1019 réponses à ce sujet

[Eclipse_9990]

[quote]Mlaar wrote...

[quote]Eclipse_9990 wrote...
[/quote]
Proof? Okay. 
That Templar that was pulling that Mage child by a leash, and threatening him with a knife to perform a "trick" for the blacksmith. (Once again Dragon age comic) 

Uldred pretty much despises anyone who has to do with the chantry.

Those Templars who tried to ambush Anders in Awakening.

Cullen mentions to the mage warden when he says he's glad that he didnt have to kill you. That the Templars he knows discuss culling mages with glee.

I mean honestly. You actually think Templars.. The people who's job it is to constantly watch Mages, and kill, or capture them. Actually like each other.. Even a little? Sure they might not be openly hostile but to think the majority of them even respect each other is laughable. 

[/quote]
Well I havn't read the comics so I cant comment on that but then comics are different from designers views and are given artistic license

Uldred is not a very good example to use since well you saw how he turned out

Templars who ambushed Anders believed thier comrades had been slain by him they were emotionally involved and therefore had personal reason to want him dead thier reasoning is the only thing in question

I'll have to run through the game again about culling mages with glee I musta missed that part

dont mistake mutal respect with like/hate they are completly different things I also stated they co-exist not that they jump into bed with each other and best of buddies,

You say Mages hate templars and vice versa yet each case you present is an extreme, Yet (sorry im usless with npc names) leader of mages guild, Wynne and various other elder mages are fine or impartial to the templars when you speak to them, and when you see them talking it is mutal respect. Infact Gregor though he has called for the rite of annulment comes across as very reluctant to have had to call for it and you can hear the hint of sadness in his voice that he did so.

What you seem to have done is taken a few extreme cases and branded the entire chantry as suspect and elevated mages to a place of ultimate purity on those actions alone[/quote]

-----------------------------------------------------------

Ultimate purity? Dude I'm not making out Mages in general to be saints. There are jerk Mages in Dragon Age don't get me wrong. Also, Wynne is a Chantry tool, and if you talk to a lot of the senior mages, and mages in general they atleast don't like the Templars. That old mage in the library Sweeny, who would sign the release form for the rod of fire. Mentions wanting you to do him a favor and get back at some Templar who patrols the library.

Also even Irving doesnt like the Chantry and Templars much. If you sell out Jowan, and tell Irving about it. He comes up with a plan solely for getting Lily in trouble. Basically saying that the Chantry would be quick to say that Lily was controlled by Jowan, if one Mage has to suffer for this he'll make sure the Chantry loses someone as well.

Modifié par Eclipse_9990, 02 février 2011 - 01:55 .

[Augustei]

Alistair didn't dismiss the chantries views on darkspawn and say it was myth. They said they had no Idea. The most likely senario still stands that the blight was started by mages. Whether it was them entering the golden city or screwing up an experiment.

Modifié par XxDeonxX, 02 février 2011 - 01:56 .

[Augustei]

blothulfur wrote...

Yes rise up against your chantry opressors saarebas and the herds of your human cattle that support them, struggle for freedom even if it means death and tear apart the armies that come to place chains upon you.
Plunge the entirety of Thedas into war if needs be for you deserve the same rights as any other man or woman, there is no fate worse than to be locked in a gilded cage.
And we shall watch and wait.
Hahahahahaha.

Exept being leashed and having your tongue cut out, being treated like scum instead of a simple prisoner

[blothulfur]

I know not what you speak of bas, I am a pathetic little human merely voicing my support for these disgusting beasts erm I mean noble freedom fighters.

Walks away whistling innocently.

[Eclipse_9990]

XxDeonxX wrote...

Alistair didn't dismiss the chantries views on darkspawn and say it was myth. They said they had no Idea. The most likely senario still stands that the blight was started by mages. Whether it was them entering the golden city or screwing up an experiment.

He at least didn't believe that its true. He says as I quote "Do you want the Chantry's version? Or the Truth?" then if you say aren't they the same thing? He laughs and says "They seldom are".
Yeah, I'd say he most likely regards it as a fabrication. 

[Lotion Soronarr]

Mlaar wrote...
You say Mages hate templars and vice versa yet each case you present is an extreme, Yet (sorry im usless with npc names) leader of mages guild, Wynne and various other elder mages are fine or impartial to the templars when you speak to them, and when you see them talking it is mutal respect. Infact Gregor though he has called for the rite of annulment comes across as very reluctant to have had to call for it and you can hear the hint of sadness in his voice that he did so.

www.youtube.com/watch

Her'es the actual youtube clip of Gregoir talking about mage survivors

[Eclipse_9990]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Mlaar wrote...
You say Mages hate templars and vice versa yet each case you present is an extreme, Yet (sorry im usless with npc names) leader of mages guild, Wynne and various other elder mages are fine or impartial to the templars when you speak to them, and when you see them talking it is mutal respect. Infact Gregor though he has called for the rite of annulment comes across as very reluctant to have had to call for it and you can hear the hint of sadness in his voice that he did so.

www.youtube.com/watch

Her'es the actual youtube clip of Gregoir talking about mage survivors

Wow.. Now I hate Templars even more. Thanks for that. 

[Lotion Soronarr]

How so?
It cleary show Gregoir doesn't hate the mages. Quite the contrary, he almost breaks down when thinking of mage survivors.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 02 février 2011 - 02:09 .

[Eclipse_9990]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

How so?
It cleary show Gregoir doesn't hate the mages. Quite the contrary, he almost breaks down when thinking of mage survivors.

I'm speaking about his seeming support of the way Qunari treat Mages.. *Sighs* But whatever. 

[LobselVith8]

GodWood wrote...

Eclipse_9990 wrote...
Essentially making mages their slaves.

How are they at all slaves?

I assumed being under Chantry control with no rights doesn't count as slavery to you?

GodWood wrote...

They are given free accomodation, free food and free education which is probably better than what most Fereldan peasants get.
The catch is they are to be regulated and kept under Chantry watch which is perfectly understandable when one sees the risk mages are to society (regular magic, blood-magic and demon possession)
The current system is fine, I really don't get you 'mage apologists'.

Except mages were segregated because of a nonviolent protest in a cathedral, not because of blood mages or abominations (History of the Circle codex). Rivain, the Dalish clans, and the Chasind have mages living with non-mages, after all.

[Veex]

I'd like to thank Sylvius, in Exile, and Shorts for reminding why I enjoy hermeneutics.

[Akizora]

In actual life I am an atheist , I will not however bring them into discussion here. When I play games my characters tend to be atheists as well or discordiants or at least have their own strong beliefs of worship or religion that differ from the "mainstream religion". Whether they worship cults, believe themselves to be gods or think that it is all a lie constructed to bring order and control over the world.

In Dragon Age Origins, my Mage did not believe in the Chantry and after a life of opression and isolation he held a great deal of hatred for the Chantry. He desecrated the sacred urn, he swore and told off revered mothers, priests and templars and even forced to kill some. Add to that he was also a narcissist and sliced the throats on random people crying for help, prompting Alistair to go "uuuh, remind me not to get injured around you".and in some cases caused Zevran to feel a strange tingle.

There was a lighter side to him however, when I hardened Lelianah and made her almost abandon her belief in the Chantry...those were the days, mmm. Can't you feel the good in my mage?

I speak of all this from IN-CHARACTER and I might as well put a late disclaimer that none of this necessarily reflects my personal opinions.

[hawat333]

I'm an atheist too, and I do disprespect every single organization that incite war in the name of any god or faith or whatever.

But my ingame characters, yeah, some of them pretty much liked the Chantry. Especieally my one human character, he was always the religous type, and it bring him peace - dealing with the unpleasant, dirty reality made him look for a shelter from the dirt he encoutered, and the Chantry became that shelter.

[Cenwyn]

mousestalker wrote...

One good thing about the Chantry: All the women seem to have the secret of keeping their figure even into advanced old age. Those Chantry robes are very flattering and must offer fabulous support.

Lol I wondered about that myself!

[Eclipse_9990]

Akizora wrote...

In actual life I am an atheist , I will not however bring them into discussion here. When I play games my characters tend to be atheists as well or discordiants or at least have their own strong beliefs of worship or religion that differ from the "mainstream religion". Whether they worship cults, believe themselves to be gods or think that it is all a lie constructed to bring order and control over the world.

In Dragon Age Origins, my Mage did not believe in the Chantry and after a life of opression and isolation he held a great deal of hatred for the Chantry. He desecrated the sacred urn, he swore and told off revered mothers, priests and templars and even forced to kill some. Add to that he was also a narcissist and sliced the throats on random people crying for help, prompting Alistair to go "uuuh, remind me not to get injured around you".and in some cases caused Zevran to feel a strange tingle.

There was a lighter side to him however, when I hardened Lelianah and made her almost abandon her belief in the Chantry...those were the days, mmm. Can't you feel the good in my mage?

I speak of all this from IN-CHARACTER and I might as well put a late disclaimer that none of this necessarily reflects my personal opinions.

Wait you destroyed the ashes, and Leliana lived? When I did it, she just turned on me. 

[LobselVith8]

[quote]MorningBird wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quote]MorningBird wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quote]XxDeonxX wrote...

Rivain is probably a bad example of mages living alongside non mages.. *Their higher ups are witches that allow themselves to be possessed by Abominations*.. They are slowly falling under the beliefs and ways of the Qun and soon those mages will have their tongues cut out and leashed[/quote]

Actually, there's no indication of that. It's been some time since the New Exalted Marches, after all, and Rivain was the one to bring about peace between the Andrastian nations and the Qunari. Even Genitivi's recent visit to them (Rivain codex) mentioned that they have respect for their mages. Clearly, they aren't the same as the Qunari. They were influenced by the Qun, but they're the most tolerant of mages in all human society in Thedas that we're aware of. Even the latest blog entry mentions Rivain as one of the nations that doesn't imprison mages like the Andrastian Chantry does.[/quote]

Not to mention, abominations don't possess mages.  Demons do.  A mage, once possessed, becomes an abomination.

[/quote]

You mean like Wynne, who can be regarded as an abomination, but disputes the label because she retains her humanity? It's likely no different in Rivain.[/quote]

Read the bolded part of XxDeonxX post.

I was merely pointing out that witches can't 'allow themselves to be possessed by Abominations.'

They can allow themselves to be possessed by demons and, as a result, turn into Abominations, but they cannot, however, be possessed by Abominations and turn into Abominations.

[/quote]

Didn't disagree, only mentioned Wynne is technically an abomination but not like abominations we typically encounter because she's bonded to a spirit, not a demon. It's likely the same with the witches of Rivain, who allow themselves to bond with spirits.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Regarding the Exalted March, it's an issue of who started it. If the Dalish were merely protecting themselves against an enemy that tried to forcibly convert them, it's in their interests to defeat the enemy so they can't be a threat to them again.[/quote]

Which is an interesting notion.
Where does defence end and agression start?

I find it natural that if someone attacks you, you want to push them out of your borders. That is defense.
Pushing into enemy teritory? Now you are the agressor and the enemy is the one defending their homes and families. [/quote]

If Orlais invaded the Dales first or the Chantry did send in templars to force the elves to convert, then the Dalish are only trying to prevent an enemy that wants to forcibly convert them from having the power to do so again. What should they do? Do nothing and pray for the best? They were slaves because of humans for centuries, so I doubt they want that to happen again.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

The whole notion of "defeating your enemy so it won't be a thread again" is bollocks IMHO. Unless you completely destroy them, the "threat" always reamains. It's jsut postponed by a few years (plenty of historical examples of that)

Would the Chantry even get involved if their own existence wasn't threatened? Possibly, maybe not. We have really far too little to go on here. [/quote]

Orlais and the Chantry of Andraste was the threat, and your example is likely why the Dalish invaded Orlais in the first place - to take down an enemy that would only attack them again (if the Dalish codex about the Dales is the correct version of events) if they waivered.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Except we can see from the case of D'Sims, a charlatan who was pretending to be a healer and was killed for it by templars, and the Chantry putting a bounty on Morrigan for their suspicions alone in Witch Hunt because they think she's a blood mage, that templars seem to have a lot of wiggle room when it comes to killing mages. No proof? No problem, apparently.
[/quote]

You tryingto go somewhere here? Proof of intent and lack of evidence would be nice. Which is something you lack, as usual. [/quote]

The lack of evidence the templars had against D'Sims (who wasn't even a real mage) and their lack of evidence against Morrigan (who they put a bounty on in Witch Hunt) doesn't seem to bother you in the slighest, though.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

How is using the Rite of Conscription - which was brought back by King Maric and kept in place by King Cailan - being "uppity?" She ignores the law by refusing it, simple as that.[/quote]

Does the law even apply to the Chantry?
If so, is refusing it that horrible? Aren't you the one who campaigns for mages to refuse following Chantry law?
If you cna cherrypick which laws t ofollow, why can't any other individual? [/quote]

Did you forget Duncan recruiting Alistair by using the Rite, because Alistair couldn't leave since he was handed over to the Chantry?

[Eclipse_9990]

Well since someone mentioned beliefs. I might as well say something.I do believe in god. I don't know if I can really consider my self a Christian but I do believe in him, and I'm also an avid supporter of evolution, (though some people believe me insane or stupid for this, but screw those guys).
Anyway I believe in god but in Dragon Age I always play a character that believes in a god as well but his issue is that he has a hard time accepting/believing in a God who supports treating Mages so badly.

I'm pretty much just saying that my hatred for the Chantry has nothing to do with real life beliefs or anything like that. Just wanted to get that out there.

Modifié par Eclipse_9990, 02 février 2011 - 02:37 .

[AlexXIV]

There are things though that should give evreyone to thnk though. For once the circle mages were overthrown by demons. Ultimately Irvings fault, since as the leader of the circle he should have been prepared for something like that. As a second, the templars could not deal with the thread alone, they needed support from Denerim, besides the right of annulment also more templars/troops. So it seems the templars, while not really being able to handle it at first, at least would have had a chance to deal with it in the long run.
 
Of course only if there wasn't the blight. Even if the templar would have eventually cleansed the tower they would have had taken heavy losses which ultimately would have lowered Fereldan's chances to fight the Blight.  It's too bad we don't know if the templars could have managed without the Warden. But chances are yes, since Uldred, or the demon that possessed him wanted to use the Blight as a sort of distraction. He probably counted on Denerim being reluctant to send enough reinforcements while they also have to deal with the blight, not to mention the civil war.
 
Just makes me the more amazed about the Wardens accomplishments which were clearly more than 'gathering an army' but more about 'building these armies' to begin with which all would be non-existant when the Warden would not have dealt with certain threats.

One has to wonder though how Uldred managed to overthrow the tower in the first place. Well there was the blight of course, and for once many mages died and the survivors were preoccupied with the events at ostagar in their heads. They didn't see the 'Uldred threat' in the shadow of the greater one. So one could argue under 'normal' (no blight) circumstances it wouldn't have happened to begin with. On the other hand many of Uldred's followers were unhappy with the situation in the Circle so the system as it was 'generated' unhappy powerful beings. Which is sort of a bad thing and one really should wonder how that can be changed. Either they have to screen mages more, aka restrict their rights more. Or they need to give them more freedom.

The equation would be how much freedom can you give them so they stay 'happy'. And how much freedom can you give them without entirely losing control. Another question would be, could the Circle control itself without the help of the templars/chantry. Well the Chantry teaches us that mages are responsible for the blights, when the magisters of tevinter tried to usurp heaven. That's basically their main argument why mages are so dangerous. It would be helpful to know what exactly happens or to have at least examples how Circles failed to control themselves, without templar interferance.

Once more we don't really have really enough information to make an 'educated guess' even. We don't really know any free mages who are not apostates, hunted and outlawed by the chantry. So we couldn't say how and if it would work out.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 02 février 2011 - 02:41 .

[LobselVith8]

[quote]Mlaar wrote...

was just thinking about the people who dislike the chantry using the argument that mages are prisoned in the circle infact was mulling over this for a while before I came to the conclusion that its a lot of hogwash!! [/quote]

Of course it is. Mages just keep running away and risking their lives or fighting against the templars because it's so wonderful to live under armored and armed drug addicts.

[quote]Mlaar wrote...

sure mages as they are discovered are sent to the circle sounds terrible dosnt it to be confined in a place where they can learn to manage thier powers in a controlled enviroment but a prison it is not [/quote]

You must be ignoring the Magi Origin VO, which specifically calls it a prison.

[quote]Mlaar wrote...

why I hear you ask, well as their knowledge in the arts improve and they become more responsible with thier powers more liberties are given to the extent where they leave the tower settle, marry have children, travel the land this is shown time and time again throughout the game, [/quote]

You realize mages aren't allowed to have relationships or marry in some Circles, can never raise their own children, and can be killed or given a lobotomy if they are declared maleficar, even without evidence (like Aenirin nearly was)?

[quote]Mlaar wrote...

infact the only mages truely complaining are the younger generations and this is typically the most rebellious stage of life as they havnt enough maturity or responsibility, take Anders for example willing to throw lightning bolts at anybody he deems is a fool his words alone condemn his lack of responsibilty. [/quote]

Making jokes doesn't mean Anders is evil. He's only alive because of Irving and Greagoir.

[quote]Mlaar wrote...

I would infact praise the chantry for not caving into fear and actually making a stance by saying look mages you were born with these gifts from the maker now you must learn how to use them without causing terror in the populace,so they lose a few years due to study but they come away from it much the wiser, the fact that so many choose to remain with the confines of the tower shows that it is actually something they care for a great deal the more knowledgable they become. [/quote]

The Andrastian Chantry preaches hatred and intolerance towards mages. The Reverand Mother in Redcliffe practically apologies for it if you greet her as a human mage and promises not to raise a mob against you.

[quote]Mlaar wrote...

From what I saw the Templars and mages relationship was one of mutal respect with the only tension being caused by the strain that perhaps they would have to take a life of one who couldnt control his actions.
So no the chantry is not evil foul cruel for having mages put into the tower for it is in the best intentions[/quote]

For oppressing them and imprisoning them in conditions that can be (and have been) argued to be slavery?

[quote]Mlaar wrote...

Well I havn't read the comics so I cant comment on that but then comics are different from designers views and are given artistic license

Uldred is not a very good example to use since well you saw how he turned out [/quote]

The mages were fighting to be freed from their oppressors. Regarding of whether Uldred was altruistic or not, they were fighting for the same cause - freedom. And we don't need to look at comics to see that the templars murdered the Magnificent D'Sims because they thought he was a mage who healed people (Awakening) or to see how templars can place a bounty on Morrigan because they assume she's a blood mage with absolutely no evidence against her.

[quote]Mlaar wrote...

Templars who ambushed Anders believed thier comrades had been slain by him they were emotionally involved and therefore had personal reason to want him dead thier reasoning is the only thing in question [/quote]

So assumptions are valid reasons to murder someone? I disagree.

[quote]Mlaar wrote...

I'll have to run through the game again about culling mages with glee I musta missed that part [/quote]

Magi Origin. When you first meet him and say that you thought all templars enjoyed killing mages.

[quote]Mlaar wrote...

You say Mages hate templars and vice versa yet each case you present is an extreme, Yet (sorry im usless with npc names) leader of mages guild, Wynne and various other elder mages are fine or impartial to the templars when you speak to them, and when you see them talking it is mutal respect. Infact Gregor though he has called for the rite of annulment comes across as very reluctant to have had to call for it and you can hear the hint of sadness in his voice that he did so. [/quote]

Greagoir seems to give Irving a lot of rope, I admit, but the fact that a mage-hating Cullen can rule the Circle of Ferelden as the new Knight-Commander in fear reveals how mages have no rights - only privledges that they're granted by the Knight-Commander.

[quote]Mlaar wrote...

What you seem to have done is taken a few extreme cases and branded the entire chantry as suspect and elevated mages to a place of ultimate purity on those actions alone[/quote]

Because the Chantry basically enslaves mages to their authority. If you read the History of the Circle codex, segregating mages from society had nothing to do with keeping people safe - it was because of a completely nonviolent protest they held in a cathedral.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 02 février 2011 - 02:42 .

[Beerfish]

There is a whole HUGE multipaged thread about freedom for the mages. Perhaps we can save that discussion for that thread instead of having this thread become son of 'should the mages be free'?



Back to the topic of this thread. One has to examine what the chantry does as a whole to think of them as worth while or not. Other than the preachy words and high handedness that many dislike they do seem to try to legitimately look out for the poor, the sick and the refugees.

[AlexXIV]

Beerfish wrote...

There is a whole HUGE multipaged thread about freedom for the mages. Perhaps we can save that discussion for that thread instead of having this thread become son of 'should the mages be free'?

Back to the topic of this thread. One has to examine what the chantry does as a whole to think of them as worth while or not. Other than the preachy words and high handedness that many dislike they do seem to try to legitimately look out for the poor, the sick and the refugees.

Well the 'free the mages' issue is sort of part of the 'do you like the chantry' issue. Since the way the chantry treats mages can be a reason for people disliking the chantry.

[Iberius]

AlexXIV wrote...

Beerfish wrote...

There is a whole HUGE multipaged thread about freedom for the mages. Perhaps we can save that discussion for that thread instead of having this thread become son of 'should the mages be free'?

Back to the topic of this thread. One has to examine what the chantry does as a whole to think of them as worth while or not. Other than the preachy words and high handedness that many dislike they do seem to try to legitimately look out for the poor, the sick and the refugees.

Well the 'free the mages' issue is sort of part of the 'do you like the chantry' issue. Since the way the chantry treats mages can be a reason for people disliking the chantry.

I still think there is possibly a bigger reason for why the chantry treats the mages the way they do. True they can go insane and become abominations, but I still think it's something bigger than that. I think the chantry just uses that as an excuse. Whether the "unknown" factor is in favor or not in favor of the chantry is yet to be seen imo.

It could be as simple as what the chantry has stated, but has it ever been "that simple" with DA

[Eclipse_9990]

Iberius wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Beerfish wrote...

There is a whole HUGE multipaged thread about freedom for the mages. Perhaps we can save that discussion for that thread instead of having this thread become son of 'should the mages be free'?

Back to the topic of this thread. One has to examine what the chantry does as a whole to think of them as worth while or not. Other than the preachy words and high handedness that many dislike they do seem to try to legitimately look out for the poor, the sick and the refugees.

Well the 'free the mages' issue is sort of part of the 'do you like the chantry' issue. Since the way the chantry treats mages can be a reason for people disliking the chantry.

I still think there is possibly a bigger reason for why the chantry treats the mages the way they do. True they can go insane and become abominations, but I still think it's something bigger than that. I think the chantry just uses that as an excuse. Whether the "unknown" factor is in favor or not in favor of the chantry is yet to be seen imo.

It could be as simple as what the chantry has stated, but has it ever been "that simple" with DA

I think the "unknown factor" is that Mages are very.. VERY profitable. Having mages under the Chantries control means that. The Chantry would get money for pimping out sourcing Mages to different groups for a fee, and because they have control over the Mage population they have the most powerful people in Thedas at their disposal. 
Remember. The Chantry slogan is "Magic must serve man, and not rule over him". They've pretty much been open about their intentions the entire time. 

Modifié par Eclipse_9990, 02 février 2011 - 03:01 .

[LobselVith8]

I can understand why some people dislike the Chantry's policies against mages, because there's no evidence to support it. The History of the Circle codex reveals their segregation happened because of a protest held during the reign of Divine Ambrosia II, and anyone looking from the POV of a mage or a Dalish might see the Chantry as an antagonist.

Godwood wrote...
One unregulated child mage (without the Warden's interference) managed to wipe out Redcliffe completely.
Imagine what a whole country side of unregulated mages could do.

You mean the child who was unregulated because his Chantry mother thought that being a mage was the worse thing for her son, and tried to have an apostate teach him not to be a mage? The Chantry's anti-mage dogma contributed to the bloodshed at Redcliffe.

Godwood wrote...
The country who was run by powerful blood mages and ultimately caused the first blight?
And who nowadays is the only country that openly supports slavery?
Honestly I don't think Tevinter is a shining beacon of liberalism for everyone to follow, although admittedly my knowledge of current mage policies in Tevinter is minimal however I think this is simply due to the fact that 'we' (the player) do not know much about Tevinter and how they handle mages.

No proof Tevinter mages did any such thing (regarding the Blight). Even the dwarves doubt the Chantry's story.
There's also Rivain, the Chasind, and the Dalish clans as examples of mages living outside Chantry control. Rivain helped bring a truce between the Qunari and the Andrastian nations, the Chasind saved Fergus, and the Dalish can aid the Warden in fighting against the darkspawn armies and the Blight.

Godwood wrote...
Like I said before mages have free accomodation, free food, free education, they are free to intermingle with one another and with Chantry permission are free to have little excusions.
What more do they need?
Honestly the current mage set up seems like a life long boarding school that simply requires you to pass one test successfully.

No freedom, no children, some Circles deny mages the right to have relationships or marry, can be killed because of heresay that you're maleficar (Aenirin) with no ability to contest it (Jowan, with Irving having no idea what evidence was against Jowan, and Jowan having no say in the matter before his Rite was signed by Greagoir), and we see and read about mages willing to risk their lives simply for the small chance to be free. Maybe saying that just because they're provided food and shelter that it's a fair trade for their freedom is a bad comparison, as slaves in history were also given food and shelter, as well as fine silks and the like so their masters could parade them and show off their wealth.

Godwood wrote...
Nope you're wrong there.
Without the Warden's interference everyone sans a scavenger and a wounded Bann Teagan is killed and reanimated by Connor to attack the warden.
You justify this by saying "He's a child, he didn't know how to control his power, probably didn't even know what a Desire Demon was".
These are all things he would of learned had he been sent to the tower now wouldn't they?

Connor's ignorance was his downfall. He made a deal with a "bad lady" without knowing she was a demon. If the Chantry didn't instigate fear and propaganda against mages, then Isolde never would have tried to make Connor not be a mage. You can place as much blame at Isolde's feet for the incident as you can on the Chantry for the anti-mage social conditions they've cultivated for centuries.

Godwood wrote...
He could of simply killed them, tortured them, whatever, but no instead he chose to use his blood magic to turn them into werewolves have them infect innocents and have the curse spread for 200 years.
Another good reason why mages should have their powers limited and regulated.

By drug addicts who get reprimanded for "chasing tail" but not for murdering people who are suspected of being mages (D'Sims, Awakening) or putting a bounty on people who are merely suspected of being blood mages (Morrigan, Witch Hunt) with absolutely no evidence to support the suspicions?

[Augustei]

Morrigan IS a maleficar though, because like I said in the other thread. Shapeshifting is a form of Maleficarum it extends beyond blood magic and is generally any magic that the chantry forbids.. Shapeshifting being one of them.
Saying they claimed her Maleficar without evidence though could not entirely be true. I mean people would have seen her shapeshifting during the blights and reported it. The templars were looking over the reports and realised she matched the description

EDIT: Wrote this before reading your reply to the other thread

Modifié par XxDeonxX, 02 février 2011 - 03:09 .