorify and envy the days when the streets were filled with masses of unwashed, drug addled heathens rutting about in public places like livestock.<_<

[EmperorSahlertz]

I would just like to point out, that the mages of the tower are allowed to have relations with their families. The mage from Witch Hunt (who's name eludes me) had recieved his clothes from his mother. And he later talks about someone is sounding like his mother, so he must have met her. In conclusion, the mages aren't as isolated as some posters have been trying to make it sound like.

[IanPolaris]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

I would just like to point out, that the mages of the tower are allowed to have relations with their families. The mage from Witch Hunt (who's name eludes me) had recieved his clothes from his mother. And he later talks about someone is sounding like his mother, so he must have met her. In conclusion, the mages aren't as isolated as some posters have been trying to make it sound like.

The mage you are talking about is Finn, and yes mages pretty are just as isolated as we've been saying.  There's nor formal prohibition from having contact with your families but it is discouraged and it is monitered as though you were a super-max prisoner unless you get explicit consent from both the First Enchanter and Knight Commander (read chantry) for it to be otherwise.  We also know that the Chantry claims all children born from mages whether the mage likes it or not.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

There's potential for disaster in any scenario. However, I prefer to pick the ones that offer many routes and outlets for dealing with or making the most of magic. For starters, it would be in the best interests of most countries to have their Circles directly controlled by, or answerable to, the Crown instead of the Chantry. At a minimum.

Indeed.  This is what I call the Dagna-Bhelen solution and you will notice that it always draws (at least very likely draws) an exalted march (just as the Dales did).  Basically near as I can tell Dagna estalishes an independant circle of magi answerable to the Crown (Bhelen) and only the dwarven crown.  Apparently it works very well (and I could easily see Dagna with the cooperation of either King Alistair or your Warden even offering Templarstyle Magic-control and support training for selected warrior.....all under the authority of First Enchanter Dagna and ultimately King Bhelen.

-Polaris

[EmperorSahlertz]

IanPolaris wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

I would just like to point out, that the mages of the tower are allowed to have relations with their families. The mage from Witch Hunt (who's name eludes me) had recieved his clothes from his mother. And he later talks about someone is sounding like his mother, so he must have met her. In conclusion, the mages aren't as isolated as some posters have been trying to make it sound like.

The mage you are talking about is Finn, and yes mages pretty are just as isolated as we've been saying.  There's nor formal prohibition from having contact with your families but it is discouraged and it is monitered as though you were a super-max prisoner unless you get explicit consent from both the First Enchanter and Knight Commander (read chantry) for it to be otherwise.  We also know that the Chantry claims all children born from mages whether the mage likes it or not.

-Polaris

Super-max prisoners aren't allowed visitors, and they most certainly aren't allowed to keep presents from visitors (if they were allowed those in the first place).

[IanPolaris]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Super-max prisoners aren't allowed visitors, and they most certainly aren't allowed to keep presents from visitors (if they were allowed those in the first place).

Perhaps not super-max, but prisoners in general (even high security prisoners) are permitted visitors (with varying degrees of control) and I do know that at the very least you can write letters.  As for presents, I am pretty sure that prisoners can get presents and/or other items from the outside.

So really, I don't see the tower being much different from a prison if not perhaps super-max, then certainly medium to high security.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

Glaucon wrote...

Sorry I had to leave that image in.  This had me chuckling for a while.  The Right of Annulment far off into the future.  Annulment is an interesting word, with regard to its results, did the developers intend it to mean having something unpleasant removed from the mind?

I suspect they did.  The term "Rite of Annulment" sounds like a very typical Euphamism to me....much better to say that then "Right of Mass Mage Slaughter" for example although that in effect is what it is.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

Glaucon wrote...

So it could be an instance of misinterpreting Chantry dogma/doctrine?  I think someone said it earlier (my apologise for being too lazy to credit), that there is an important distinction between an institution and its members.  Even so, KoP nicely put forward the notion that current Chantry doctrine is reactionary in nature and fails to address the causes of friction.

Or almost equivalently it could be a matter of a flawed interpretation of doctrine gaining common ground until it becomes unquestioned canon.  I reread the codex on the early history of the Chantry, and it's quite clear from that that Andraste and her followers never intended for mages to be seperated from society.  That developement came later largelybecause of politics and yes fear.  I think that the chantry is misinterpreting the verses in the Chant of Light w/r/t magic, and given what we know of the Verses of Shartan (to name one example), I wouildn't be at all suprised if the original chant of light had a much different (and softer) take on magic than what the current Chantry would tolerate.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

Glaucon wrote...

Too often it is the case that philosophical or theological theories fail to be fully realised or are perverted by motive.  It's sad, but it's a reality.  The Circle clearly doesn't 'work' as is.  Is it simply a matter of leadership and consistency of application that it lacks?  Would a fully realised and correctly (as a weak statement) implemented version of Chantry doctrine/dogma be both socially acceptable and of mutual benefit to all parties?

The problem here is that we learn in Denerim (from the Chantry sisters) that the Andrastian chant is quite literally written in pencil.  If a Divine doesn't like a verse, she omits them....or alters them as she sees fit.  The most infamous case (but far from only) of this was the omission of the Verses of Shartan from the Chant when they became 'inconvenient' during the exalted marches on the Dales.  If the Chantry is willing to alter the chant against elves, what do you think the odds are that they won't against magic?  Yeah, I thought so too.

Really it comes down to this:  Would everyone be able to agree what the chant really says about magic.  So far (given the existance of the Imperial Chantry on exactly this sort of question), I am highly pessimistic.  In fact the argument could IMO easily lead to a "Protestant/Reform" Chantry along these very issues IMO.

-Polaris

[EmperorSahlertz]

Uhm.. THe original CHant could also have en extremely hostile view on magic, and say that it should be purged. But the current Chantry realized the usefulness of mages and edited the chant? Both scenarios are possible, and both are purely based on speculation.

[IanPolaris]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Uhm.. THe original CHant could also have en extremely hostile view on magic, and say that it should be purged. But the current Chantry realized the usefulness of mages and edited the chant? Both scenarios are possible, and both are purely based on speculation.

If you read the Chantry history codecies and the History of the Circle Codecies, it seems clear enough that the original Andrastian rebels thought that magic was useful and mages were useful.  Their beef was with the misuse of power by the Magisters of the Tevinter Imperium.  Indeed the first Codex on the HIstory of the Circle emphasizes that it was well after Andraste that a frustrated Divine unable to break what was in effect a "Mage's strike" tried to do an exalted march on her own city and her own templars told her that she was out of her tree.  It then goes on to say that for the FIRST TIME in human history, mages were seperated from mundanes.

Clearly then the original chantry did not have (or by implication at least seem to have) nearly the hostile view that the modern chantry does.

-Polaris

Edit:  Few things are completely clear, but one thing that is clear to me about the very early chantry is that Andraste loathed anything that even remotely resembled slavery (which makes sense given she was a slave herself at one time).  Given that, I don't think the modern Chantry would be too happy if Andraste really did return to pass judgement on them.

Modifié par IanPolaris, 30 décembre 2010 - 12:21 .

[Erika T]

Dave of Canada wrote...

I'd also like to point out that Rage Abominations, the "weakest" abomination there is, can take out three fully trained Templars when possessing a cat. I think that's saying something.

so how come a level 5 rogue with without any weapons can beat it on autofight?