1869 réponses à ce sujet

[EmperorSahlertz]

IanPolaris wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

So to be a leader amongst the Dalish you HAVE to be a mage? Makes you think.
Just because there can be many candidates, does not equal there are many candidates. Just that they are all screened for potential. Then evidently dumped, since the Clan will never have more than two fully trained mages. Also, when does a Dalish mage qualify as "fully trained"? What tests does the candidates have to go through to be accepted as a First. There are so many unanswered questions remaining, that the Dalish can't be used as an alternative.

That's not true.  Even if you are rejected as a Keeper's first, you still live side by side (note the entry said at LEAST two trained mages not that two was a hard and fast number).  Consider that Zathrien's clan seemed pretty typical, and if you side with the werewolve you encounter in combat at least two other mages (the Halla Herder is definately a mage) besides Zathrien and Lanaya.  Also Anerin is treated and welcomed by the same clan as a full adult with full honors (otherwise Anerin would not be entitled to wear bloodpaint).

Given that Dalish clans are relatively small and given that each has AT LEAST two mages,per capita there are far more Dalish Mages than CE or Human mages, and because the clans are so small by comparison in absolute numbers (and the percentage of mages so great) any abomination that would occure would actually have a much larger impact.  Thus if what the Chantry said was true, we should see fear or at least extreme wariness around any mage that isn't a Keeper or keeper's first yet we do not!

-Polaris

The codex says: A Clan seldom or never.... Which means that for a Clan to have more than two trained mages is almost unheard of. Ótherwise the word "never" would have been excluded. And you don't know what happens to the other candidates. Don't try to come up with fanciful explanations. Just admit that you don't know what happens to the other candidates. If you havn't got the balls to admit that much, this whole discussion is pointless, since you won't ever admit to being obviously ignorant. I am not saying something sinister happens to them for sure. Just that NONE OF US knows what happens, and that we didn't see any of the other candidates Lanaya had to compete with.
Anyone can slap some paint on their own face. Aneirin HIMSELF says he is NOT part of the Dalish. Even teh Dalish themselves says he is a healer who lives in the forest (ie. not "he is our healer"), which further indicates Aneirin is not part of that Clan. And how do you know the Halla herder is a mage? Because she talks to the Halla? It appears that Halla are extremely intellegent, like Mabari, and can understand human... er.. Elven language. And we never see her use any spells (at least not to my knowledge), so that is based on speculation? And who is the fourth mage which attacks us? I've only ever spotted Lanaya and Zathrien attacking me.

And again, the chantry does not say that Abominations are common. They say they are dangerous. Which they are. The Chantry does actually says that the Abominations are thankfully rare. It is the potential for misuse of magic that the Chantry fears. Dalish do not share that fear, because tehy trust explicitly in their Keepers. The humans have a history of oppresive mages (Ancient Tevinter) which have damaged mages' reputation. This would more than likely have happened, even if the Chantry wasn't established after the fall of Ancient Tevinter.

[EmperorSahlertz]

LobselVith8 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Of course the Chantry won't change their ways, when the mages themselves keep confirming the Chantry in their fearful thoughts of magic!

People don't like to be thralls, Emperor. You should know from history that people have fought to be freed from their oppressors.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

And Haven, is neither feasible, nor desireable. Or are you actually suggesting all mages turn to Dragon worship and Blood Magic?

I don't believe anyone made such a suggestion. The Disciples of Andraste evidently change their harsh treatment of outsiders (likely because an outsider helped them and there's no longer an Urn), stop murdering outsiders, and even welcome outsiders to join their religion.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

And again, you got no record of Haven's history with Abominations. For all we know, Haven just ahd a lucky year(or even just a lucky day for that matter) with no Abomination.

That's a lot of speculation that doesn't explain why an entire town of mages and non-mages have no present abominations or why the town is still standing if they weren't able to deal with abominations.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Nor do you know how the non-mages in Haven actually feel about the mages there. You are calling Haven an acceptable alternative, based on zero evidence. I ignore all suggestions of Haven as an alternative, because of that.

The Disciples don't hate mages, despise the Chantry view of magic, and endorse magic. They are an alternative, and we have enough information to compare them to the Andrastian Chantry.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Vaughan potentially got himself killed for his act. Had he been a mage, it would probably have been a different story.

Only if the Warden kills him, Emperor.

Doesn't really matter who kills Vaughan. After all, you can only be so dead.
Haven may be an alternative. But I disagree on wether they are acceptable, or even feasible. You won't find me worshiping some overgrown lizard.
And I know that people don't like to be thralls. But violence isn't the only option you know. Violence in this case, is probably only gonna make it all a whole lot worse for the mages.
What I would really like to see is not the Mages being emancipated from the Chantry. But the Templars. Divide the power into a unit of three. Mages, Chantry and Templars all equal.  But that won't happen overnight. It will take many years. Hell, the ones starting the project probably won't live to see it. But the end result is worth it.

[Big Blue Car]

The mages should be free, if they kill people using their natural talents then that is the free marketplace of magic at work. Tevinter was actually built under the sea by Andrew Ryan. Ayn Rand was no Templar.



Andraste shrugged.

[LobselVith8]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The codex says: A Clan seldom or never.... Which means that for a Clan to have more than two trained mages is almost unheard of.

Which codex entry? Besides the unofficial DA Wiki, I've never read that phrase on an actual codex entry.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Anyone can slap some paint on their own face. Aneirin HIMSELF says he is NOT part of the Dalish. Even teh Dalish themselves says he is a healer who lives in the forest (ie. not "he is our healer"), which further indicates Aneirin is not part of that Clan.

So he put tattoos on his own face? That's stretching things, Emperor. Even WH mentions the Dalish accepting escaped Circle mages into their clan. As for what he said, he never said he wasn't part of the Dalish clan, he admits that he doesn't feel as though he's part of the Circle or the Dalish.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

And how do you know the Halla herder is a mage? Because she talks to the Halla? It appears that Halla are extremely intellegent, like Mabari, and can understand human... er.. Elven language. And we never see her use any spells (at least not to my knowledge), so that is based on speculation? And who is the fourth mage which attacks us? I've only ever spotted Lanaya and Zathrien attacking me.

I believe there are two other mages who attack alongside them.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

And again, the chantry does not say that Abominations are common. They say they are dangerous. Which they are. The Chantry does actually says that the Abominations are thankfully rare.

The codex entries and the storyline do point to their existance as a direct result of Templar/Mage conflict.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

It is the potential for misuse of magic that the Chantry fears. Dalish do not share that fear, because tehy trust explicitly in their Keepers. The humans have a history of oppresive mages (Ancient Tevinter) which have damaged mages' reputation. This would more than likely have happened, even if the Chantry wasn't established after the fall of Ancient Tevinter.

Clearly, that reputation is damaged among the Andrastian nations, where the Chantry controls mages - while other nations seem to have more tolerant views of magic (with the exception of the Qunari).

[Huntress]

Wow, why are so upset about? Don't like what you read? STOP READING THEN.



The other candidates just take a part with in the tribes until is time for another competition for First.. is that hard for you to see? The clans won't send away mages, none.



Simple the candidates against Lanaya were in another clans.



Aneiren live in the forest because he doesn't want the dalish to suffer because of him been found in there. The tribe had to stop longer that they wanted because of the werewolf attack.



Just Breath EmperorSahlertz. is not a competition is just talking.

[LobselVith8]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Doesn't really matter who kills Vaughan. After all, you can only be so dead.

It matters since the Warden brings him to justice, not the authorities.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Haven may be an alternative. But I disagree on wether they are acceptable, or even feasible. You won't find me worshiping some overgrown lizard.

What's the difference between worshipping a dragon and a god nobody can see? Neither group can prove that they hold the truth any more than the other. Both are issues of faith, Emperor. Brother Genitivi clearly believes in the Maker. Sten believes in the Qun. Morrigan has faith in her own power.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

And I know that people don't like to be thralls. But violence isn't the only option you know. Violence in this case, is probably only gonna make it all a whole lot worse for the mages.

Someone should have told that to Andraste and Shartan.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

What I would really like to see is not the Mages being emancipated from the Chantry. But the Templars. Divide the power into a unit of three. Mages, Chantry and Templars all equal.  But that won't happen overnight. It will take many years. Hell, the ones starting the project probably won't live to see it. But the end result is worth it.

It'll never happen because the Chantry will never relinquish it's control over the mages.

[EmperorSahlertz]

LobselVith8 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Doesn't really matter who kills Vaughan. After all, you can only be so dead.

It matters since the Warden brings him to justice, not the authorities.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Haven may be an alternative. But I disagree on wether they are acceptable, or even feasible. You won't find me worshiping some overgrown lizard.

What's the difference between worshipping a dragon and a god nobody can see? Neither group can prove that they hold the truth any more than the other. Both are issues of faith, Emperor. Brother Genitivi clearly believes in the Maker. Sten believes in the Qun. Morrigan has faith in her own power.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

And I know that people don't like to be thralls. But violence isn't the only option you know. Violence in this case, is probably only gonna make it all a whole lot worse for the mages.

Someone should have told that to Andraste and Shartan.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

What I would really like to see is not the Mages being emancipated from the Chantry. But the Templars. Divide the power into a unit of three. Mages, Chantry and Templars all equal.  But that won't happen overnight. It will take many years. Hell, the ones starting the project probably won't live to see it. But the end result is worth it.

It'll never happen because the Chantry will never relinquish it's control over the mages.

Vaughan is also probably only allowed to do as he does, becasue he does it to the Elves (which is an entriely different issue). I think we can be sure, that if he had wrecked a human's wedding, he would have suffered severe consequences. Alas, Elves are also mistreated, but this discussion is about mages. Let us keep it there.

The Maker is a matter of Faith, as no one can proove his existance. A dragon is matter of worship. They are worshipping a big firebreathing lizard. I can udnerstand why some primitive minds may find a dragon godlike. I just don't see them as divine when they devour our lifestock and burn our villages. Haven also resorts to Blood magic, which is absolutely unacceptable.

Andraste and Shartan weren't mages. On the contrary they rallied a whole bunch of non-mages and kicked the mages so bad, that they have been struggeling ever since. And now, when they aren't even united anymore, you think they stand a chance at doing better than Tevinter against the world?

And no, the Chantry will never let go of mages, becuase they still have a reason to fear them. And mages keep confirming that reason. The mages have evidently tried many times (17 annulments) to claim the change they want by force, and every time they have been put down. Once a beast has been burned, it should learn to fear the fire. Mages are just unwilling to learn how to play the game.

Edit: a quick point on the tatoos: I didn't really mean them as actual tatoos (with ink and needles and all that good stuff...), but actually as mere paint on his face. I don't know what kind of "marking" the Dalish tatoos are. If they are ink and needles I agree it would be impossible to apply himself. But if it is mere paint, he could have himself. It could also merely be a token of gratitude from the Clan, after he healed on of their members.

Modifié par EmperorSahlertz, 24 janvier 2011 - 11:56 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

Huntress wrote...

Wow, why are so upset about? Don't like what you read? STOP READING THEN.

The other candidates just take a part with in the tribes until is time for another competition for First.. is that hard for you to see? The clans won't send away mages, none.

Simple the candidates against Lanaya were in another clans.

Aneiren live in the forest because he doesn't want the dalish to suffer because of him been found in there. The tribe had to stop longer that they wanted because of the werewolf attack.

Just Breath EmperorSahlertz. is not a competition is just talking.

I'm sorry, but you have no proof of what happens to the candidates. We actually have almost no knowledge of the Dalish magic practices. Nothing sinister have to happen to the candidates. But we don't know. If, for instance, all candidates which didn't become First, was summarily executed, I'd wager that the Dalish would suddenly drop to a lowpoint in feasible alternatives.
What is hard for me to see is why so many of you are so quick to paint all Dalish with a big white brush and claim that they have got a better system, when we know squat about it. 

[LobselVith8]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Vaughan is also probably only allowed to do as he does, becasue he does it to the Elves (which is an entriely different issue). I think we can be sure, that if he had wrecked a human's wedding, he would have suffered severe consequences. Alas, Elves are also mistreated, but this discussion is about mages. Let us keep it there.

Fair enough.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The Maker is a matter of Faith, as no one can proove his existance. A dragon is matter of worship. They are worshipping a big firebreathing lizard. I can udnerstand why some primitive minds may find a dragon godlike. I just don't see them as divine when they devour our lifestock and burn our villages.

They believe the High Dragon to be Andraste reincarnated. I can't prove them right or wrong. Certainly, Kolgrim seemed to have some level of communication with "Andraste" to stop her impending attack.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Haven also resorts to Blood magic, which is absolutely unacceptable.

So do Grey Wardens.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Andraste and Shartan weren't mages. On the contrary they rallied a whole bunch of non-mages and kicked the mages so bad, that they have been struggeling ever since. And now, when they aren't even united anymore, you think they stand a chance at doing better than Tevinter against the world?

Former slaves against slave masters, not non-mages against mages. There's absolutely no evidence that Shartan was or wasn't a mage, and at least one book makes the claim that Andraste was indeed a mage.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

And no, the Chantry will never let go of mages, becuase they still have a reason to fear them. And mages keep confirming that reason. The mages have evidently tried many times (17 annulments) to claim the change they want by force, and every time they have been put down. Once a beast has been burned, it should learn to fear the fire. Mages are just unwilling to learn how to play the game.

The Histoy of the Circle codex reads that the Circles were formed as a result of a non-violent protest. There's absolutely no evidence that proves that mages need to be imprisoned. Therefore, I see no reason to blame mages when they try to emancipate themselves from an oppressor.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Edit: a quick point on the tatoos: I didn't really mean them as actual tatoos (with ink and needles and all that good stuff...), but actually as mere paint on his face. I don't know what kind of "marking" the Dalish tatoos are. If they are ink and needles I agree it would be impossible to apply himself. But if it is mere paint, he could have himself. It could also merely be a token of gratitude from the Clan, after he healed on of their members.

There's absolutely no evidence that they're just markings. He's dressed as a Dalish and has Dalish markings, aka blood writing. Regarding Aenirin's Dalish "blood writing," from the Blood Writing Codex entry:
When the children of our people came of age, they earn the privilege of wearing the vallaslin, the blood writing. It sets us apart from the shemlen, and from the elves who have thrown their lot in with them. It reminds us that we will never again surrender our traditions and beliefs.
The ritual deserves great reverence. The one who is to gain the vallaslin must prepare by meditating on the gods and the ways of our people, and by purifying the body and the skin. When the time comes, the keeper of the clan applies the blood writing. This is done in complete silence. Cries of pain are signs of weakness. If one cannot tolerate the pain of the blood writing, they are not ready to undertake the responsibilities of an adult. The keeper may stop the ritual if they decide that the one gaining the vallaslin is not ready. There is no shame in this, for all children are different, and our ancestors once took centuries to come of age.
As told by Gisharel, the Keeper of the Ralaferin clan of the Dalish Elves.

[LobselVith8]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

I'm sorry, but you have no proof of what happens to the candidates. We actually have almost no knowledge of the Dalish magic practices. Nothing sinister have to happen to the candidates. But we don't know. If, for instance, all candidates which didn't become First, was summarily executed, I'd wager that the Dalish would suddenly drop to a lowpoint in feasible alternatives.
What is hard for me to see is why so many of you are so quick to paint all Dalish with a big white brush and claim that they have got a better system, when we know squat about it. 

People are pointing out that their system doesn't paint mages with an evil brush like the Chantry system does, that's all. Mages and non-mages live together in the clans. What's wrong with pointing out that there are working alternatives to the anti-mage system of the Andrastian Chantry?

Witch Hunt makes it clear that they accept mages who ran away from the Circle (in a conversation with Ariane) so I don't see why you're saying that we don't know what they do with mages in the Dalish clans.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Any natural rights argument would, I think, support total freedom for mages.

Mages have magical power, and this simply some aspect of their nature over which no one had any control.  No mage chose to be a mage, and no non-mage chose not to be a mage.

Treating the two groups differently can't help but be unfairly discriminatory.

Any application of regulation upon mages would therefore need to be applied to everyone equally, mages and non-mages alike.  If mages need permission to leave their homes, for example, then so would non-mages.

To do otherwise would be to punish mages through regulation for something they didn't do, and something over which they have no control.

[moilami]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

I'd also again like to point out, that Abominations are not what the Circle are trying to defend people from (at least not only). They are mainly trying to defend people from rogue mages.

And they fail in that badly. Very badly. In the same time they break families and make the society lose the great gift mages have.

[moilami]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

So to be a leader amongst the Dalish you HAVE to be a mage? Makes you think.
Just because there can be many candidates, does not equal there are many candidates. Just that they are all screened for potential. Then evidently dumped, since the Clan will never have more than two fully trained mages. Also, when does a Dalish mage qualify as "fully trained"? What tests does the candidates have to go through to be accepted as a First. There are so many unanswered questions remaining, that the Dalish can't be used as an alternative.

(Lol, makes me want to switch role to my dwarven warrior who would enthusiastically approve that populist speech, and say a few words too.)

[Lotion Soronarr]

moilami wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

moilami wrote...

(From other thread. Chantry is corrupt and evil and anyone not seeing that is blind and brainwashed.)

Except that the devlopers specificy say you're wrong on that.

Where? I am very interested to see how they keep justifying slaying or inprisoning innocent people. This Chanty stuff and "new world order" is just broken,* and big changes is needed to fix it.

Other than that, what devs say doesn't change logic. Killing is killing even if 1000 devs would say killing is just helping people to get to heaven.

DG stated specificly that the templa-mage issue is meant to be grey. Grey as in "no clear moral victor". No clear solution to the issue. No clear side to pick. Of course, some people may prefer to pick one of h the other, but that's on purely sbbjective issues.

And I ask oyu - if you're agaisnt imprisoning people (for whatever the reason) who didn't do anything - what would you do if your neighbour town becomes the epicenter of a deadly virus. when the army comes to set up the quarantene, will you fight them?

[Lotion Soronarr]

IanPolaris wrote...

Lotion,

I am not going to reply point by point to that monstrosity. Rather I will give you a couple of nuggets to think about:

1. You talk about human nature as though it were obvious, but it's not, and you tried to slant the discussion by claiming the 'science' was on your side while only citing radical behaviorists. You got slapped down for that and deservedly so. It's not given that it's 'obvious' human behavior.

2. I take umbrage at the charge of hypocrisy. I am not using behavioral psychology. I am making the pointed and correct observation that if abominations were the problem you claim, then we should see the footprint of that in all societies and we don't. That's not at all the same thing as what you were trying to do.

It's a fact that the Black Death created a huge social footprint in all societies in Europe. You can dispute the nature and extent, but the footprint is an observed fact. We should see the same for a magical natural disaster of the scope you are claiming but we don't. Thus we can reasonably conclude that either such a disaster never happened, OR it was grossly inflated.

-Polaris

1. The men I cited weren't radical. You only call them such so you don't have to answer such. I asked you before to cite your sources that claim they are disputed/radical. You didn't. You fail.

2. I don' care if you take umbrage. You are being a hypocrite and having double standards. Call your observations pointed and correct a thousand time. That doesn't make them so.

3. You footprint is bollcoks. It does not apply here. Even if it was, DA:O is no Earth and same social behavior and psychological models do not apply - remeber?

the only reasonable thing to conclude is that you're wrong.

Oh..and you didn't asnwer the burnign question..You adoid it like a plague, because yo uknow it will burry you.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Ian, you put a gigantic foot in your mouth and then tried to hide/ignore it...but it won't work. I'm gonna ram that foot down till it comes out on the other side.
You keep ignoring the main issue, but I'll not let it happen.

So I ask you again - if you are correct - WHERE IS THE GREYNESS?

You do now what a grey choice is, right? Let me help you. One where it's almost impossible to decide about the "right" thing. One where there really isn't a clear "right" thing.
One where each side has pros and cons, and when you are faced with a choice, when you have to pick a side, you sit down and think and analyze...but you see there is no clear choice there. There is only dillema.
THAT is grey.

The anvil choice was grey.
Elves or Warevolves is grey.
Connor or Isolde is grey (3rd option doesn't count)

Pros and cons, but you can hardly call one better.

You postulate that it is an objective truth (according to you) that the Chatnry and the Cirlces are evil, incompetent, morraly corrupt, ineffective, etc, etc... In short they've go no pro's ..only con's.
they don't keep the coutrnyside safer, they dont' keep the mages safer, they don't have the moral highground...what DO they have?

On the other hand, you present other systems as having only pros and no cons.

So where is the hard choice here? Where is they greyness? YOU CLAIM THERE IS AN OBJECTIVELY SUPERIOR CHOICE IN EVERY WAY...Something that the dev's explicitly said is not true. David Gaider confirmed it - the Circle issue, the whole mage-templar thing is meant to be grey..muddled.. with no clear better choice.

So how can it be? Either the developers f***** up when making their world and have no idea what they're saying, or you are wrong.
Guess who's side I'm takin here?

The whole thing that made the chantry circle system a viable choice WAS that it was effective. That it did safeguard the common folk, depsite it's shaky moral foundation.
Wihout that, there is no choice. There is no dillema.


And thus, your whole argument crumbles. And like dominos, it tears down most of your previous arguments....The abomination rates, danger or abominations, circle security.... Everything undone by one simple argument, that you ignored from the very beginning.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 25 janvier 2011 - 08:19 .

[IanPolaris]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Lotion,

I am not going to reply point by point to that monstrosity. Rather I will give you a couple of nuggets to think about:

1. You talk about human nature as though it were obvious, but it's not, and you tried to slant the discussion by claiming the 'science' was on your side while only citing radical behaviorists. You got slapped down for that and deservedly so. It's not given that it's 'obvious' human behavior.

2. I take umbrage at the charge of hypocrisy. I am not using behavioral psychology. I am making the pointed and correct observation that if abominations were the problem you claim, then we should see the footprint of that in all societies and we don't. That's not at all the same thing as what you were trying to do.

It's a fact that the Black Death created a huge social footprint in all societies in Europe. You can dispute the nature and extent, but the footprint is an observed fact. We should see the same for a magical natural disaster of the scope you are claiming but we don't. Thus we can reasonably conclude that either such a disaster never happened, OR it was grossly inflated.

-Polaris

1. The men I cited weren't radical. You only call them such so you don't have to answer such. I asked you before to cite your sources that claim they are disputed/radical. You didn't. You fail.

I guess you don't know what the word "radical" means when it applied to terms like behavoirists and such.  Skinner and his disciples are called "radical behaviorists" because they believe that only the direct environment stimulous is meaningful when it comes to pyshcology.  I am not going to bother with extra cites and such because this is NOT a thread and forum of applied human psychology.  I invite others to do their own reading.  There are many psychological theories out there besides the one you cited.

2. I don' care if you take umbrage. You are being a hypocrite and having double standards. Call your observations pointed and correct a thousand time. That doesn't make them so.

That applies in reverse.  The difference is I wasn't making grandious claims that the 'science was on my side' which is a really, really stupid thing to say about an IN GAME moral question anyway.  Rather I was pointing out that if mages in normal society were as dangerous as you and the Chantry want us to believe, then we should be seeing sighns of that.  Lack of such signs is evidence against the Chantry's assertions.  Really that's all.

3. You footprint is bollcoks. It does not apply here. Even if it was, DA:O is no Earth and same social behavior and psychological models do not apply - remeber?

No it's not.  Actions even in the game have consequences and it's perfectly reasonable to ask for the logical consequences for a game world construction. 

the only reasonable thing to conclude is that you're wrong.

Oh..and you didn't asnwer the burnign question..You adoid it like a plague, because yo uknow it will burry you.

Really?  We are supposed to take your say-so that I am wrong, when I have supplied game lore evidnece that strongly indicates that I am not?  Okaaay.....

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

Lotion,

Right back at you. If the circle tower were the slamdunk choice that you think it is, where is the greyness?

Right now, IN CHARACTER your PCs either don't have sufficient evidence or skewed evidence regarding the circle. Just as the choice in Orzammar had a best solution arrived at in morally grey fashions, I see the same here.

Edit:  The point is that most people (esp most non-mages) buy into what the chantry is saying and that is what makes it grey.  In addition, most commoners in Thedas (because of the Chantry) fear and mistrust mages which means the system I advocate would have to be implemented gradually and given the very sparse data, that would be fought tooth and nail by extremists by both ends.

The point is that in-game the choice is a lot murker and fraught with a lot more dangers than it might appear outside the game.  That is a Grey Choice as well.  Grey doesn't mean "no clear answer".  Grey cfan also imply "moral ambiguity", i.e. the right answer has to be arrived by "wrong" or 'distastful' means.  That too is a grey choice (Orzammar is a classic example).

-Polaris

Modifié par IanPolaris, 25 janvier 2011 - 08:26 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Any natural rights argument would, I think, support total freedom for mages.

Mages have magical power, and this simply some aspect of their nature over which no one had any control.  No mage chose to be a mage, and no non-mage chose not to be a mage.

Treating the two groups differently can't help but be unfairly discriminatory.

Any application of regulation upon mages would therefore need to be applied to everyone equally, mages and non-mages alike.  If mages need permission to leave their homes, for example, then so would non-mages.

To do otherwise would be to punish mages through regulation for something they didn't do, and something over which they have no control.

The imprisoment never was about crimes or something thaty do/didn't do. It was about security. About safety.

Mages are ticking bombs that no one knows when they will go off. And there's only a few of them.
Confining them seems like the most efficient way to prevent many deaths.

[Augoeides]

I'm all for the freedom of mages. If we're going to imprison folk who MAY use their natural talents for killing or become a monster (literally an abomination or merely an abomination in deed) then they might as well lock up any and all who fall under the banner of warrior and rogue.

[Lotion Soronarr]

IanPolaris wrote...

Lotion,

Right back at you. If the circle tower were the slamdunk choice that you think it is, where is the greyness?

Right now, IN CHARACTER your PCs either don't have sufficient evidence or skewed evidence regarding the circle. Just as the choice in Orzammar had a best solution arrived at in morally grey fashions, I see the same here.

-Polaris

Dman liar. Trying to escape the argument again. You won't.

I never calimed the circle was the objectively better choice.
I'm fully aware of it's downsides and moral dillema upon which it is built.

And no, you are lying again. In character, according to you - your character should have all the knowledge. Nothing of it is metagame..codex entries that are part of ThedAs history, something you character should know. He should know the land he's living in and what goes on there.

Orzamar and Redcliffe are different, since metagaming you know the OUTCOME..in there, the only knowledge is hte current situation.

So double fail on you. Tripple.

I aks again - WHERE IS HTE GREY????
What are the downsides of the other system? LIST THEM.

[IanPolaris]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

The imprisoment never was about crimes or something thaty do/didn't do. It was about security. About safety.

Mages are ticking bombs that no one knows when they will go off. And there's only a few of them.
Confining them seems like the most efficient way to prevent many deaths.

So says the chantry.  Where is the moral greyness if the circle were really the indisputable best and most efficient way of dealing with mages?  Where is the evidence outside the circle that mages are the walking time-bombs the Chantry suggests?

If mages just for gbeing mages were to go "bad" at an appreciable rate, we should see signs of that regardless of culture, and we don't.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

Lotion,



Yes you did. You said that circle was the most logical and reasonable choice. You have made that emphatically clear many times. Go back and read your own damn posts!



-Polaris

[Lord Cheetah]

i'm just going to say this, if you let mages to be free how much people will the average mage kill.

just look at the connor incident, 1 little boy used ONE spell and i think at least 75 people (in castle and village) were killed, and now you must remember, a life is a life, a mage's life should be just as valuable as a normal 1, blood mages aren't exactly killing 1 person so they can do awesome spells the rest of their life, and even if they did, it would be bad enough. 1 mage (like Uldred or Avernus) can do a simple spell to summon demons which kill a load of people, in Uldred's case more then half the circle got killed or became a abomination.



They might be stereotypical examples but they still killed loads of people on accident, if you read codexes in Broken circle and talk to people you notice that it also didn't go the way Uldred wanted it to go, he was a abomination the whole time since he summoned the demons. What would exactly change if they would be free?

[IanPolaris]

Where is the downside of the system I am advocating?



Simple. It requires patience to give people enough time to be deprogammed enough to give mages a fair chance. It also requires patience on the mage side to understand that however noble their reasons were, their exactions have been construed to give all mages a bad name and that's been done for centuries.



The fact is most people tend not to have such patience without extremely skilled diplomatic and political leaders (which we see a distinct lack of).



In short, anytime you change a system, you have a dangerous transition period. That is the biggest disadvantage to what I am proposing.



-Polaris