1869 réponses à ce sujet

[IanPolaris]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

I'm sorry, but where are you getting that Greagoir is a Radical Liberal? If aynthing he seems more like an Orthodox Andrastian. The epilogue card stating that Cullen's rule of the circle was even more restricting than Greagoir's seem to reinforce this.

I didn't say that Gregoire was a radical liberal Andrastian.  I said he was a radical liberal Templar and he does seem to be.  Talk with the other templars, read up on the Codex Entries.  Here is the ultimate proof:

When Wynne tries to have you arrested as a Bloodmage (and this scene counts becuase it was NEVER deleted and thus is canon), Gregoire offers to let you live so you can go to trial in front of the Grand Cleric and even offers to speak on your behalf.  You can't take him up on that, but it's incredibly radical for a Templar.  Even his tacit agreement that there are worse things than bloodmages is radical from the Templar PoV.

-Polaris

[Huntress]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

And what if the man with the key to the WMDs get mind controlled?

Make sure the person mind-controlling him doesn't want to use it.  That means having your own WMDs with your own ability to mind-control.

Blood magic doesn't have to mean mind-control, and mind-control is a fact.  It CAN be used beneficially (like any other powerful thing).

What you can't do is pretend it doesn't exist because that makes you vunerable to those that should have it the least.

-Polaris

And if the mind-controller is a madman who jsut wants to see the world burn? Then we are just **** out of luck? Nah, the easy way of avoiding this is to eradicate every single man, woman and child who ever even tries to learn to mind-control.

The chantry is doing just that, mind controlling the templars, peasants and mages! Burn them! burn them all!??
I aprove+10

Politics can mind control a croud by giving them whatever they want to HEAR.. we should get ride of them too.

Just remember HUMANS is a new race, the elves were the one who tought them magic to help them get rid of the barbarians, at least read codex for crying out loud. The elves have lived for so long and yet they didn't have templar watching over the elves mages. Facts is templars are the strong arm of a tyrant religion.

Fact: the Maker is a Human god, not elf nor dwarf.

[LobselVith8]

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Greagoir claimed he had evidence, but Irving was never privy to it - he makes that clear when the mage speaks with him about Jowan's Rite of Tranquility, and how Irving would do things differently but that he doesn't have a say in the matter.

Where are you getting that claim from, Lotion? Because Greagoir clearly shut down Duncan's request for more troops to fight the darkspawn despite Irving clearly disagreeing with him about the issue.[/quote]

Meanges moving outside of tower is a security issue - Geroir has the final say there.

And again..Irwing didn't see any evidence...YET. Teh confronatation between Gregoir, Irwing and Jowan never happened, because Jowan escaped. So you don't know what would have happened. [/quote]

Yet? The Rite was already signed. When was Irving going to see it? After Jowan was already made tranquil?

Greagoir has the first, last, and only real say on the issue. Irving has as much power as Greagoir permits him to have.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

That must be why the Chantry imprisons mages to Circles, permits them no rights to have lives as ordinary citizens, can have their templars (who are outside the bounds of the nobility) kill people on the mere suspicion of being a mage (like the fake made the Magnificent D'Sims), and blames them all (and not Tevinter solely) for the Blights.[/quote]


You mean why they quaranteen them for the good of the great populace, shield them from those that wold kill them and grant them a safe place to live? [/quote]

Guarenteed a good life? That must be why a rape victim like Fiona finds the Circle no better than her previous living conditions.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

You mean the original quote from DG that IanPolaris addressed before a few pages back, where you became irate because IanPolaris re-quoted and pointed out that it doesn't mean what you claimed it does?[/quote]

The quote you and Ian "analyze" out of context (because you adimtedly don't know it)? The same quote I already proved eons ago you both got wrong, but you ignore? [/quote]

You mean, because we disagreed with you, we're wrong?

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

No incident THAT WE KNOW OFF.
Not that we get much information of hte history of that particular clan..

Oh wait..that curse that caused a lof of people todie and suffer over the course of years...Yeah..let's not call that an incident, shall we? [/quote]

You mean like the towns that were massacred in the New Exalted Marches because the people converted to the Qun?

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Oh yes..let's not forget that a Cirlce holds all the mages in a kingdom. The number of mages involved compared to a dalic hcamp is WAAY higher. [/quote]

So we should ignore how mages and non-mages live together among the Dalish because their camps are relatively smaller than the entire human nations? Maybe people wouldn't hate mages if the Chantry didn't blame them for the alleged actions of one empire.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

There are some incidents we do know of about the templars. There is their murder of the Magnificent D'Sims because the templars thought he was a mage (and he wasn't), their attempted murder of the child Aenirin, and their attempt to murder the Warden-Commander and the Grey Warden Anders. Clearly, mages aren't the only ones who can cross the line.[/quote]

You going somewhere with this? [/quote]

Besides pointing out that mages aren't the only ones who can abuse the power they have?

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

You're making claims with no proof. A mage is one person; how dangerous is a religious institution like the Chantry, that can do anything in the name of the Maker? Mages don't get to call an Exalted March, though. Not on a cathedral (see: History of the Circle codex), not on the Dales (and the elves claim templars went into the Dales after they kicked out the missionaries), and I'd say the fall of the Dales lead to more deaths than any abomination has.[/quote]

An orginization is dependant on the goodwill of its followers. An Exalted March cannot happen unless the Andrastians are willing to join it. Therefore the destruction it will cause is not the result of a single person.
A mage can shoot a fireball, even if he doesn't want to (ie. it would have to be an untrained one for that, but the point still stands).[/quote]

What Andrastian wouldn't be willing to join a holy crusade when they believe in the institution? Even the Orlesian occupation (that the Chantry fully supported) wasn't enough to dissuade them away from their worship of the Maker and their faith in the Chantry (which resides in Orlais).

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

[quote]IanPolaris wrote...

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

He made the deal with a demon he, and he alone, is responsible for becoming an Abomination. Otherwise we can go even further back and say, he ran away from the Circle, so he is responsible for becoming an Abomination.[/quote]

So running away from the circle should be a death sentence?  That would be news to Anders.

-Polaris[/quote]
Running away from the Circle isn't a death sentence. Unless you resist capture. Being a Maleficar is a death sentence though. And the apostate in question was obviously resisting capture, and he may have been a Maleficar too, we will never know.[/quote]

Tell that to Aenirin, because the templars tried to kill him for running away, and there's absolutely no proof that he was a maleficar.

[C9316]

It would be better if Mages were allowed to look after themselves. As others have stated the Circle of Magi is neccessary for teaching mages how to control and use their Maker given powers responsibly. In fact the templars aren't neccessarily needed, just give a group of mages their role make the templars a backup at the very least. I also think Mages should have contact with their families instead of being taken from them forever.

[DamnThoseDisplayNames]

When Wynne tries to have you arrested as a Bloodmage

What? Sorry, can someone point me to some wiki entry or anything, or where can I see this, never knew about that.

[SgtElias]

C9316 wrote...

It would be better if Mages were allowed to look after themselves. As others have stated the Circle of Magi is neccessary for teaching mages how to control and use their Maker given powers responsibly. In fact the templars aren't neccessarily needed, just give a group of mages their role make the templars a backup at the very least. I also think Mages should have contact with their families instead of being taken from them forever.

I'd feel more comfortable (for lack of a better term) if the mages were in charge of ruling themselves, while some sort of back-up army was in place to deal with a serious problem if it occured. I just don't think it should be the templars as an order, because they're an arm of the Chantry. Regular warriors can learn a templar's talents.

Just my two cents.

[IanPolaris]

DamnThoseDisplayNames wrote...

When Wynne tries to have you arrested as a Bloodmage

What? Sorry, can someone point me to some wiki entry or anything, or where can I see this, never knew about that.

It's in the PRIMA Guide.  In the vanilla game, the triggers for the scene were disabled, but the scene very much exists (and a simple mod reenables those triggers).  If you free the tower and save the mages (but not if you Annul the Tower), Wynne will try to have you arrested as a bloodmage (if you are one).

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

C9316 wrote...

It would be better if Mages were allowed to look after themselves. As others have stated the Circle of Magi is neccessary for teaching mages how to control and use their Maker given powers responsibly. In fact the templars aren't neccessarily needed, just give a group of mages their role make the templars a backup at the very least. I also think Mages should have contact with their families instead of being taken from them forever.

If you mean "Circle of mages" as a social institution (preferably run under the Aegis of Crown and staffed largely by mages themselves like the Mages' Collective), then sure.  I don't think any reasonable person would argue that magic isn't dangerous and the mages should be regulated and trained properly.

If you mean isolate them from society and refuse to give them a stake in that society, then I will part company with you there.

-Polaris

[LobselVith8]

[quote]DamnThoseDisplayNames wrote...


[quote]When Wynne tries to have you arrested as a Bloodmage[/quote]

What? Sorry, can someone point me to some wiki entry or anything, or where can I see this, never knew about that.[/quote]

It's a missing scene. You can find it here.

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

[quote]IanPolaris wrote...

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

What kind of logic is that?.... He had lots of choices. The Abomination just seemed the easier one. He is the sole person responsible for his own actions. You can't blame that on anyone else than himself.[/quote]

Read that codex entry again.  The former templar specifically states in his own words that the mage made a deal with a demon because it was the only way he was going to live.  That is in fact Deal or Die.

-Polaris[/quote]
So just because a Templar says it, it is the truth?.... Wow, that's a new one comming from you. What the mage did was a quick path to "survival" (being turned into an abomination is hardly survival). He could have done many things. The Templar however did not think the mage would succeed at that, but who knows? The idiot chose to become an Abomination instead.[/quote]

Why doubt the templar? The templar is hunting down the mage. We can infer that the templar will kill the mage who is being hunted down. The horrible truth is, some people are willing to do anything to survive, including selling their souls to make it happen. Why expect any different from a mage who wants a chance at freedom, fails, and is doing to be murdered by the templars hunting him down at any moment?

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Even if the Divine send her Templars she is still dependant on the Templar's doing what she wants them to. There is so many places down the chain from aperson in power where it can go wrong, and nullify the threat. From a mage, there is no chain. The mage himself is the threat.[/quote]

Alistair addresses this point (when you ask him why the templars aren't in charge of the Chantry) when he mentions their lyrium addiction.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[QUOTE] Lotion Soronnar wrote...

It's you the one whos' been trivilizing the danger mages posses and just how complicated their issue is.

The circles ultimitavely being a good thing is not debetable - less abominations running amok, the lands being safer.

Thisk of it as segragation if oyu wll - but in essence it is more similar to a quarantene.
And if there was a quarantene near your town, you'd be singing a different tune. We all know it. [/quote]

This thread wouldn't exist if the Chantry's treatment of mages wasn't debatable, Lotion, nor would the several other threads with similiar issues about mages and templars. The relationship between the Chantry and the mages has even been considered everything from imprisonment to enslavement. You debate that things are safe because the mages are locked up, but is that true? How much safer would things be if the mages were allowed to use their powers against the darkspawn in the Deep Roads? Consider how many mages could be combating the darkspawn from multiple points, and there might have never been four more Blights after the first.[/quote]

LOl..

no my friends...No.

You see, people can argue anything, no matter how wrong or stupid it is. People argue the subject of morality, right and wrong..some belive Elvis is still alive or that moon is made of cheese. Hardly debate-worthy.

What the Chantry does is logical. Practical. Efficient. If mages existed in the real world, I'm willing to bet they would be treated pretty much the same.
Is it morally nice? No. It could be better. It can practicly always be.
But sadly, containment and such is necessary, and basic human behavior will give rise to strife between oversight and the one who is watched. This is unavoidable.

and yes..the lands are safer thanks to mages being locked up. [/quote]

What the Chantry does is vile, horrific, and monstrous. Imprisons people for who they are. Conditions mages to resort to forbidden magic to survive against the templars who are hunting them down. Murders innocent people who templars falsely assume are mages (D'Sims). And given how mages will always rebel against their oppressors, hardly the efficient system that you profess it to be.

Again, you mean imprisonment (remember the Magi Origin VO)?

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Condemning all mages for the actions of one empire, Lotion. Just listen to Greagoir - he never blames the Tevinters for the Blights, he blames mages in general.[/quote]

I fail to see your point...Magisters were mages. All mages are dangerous. [/QUOTE]

Magisters were human. Would it make any sense to imprison all humans because they allegedly caused the Blight?

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

I don'trecall any chantry verse saiyng "hate the mages".
And Gergoir is hardly representative of the whoel Chantry... [/quote]

Even Duncan admits that the Chantry barely tolerates magic. Cullen admits that templars discuss killing mages with glee. Kolgrim mentions the different attitudes the Disciples of Andraste and the Andrastian Chantry have towards magic. In Andrastian nations, mages are openly despised, feared, and hated because the Chantry blames them for the Blight, despite that it's the Tevinter who were allegedly responsible for this unlikely origin story for the darkspawn.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

How is being thrown into prison because of who you are comparable to living under a form of government, again?[/quote]

Death or servitude..Isn't that what slavery is all about, in essence? [/quote]

Ask the tranquil.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[QUOTE] Lotion Soronnar wrote...
You fail to provide why it is false. While I proved why it is not. And frankly I don't care if you think it's false, you're wrong.

Now... ANSWER...THE...FRIGGIN...QUESTION. Stop stalling and evading it. [/QUOTE]

Mages aren't diseased, so it's not an accurate analogy. There's no question to answer. If you were discussing the Architect's Disciples, the Messenger, or the Architect (because all of them can infect normal people with darkspawn disease) than you'd have a point, but mages aren't diseased. Ergo, it's not a proper analogy. Please, refrain from using it.[/quote]

There is a question and you keep evading it again and again. I knew it. Coward. [/quote]

Still name-calling, I see? Maybe you should work on your comparisons, instead.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

And as I said before, it is a proper analogy. I dont' care if you don't think so. The question I'm asking is not even tied to the analogydirectly  in the first palce and be answered separately. So I'll repeat it one final time:

Situation: Viral epidemic breaks out in the town next to you. Military establishes a quarantene of the town. People are trying to break out..military uses force to contain them. Are the actions of the military justified? [/quote]

Except mages don't have a viral disease; again, this makes more sense if we're discusing whether the Architect and the Messenger should be spared or not because they (and all intelligent darkspawn) can spread darkspawn disease among humans.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[QUOTE] Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Focus? Quite simply. Annuling the tower is a not a faliue for hte templars. Hence, the Broken Circle is not a faliure. [/quote]

Yet it's only able to happen because of the Grey Warden, not the templars. If the Warden never showed up, then it's possible Uldred would have defeated Greagoir and his relatively small contingent of templars, especially since there was no word back or reinforcements from Denerim.[/quote]

But it doesn'thappen. you don't know. Ergo it cannot be considered a faliure. fuirthermore the reinforcments DO come (if oyu side with Cullen), thus they would have come anyway.

In other words, your argument is void and invalid. A faliure that does not happen (but might happen.hypotheticly) cannot be considered a faliure [/quote]

It's not a failure because the Warden resolves the problem. The templars inability to deal with the abominations is why the Warden steps up and deals with them.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

I never said Zathrian was immune to possession - I pointed out that, counter to your claim that mages will inevitably become abominations, Zathrian lived for centuries as a Dalish mage and didn't become one, so it isn't inevitable.[/quote]

I never said it was inevitable. I said that EVERY mage is in constant danger of becoming an abomination 24/7. [/quote]

Anyone can become possessed. Remember Ander's cat? Killed four templars. Clearly, following your logic, everyone in Thedas must be imprisoned.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

As for the reinforcements, they're clearly there by the time the armies match to Denerim if the Warden sided with Cullen, but how many days, weeks, or months is that from when the Circle was dealing with Uldred and the abominations? Uldred's army was almost complete and we only see a contingent of templars at the end, after the civil war has been resolved, so there's no evidence that reinforcements are coming before or anywhere close to when Uldred would've completed his army and marched against the templar force.[/quote]

And there's no evidence that they wouldn't have come in time and killed of Uldred, if the Warden never got involved. As I said..NO EVIDENCE.
Specualtions and "might" is NOT evidence. either you got evidence or you don't. And you don't. [/quote]

They're not there when Uldred is killed, and he nearly completed his army, so it doesn't seem likely that they would have come in time (if at all) since there's no indication that they ever do as a result of Greagoir's plea.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
I pointed out that under the current system, people are killed by templars on the suspicion of being a mage, including people who aren't mages - like the Magnificent D'Sims.[/quote]

You mentioning him in EVERY SINGLE POST of yours is ....madening. 
Mistaks happen in every system. There are trigger-happy fooIs in every system. I fail to see your point. [/quote]

Because he was an innocent person killed by templars on the basis of speculation. I don't see how you fail to see the problem with killing people merely on the basis that they may be a mage.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

But despite your claim otherwise, you've consistently sided with the Chantry and pro-Chantry characters (Wynne in Winnie the Poo thread) for several months. I have no issue with it, but I see no reason why you claim otherwise.[/quote]

As I said before, I'm a realist. I side with the side that has better arguments and a better grasp on the reality of thedas.
You just happen to pick the wrong side. [/quote]

Because I disagree with you? Very narrow-minded of you.

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

There's more than two mages there; if the Warden and the Lady go to the camp, two other mages attack the Warden along with Zathrian and Lanaya. There's also Aenirin, who has Dalish markings and never specifically says he's not part of the camp.[/quote]

Aneirin says he doesn't consider himself as part of the Dalish. Kind of a wave with a pole isn't it? And when I attack the Dalish I only ever encounter Zathrian and Lanaya. I won't rule out the possiblity that it's because the Werewolves simply get to the other mages first, but I still havn't seen them.[/quote]

That doesn't mean he isn't part of Zathrian's camp, especially considering he's wearing Dalish attire and has Dalish tattoos.

[Lotion Soronarr]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

*yawn*  .. and how many mages destroy entire villages?
Yes, I can safely say that the circle system is better than no circle system

I can safely say that the number of dead mages is insignificant compared to the number of villagers that would have died, had those same mages been running arounf free for 700 years.

You're making claims with no proof. A mage is one person; how dangerous is a religious institution like the Chantry, that can do anything in the name of the Maker?Mages don't get to call an Exalted March, though. Not on a cathedral (see: History of the Circle codex), not on the Dales (and the elves claim templars went into the Dales after they kicked out the missionaries), and I'd say the fall of the Dales lead to more deaths than any abomination has.

Logic is my proof. And math.

We know, both from game and fluff, the massive amount of a damage a single abomination is capable off. Having them rampage in the countryside for 700 years will lead to how many Connor scenarios? Lors only knows. That's 1 - ONE - untrained child mage killing off an entire village. How many people are there?
Uldred, a trained mage, wreakks havocc, killing mages and templars alike, teraing the veil and brining more abominations in. Now what if he did that in the middle fo a town?

How many mages are there in the word? How many mage towers? Immagine all of those mages runnign around.

Yes..17 towers lost in 700 years is chicken feed.

[atheelogos]

Beerfish wrote...

Beerfish wrote...

DKJaigen wrote...

Mages
should self-regulate themselves and the circle is a needed institution
to make sure new mages are able to control their power. As soon as their
able to harness this power they should be free to do whatever they are
willing to do.

The chantry and Templar's however should be removed from this entire structure as their ignorance does more harm then good.

This
worked well keeping Ulred under control didn't it?  Irving and Wynne
and such did a great job of keeping tabs on one of their own.

You're
forgetting about Knight-Commander Greagoir. And considering that Uldred
and the mages were fighting for their freedom, how is oppressing them
under the Chantry system going to change that? The fact that some people
in this thread (and apparently in the other thread with Merill) see the
Chantry system as a form of enslavement of the mages doesn't indicate
that they're going to stop fighting for their freedom anytime soon.

As has been normal when you respond to a point, what you counter with has very little to do with what the point was.  It was Irvings responsibility as the 1st enchanter of the mages circle to ensure his mages behaved.  He failed utterly and Ulreds motives for doing something bad is secondary because as we saw elsehwere (Avernus in Wardens Keep, Connor in redcliffe.) Mages do bad things for any number of reasons whether they be trying to take over the circle, being desperate to win a conflict or trying to help dear old dad.

Gregoirs big sin in the circle tower incident?  Not being vigilant enough apparently. 

Gregoir's mistake, and the other templars too, was creating that horrid atmosphere to begin. If they would let up mages wouldn't feel the need to fight them.

[IanPolaris]

DamnThoseDisplayNames wrote...

When Wynne tries to have you arrested as a Bloodmage

What? Sorry, can someone point me to some wiki entry or anything, or where can I see this, never knew about that.

http://dragonage.wik...i/Broken_Circle

As an aside the quote below is slightly wrong.  The scene was never deleted.  It is still canon.  The triggers were disabled apparently because it caused problems with the landsmeet quest and BW was running out of time and money to fix it (at least that's the official story)

Money Quote:


Note: Originally, if the Warden was a blood mage Wynne would report her suspicions to the templars. This was removed from the final game, but an unofficial patch is available to replace the scene for the PC version, it is a smaller optional file available under the larger "Dialogue Tweaks" patch. The Warden can admit to this and end up being forced to fight both the Mages and Templars present. However, with a high enough persuasion the Warden can tell them it is "Grey Warden magic," which First Enchanter Irving eventually accepts, allowing you to keep your chosen allies for the final battle.

Modifié par IanPolaris, 21 janvier 2011 - 08:35 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

[quote]IanPolaris wrote...

[quote]David Gaider wrote...

[quote]Sharn01 wrote...
Should I be locked up because I know how to do this, or should law enforcement at least wait until I have posed some threat before arresting me?[/quote]

That's an argument with blood magic, yes, but not with abominations. The mere fact that you possess this knowledge does not mean you will go on a killing rampage against your will. The problem with mages is that even those with the best intentions can still present a threat. It complicates the issue precisely because there is no set criteria for who is at risk.

[/quote]

All this means is that mages should be regulated.  This is a point not in dispute.[/quote]

No standard form or "regulation" will do for mages. and confinment is a form of regulation.




[quote]
[quote]Not to mention the fact that the mages are not even allowed to love or have families, they are denied that right, if a relationship is discovered the mages are separated, and if a child is born in is taken from them. [/quote]
Relationships are only discouraged because fraternization inside such a closed community can make things quite complicated. It's not technically forbidden, though marriages generally aren't allowed. As for families, that's discouraged for the same reason -- not least of which is that it makes the mage much more susceptible to demonic influence. Remember Connor? Manipulating someone through the people they care about is the oldest trick in the book for demons.
[/quote]

I simply disagree with DG on this and DG is clearly talking about the Chantry party line (as before) and not his personal view.[/quote]

Ahhyes.. You disagree...Because heaven forbid an organization that you dislike actually does something becaouse it's very practical, and proved effective, and not because it's evil.
Do disagree wiht David. I will simply stand by and smirk.

[Ziggeh]

IanPolaris wrote...

DG in response to the poster could have said explicitly that abominations were more common in old days than now.  He very carefully and very deliberately did not and did it in a way that you apparently failed to notice.  Read it like a lawyer.

Then why make the statement at all? He was making a non definitive case for the dangers of magic, because he doesn't want us to believe either side is right or the situation simple.  If the circle doesn't aid the security of society, then there is a simple solution, and while the fiction still poses the question, it is ultimately a moral dichotomy.

IanPolaris wrote...
Edit PS: Evidence that abominations are "mostly contained in the circle" would be nice as well.

Abominations come from mages, mages are "mostly contained in the circle". It's kind of a maths thing, unless you're questioning the nature of the demon/mage relationship?

[atheelogos]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

*yawn*  .. and how many mages destroy entire villages?
Yes, I can safely say that the circle system is better than no circle system

I can safely say that the number of dead mages is insignificant compared to the number of villagers that would have died, had those same mages been running arounf free for 700 years.

You're making claims with no proof. A mage is one person; how dangerous is a religious institution like the Chantry, that can do anything in the name of the Maker?Mages don't get to call an Exalted March, though. Not on a cathedral (see: History of the Circle codex), not on the Dales (and the elves claim templars went into the Dales after they kicked out the missionaries), and I'd say the fall of the Dales lead to more deaths than any abomination has.

Logic is my proof. And math.

We know, both from game and fluff, the massive amount of a damage a single abomination is capable off. Having them rampage in the countryside for 700 years will lead to how many Connor scenarios? Lors only knows. That's 1 - ONE - untrained child mage killing off an entire village. How many people are there?
Uldred, a trained mage, wreakks havocc, killing mages and templars alike, teraing the veil and brining more abominations in. Now what if he did that in the middle fo a town?

How many mages are there in the word? How many mage towers? Immagine all of those mages runnign around.

Yes..17 towers lost in 700 years is chicken feed.

So lock up an entire group of people because of what they could do and not for what they did do? Should we lock up all nobles because Loghain started a war? If one noble can start one surely another can right?

And it's not all about numbers my friend. It's about the humane treatment of sentient being. It doesn't matter if the people in question are a minority or majority. They desever rights. Maybe you don't believe every person is entitled to fair treatment? I guess that's where we differ, and if that is the case I guess we'll never see eye to eye on this issue.... shame really

[LobselVith8]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

You're making claims with no proof. A mage is one person; how dangerous is a religious institution like the Chantry, that can do anything in the name of the Maker?Mages don't get to call an Exalted March, though. Not on a cathedral (see: History of the Circle codex), not on the Dales (and the elves claim templars went into the Dales after they kicked out the missionaries), and I'd say the fall of the Dales lead to more deaths than any abomination has.

Logic is my proof. And math.

We know, both from game and fluff, the massive amount of a damage a single abomination is capable off. Having them rampage in the countryside for 700 years will lead to how many Connor scenarios? Lors only knows. That's 1 - ONE - untrained child mage killing off an entire village. How many people are there?
Uldred, a trained mage, wreakks havocc, killing mages and templars alike, teraing the veil and brining more abominations in. Now what if he did that in the middle fo a town?

How many mages are there in the word? How many mage towers? Immagine all of those mages runnign around.

Yes..17 towers lost in 700 years is chicken feed.

It's not chicken feed; it's countless men, women, and children brutally murdered, and we have no way of knowing if those Rites were even jusitified or necessary. You provided no proof that the Chantry has actually done anything to limit the spread of abominations when we continue to read encounters where mages resort to becoming abominations as a direct result of the templars.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

atheelogos wrote...

Okay I'm back from class where did we leave off? Oh yes lol..... I think your giving mind control too much credit. Its dangerous yes, but small time compared to what we have with all of our weapons of mass destruction. And we're still here.

And what if the man with the key to the WMDs get mind controlled?

What if the man with the key had no choice because his wife and family were kidnapped? How is that any different?

Beerfish wrote...

As has been normal when you respond to a point, what you counter with has very little to do with what the point was.  It was Irvings responsibility as the 1st enchanter of the mages circle to ensure his mages behaved.  He failed utterly and Ulreds motives for doing something bad is secondary because as we saw elsehwere (Avernus in Wardens Keep, Connor in redcliffe.) Mages do bad things for any number of reasons whether they be trying to take over the circle, being desperate to win a conflict or trying to help dear old dad.

Gregoirs big sin in the circle tower incident?  Not being vigilant enough apparently. 

Ah, Beerfish, still condescending when people disagree with you, I see? You blamed Wynne and Irving solely for not seeing through Uldred, but you're blaming them for not doing Knight-Commander Greagoir's job. Irving only has as much power as Greagoir grants him. Maybe you ought to put that condescending attitude into coming up with some stronger posts.

Templars do plenty of bad things, too. Rylock tries to murder Anders and the Warden-Commander, templars left the barely teen Aenirin to die, and templars murdered an innocent man (D'Sims) because they thought he was a mage. The Dalish claim that templars invaded the Dales when they kicked out the missionaries. Why are you trying to paint things as though mages are the only ones who have ever committed a wrong?

[Beerfish]

[quote]atheelogos wrote...


Gregoirs big sin in the circle tower incident?  Not being vigilant enough apparently. 
[/quote]Gregoir's mistake, and the other templars too, was creating that horrid atmosphere to begin. If they would let up mages wouldn't feel the need to fight them.
[/quote]

Says you.  It's a given that a number (though by no means all and by no means any proof at all that the majority) of mages are upset enough with the current situation to do something radical about it.  I would be very suprised if Uldred being the person he was would do nothing if the Templars and Chantry were nicer to them.  As the Grey Warden himself says to the blood mage who you have the choice to kill or free.  "You have set back your own cause badly." or words to that effect. 

After Uldreds stunt it gives both the Templars and the Chantry all the ammo they need to put a tighter clamp on the mages, especially when he was very close to annulment.  Anyone that thinks that after the Circle Tower incident and Redcliffe that there would be support for free mages has another thing coming.

[IanPolaris]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Logic is my proof. And math.

Maker help us then.

We know, both from game and fluff, the massive amount of a damage a single abomination is capable off. Having them rampage in the countryside for 700 years will lead to how many Connor scenarios? Lors only knows. That's 1 - ONE - untrained child mage killing off an entire village. How many people are there?

Actually not that many.  What happened in Redcliff Villiage is a tragedy to be sure, but a villiage that size would be fortunate to have perhaps 50 people in it abosolute tops and proabably only about half as many.  That's both in-game and actual medaeval lore.  Villiages and Hamlets were TINY compared with what we are used to today. 

Also the entire Conner situation could not have occured if Isolde had not decided (with justification I might add) that life in the circle tower was too horrible for child to undergo....and it would not have occured if Isolde (because of Chantry propoganda) hadn't come to the conclusion that all magic and all mages were sinful and evil beings.  THIS is what gave Loghain the opening to insert an incomptant apostate (Jowan) to poison Arl Eamon while denying at the same time the support Conner needed to understand that dealing with Demons never ends well.  A COMPETANT Mage tutor that Conner could trust could have probably ended the situation before it even started.

So yes, the Chantry and the Circle deserve some of the blame for Redcliff.

Uldred, a trained mage, wreakks havocc, killing mages and templars alike, teraing the veil and brining more abominations in. Now what if he did that in the middle fo a town?

A single warrior can completely destroy an entire mountain villiage (Haven).  Your point?

How many mages are there in the word? How many mage towers? Immagine all of those mages runnign around.

I have no problems at all with it provided that a strong system of policing including self-policing is present.  No society had a problem with it until Divine AmbrosiaII got her panties in a twist over an issue that had nothing to do with protecting anyone.  I am suprised you do.

Yes..17 towers lost in 700 years is chicken feed.

That's mighty bloody chickenfeed...but obviously mages aren't considered human being to you so it doesn't matter.  *I* do consider them human beings so let's try to put some rough numbers on this.  17 towers in 700 years (possibly 18 if you include the Fereldan tower) works out to one tower lost every 41 years.  If you use the 18 number (which we probably should) it works out to a bit more than one tower every 39 years.  Based on the game information and the like, we can guess that each tower probably holds upwards of 100 mages.  I will use 100 as a (low) estimate.  Then there are the templars and support staff which likely doubles this.

That means each time a tower is annuled you are slaughtering approximately 200 people which works out to almost 5 people per year and this is totally ignoring all the lesser instances where mages (and nonmages) were killed that didn't merit a full annulment of the circle so the already bad number is actually higher than this.

There is no way that this is better than what happened before.  That is the REAL math talking.

-Polaris

[Huntress]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

*yawn*  .. and how many mages destroy entire villages?
Yes, I can safely say that the circle system is better than no circle system

I can safely say that the number of dead mages is insignificant compared to the number of villagers that would have died, had those same mages been running arounf free for 700 years.

You're making claims with no proof. A mage is one person; how dangerous is a religious institution like the Chantry, that can do anything in the name of the Maker?Mages don't get to call an Exalted March, though. Not on a cathedral (see: History of the Circle codex), not on the Dales (and the elves claim templars went into the Dales after they kicked out the missionaries), and I'd say the fall of the Dales lead to more deaths than any abomination has.

Logic is my proof. And math.

We know, both from game and fluff, the massive amount of a damage a single abomination is capable off. Having them rampage in the countryside for 700 years will lead to how many Connor scenarios? Lors only knows. That's 1 - ONE - untrained child mage killing off an entire village. How many people are there?
Uldred, a trained mage, wreakks havocc, killing mages and templars alike, teraing the veil and brining more abominations in. Now what if he did that in the middle fo a town?

How many mages are there in the word? How many mage towers? Immagine all of those mages runnign around.

Yes..17 towers lost in 700 years is chicken feed.

Do you even understand why the connor problem begging? The mother didn't want to let him go/lose him forever because of the chantry stupid rule of not allowing mages to live with their family, the moment the chantry new about connor he was gonna be TAKEN agaisnt the mother will. Now tell me if that is not a cruel religion?

Magic have been in thedas for more than 700 years before the tavinter imperium, before Andraste was born, magic have been in thedas since The first races started walking about. Up to now the elves and dwaver are the oldest of the races and they  didn't need any templar to watch over anyone,  thats why the chantry got rid of the Dales, they couldn't control dalish mages.
They couldn't conver the dalish to the maker.  What this tells me is The chantry is just a ruthless organization and should be stoped before another exalted march start, this time is going to be the dwarves and I will tell you, dwarves are not afraid of magic.

Modifié par Huntress, 21 janvier 2011 - 09:04 .

[LobselVith8]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

All this means is that mages should be regulated.  This is a point not in dispute.

No standard form or "regulation" will do for mages. and confinment is a form of regulation.

Is there a reason why no standard form of "regulation" will do, considering that standard regulation was likely how things were before the mages were forced into isolation in the Circles?

As for the term confinement... why ignore the proper term used in the Magi Origin VO? It's called a prison. On this thread and in the Merrill thread, the term has ranged from everything from imprisonment to slavery.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Ahhyes.. You disagree...Because heaven forbid an organization that you dislike actually does something becaouse it's very practical, and proved effective, and not because it's evil.
Do disagree wiht David. I will simply stand by and smirk.

That must explain why it looks like there's going to be an all-out war between templars and mages in DA2... because it's evidently so practical.

[Beerfish]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Beerfish wrote...

As has been normal when you respond to a point, what you counter with has very little to do with what the point was.  It was Irvings responsibility as the 1st enchanter of the mages circle to ensure his mages behaved.  He failed utterly and Ulreds motives for doing something bad is secondary because as we saw elsehwere (Avernus in Wardens Keep, Connor in redcliffe.) Mages do bad things for any number of reasons whether they be trying to take over the circle, being desperate to win a conflict or trying to help dear old dad.

Gregoirs big sin in the circle tower incident?  Not being vigilant enough apparently. 

Ah, Beerfish, still condescending when people disagree with you, I see? You blamed Wynne and Irving solely for not seeing through Uldred, but you're blaming them for not doing Knight-Commander Greagoir's job. Irving only has as much power as Greagoir grants him. Maybe you ought to put that condescending attitude into coming up with some stronger posts.

Templars do plenty of bad things, too. Rylock tries to murder Anders and the Warden-Commander, templars left the barely teen Aenirin to die, and templars murdered an innocent man (D'Sims) because they thought he was a mage. The Dalish claim that templars invaded the Dales when they kicked out the missionaries. Why are you trying to paint things as though mages are the only ones who have ever committed a wrong?

Condescending?  You can see it that way.  The way I see it whenever anything to do with a mage turning into an abomination or getting possessed gets brought up I see no rebuttle or explanation of the incident other than 'it was the chantries fault or the templars fault!'  You quite simply agreed with me in your 1st paragraph.  Gregoire was indeed being slack in his job and because he was slack the incident happened.  Irving and the other mage leaders failed utterly in their given task to be on top of what others were up to.  Thus it gives a person zero confidence that they could ever look after themselves.

Again with your 2nd paragraph you have done what you have done throughout this thread.  Not address the point that was made to you to, you merely jump on the templars and chantry and totally ignored or refuted the point.

You blamed the Uldred incident on Gregoire not doing his job (totally counter to the freedoms you want.), you totally ignored the redcliffe connor incident and you totally ignored AVernus.

I have not once declared that Templars or the Chantry are saints.  There are bad Templars, the Chantry is a dubious organization that has it;s own agenda.  Feel free to post as many bad templar bad chantry incidents you wish, it won't change the mage situation.

The mages with the incidents I quoted in my post need to be watched carefully.

[IanPolaris]

Ziggeh wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

DG in response to the poster could have said explicitly that abominations were more common in old days than now.  He very carefully and very deliberately did not and did it in a way that you apparently failed to notice.  Read it like a lawyer.

Then why make the statement at all? He was making a non definitive case for the dangers of magic, because he doesn't want us to believe either side is right or the situation simple.  If the circle doesn't aid the security of society, then there is a simple solution, and while the fiction still poses the question, it is ultimately a moral dichotomy.

He is making the statement that magic is dangerous.  No one disagrees.  DG is stirring the pot without saying really anything.  I am suprised no one else has noticed.

IanPolaris wrote...
Edit PS: Evidence that abominations are "mostly contained in the circle" would be nice as well.

Abominations come from mages, mages are "mostly contained in the circle". It's kind of a maths thing, unless you're questioning the nature of the demon/mage relationship?

No.  What I am questioning is whether abominations without the toxic circle environment (and I hope you'd agree that it is toxic) are common enough to merit locking away all mages.  Clearly not even the chantry thought so for almost two hundred years (and mages weren't locked up for that reason anyway).  If the rate of abomination is very low (say 1 in a million as a theoretical excercise) but the rate increases to say 1 in 100 in the tower, then I can reasonably conclude that the tower actually makes the abomination problem worse (because more than 1:1000 abominations will escape or avoid tower confinement).

So your 'obvious' inference is a lot less obvious than you think.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

[quote]Beerfish wrote...

[quote]atheelogos wrote...


Gregoirs big sin in the circle tower incident?  Not being vigilant enough apparently. 
[/quote]Gregoir's mistake, and the other templars too, was creating that horrid atmosphere to begin. If they would let up mages wouldn't feel the need to fight them.
[/quote]

Says you.  It's a given that a number (though by no means all and by no means any proof at all that the majority) of mages are upset enough with the current situation to do something radical about it.  I would be very suprised if Uldred being the person he was would do nothing if the Templars and Chantry were nicer to them.  As the Grey Warden himself says to the blood mage who you have the choice to kill or free.  "You have set back your own cause badly." or words to that effect. 
[/quote]

Read the codex entries on the Mage's Collective and the Mage's Fraternaties.  Together the Aequatarians and Libertarians DO form a majority of the mages, and they see eye-to-eye about the mistreatment of mages in the tower.  It's why the Mage's Collective exists.  That's a rather radical solution right there (almost spitting right in the eyes of the Chantry).  Morever, the Libertarians in Cumberland are going to move that the circles be emancipated (freed) from the chantry, and from what you learn in the game, it's probably going to pass.

Historically the Aequitarians sided with the Loyalists out of self-protection mostly.  It's the Aequartians that are deciding that the Libertarians are fundamentally right.....if you don't push for change,then it never happens.

[quote]
After Uldreds stunt it gives both the Templars and the Chantry all the ammo they need to put a tighter clamp on the mages, especially when he was very close to annulment.  Anyone that thinks that after the Circle Tower incident and Redcliffe that there would be support for free mages has another thing coming.
[/quote]

Yes and it's exactly the wrong lesson since it was the explosive and toxic atmophere in the tower that made Uldred's revolt possible.

-Polaris

[atheelogos]

[quote]Beerfish wrote...

[quote]atheelogos wrote...


Gregoirs big sin in the circle tower incident?  Not being vigilant enough apparently. 
[/quote]Gregoir's mistake, and the other templars too, was creating that horrid atmosphere to begin. If they would let up mages wouldn't feel the need to fight them.
[/quote]

Says you.  It's a given that a number (though by no means all and by no means any proof at all that the majority) of mages are upset enough with the current situation to do something radical about it.  I would be very suprised if Uldred being the person he was would do nothing if the Templars and Chantry were nicer to them.  As the Grey Warden himself says to the blood mage who you have the choice to kill or free.  "You have set back your own cause badly." or words to that effect. 

After Uldreds stunt it gives both the Templars and the Chantry all the ammo they need to put a tighter clamp on the mages, especially when he was very close to annulment.  Anyone that thinks that after the Circle Tower incident and Redcliffe that there would be support for free mages has another thing coming.

[/quote]Alistair supports it and he saw both incidents first hand, so yeah........

[Beerfish]

Do you even understand why the connor problem begging? The mother didn't want to let him go/lose him forever because of the chantry stupid rule of not allowing mages to live with their family, the moment the chantry new about connor he was gonna be TAKEN agaisnt the mother will. Now tell me if that is not a cruel religion?

What does that have to do with the fact that the boy, seeing his father dieing made a deal with a demon?  It merely reinforced the Chantry/Templars position that mages have to be watched closely for the common good and their own protection.  Does it suck to be a mage?  Is it fair?  Nope not at all.  Not too many people are arguing that.  What they are saying is 'see what happened when a person managed to hide a mage from the templars."

Magic have been in thedas for more than 700 years before the tavinter imperium, before Andraste was born, magic have been in thedas since The first races started walking about. Up to now the elves and dwaver are the oldest of the races and they  didn't need any templar to watch over anyone,  thats why the chantry got rid of the Dales, they couldn't control dalish mages.
They couldn't conver the dalish to the maker.

There is not enough information about how mages were handled in the past to make an evaluation as to if they had a better system or not.  Perhaps they just killed mages as soon as they showed abilites.  The fact of the matter is that in the here and now there have been a number of bad mage incidents.  Rail against the present system all you want but until a credible alternative is presented I as a citizen of Fereldan would rather the mages be as they are than to let them go and do whatever they wanted.