1019 réponses à ce sujet

[Lotion Soronarr]

Again, proof that Chantry has no evidence would also be nice.



You cannot just say "They don't have any evidence".

We don't know what they have.



Maybe they really have nothing.

Maybe the only have rumors

Or maybe Morrigan did some Blood Magic in front of a dozen witnesses and the Divine herself.

[Augoeides]

I'm willing to bet the Chantry has/had nothing on Morrigan except that she was an apostate which was only brought to light due to her involvement in ending the Blight.

[IanPolaris]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Again, proof that Chantry has no evidence would also be nice.

You cannot just say "They don't have any evidence".
We don't know what they have.

Maybe they really have nothing.
Maybe the only have rumors
Or maybe Morrigan did some Blood Magic in front of a dozen witnesses and the Divine herself.

Let's start from the fact that for most of the games that are played, Morrigan is not in fact a bloodmage.  Moreoever, except for POSSIBLY the Dark Ritual (which the Chantry can't know anything about), there is no evidence that we can see that Morrigan is a bloodmage.

Innocent until proven guilty.  Try it sometime.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

How do you know the Chantry has no proof? How do you know what happened in he two years in Orlais? None of us are saying that they do have proof. We are saying that they might have proof. Since they suspect her of being a Blood Mage, they must have some form of evidence, otherwise they would just label her Apostate (and still hunt her anyway).

Becuase it doesn't seem to stop the Chantry in the past (see Anders, D'Sims, Anerin, and even the PC if Wynne tries to rat you out).  Basically given the anti-magic bias of the Chantry, I am not willing to take their unsupported word that they have any evidence and neither should you.

-Polaris

[Buffy-Summers]

After playing through my Mage in DAO I now despise the Chantry

Anyone who locks every mage into a tower against their free will is little more then dictators

A person is innocent until they do something not because what they might do or what could happen

The chantry's treatment of mages is akin to locking up the offspring of criminal because they MIGHT cause a problem.

[LobselVith8]

Buffy-Summers wrote...

After playing through my Mage in DAO I now despise the Chantry

Anyone who locks every mage into a tower against their free will is little more then dictators

Interestingly, that was the response when Michael Hamilton explained why the Magi boon was turned down:

Michael Hamilton wrote...

Since when has any dictatorship ever been turned over by asking politely?

Really think about what you're saying.

"I asked and they said no!"

Modifié par LobselVith8, 13 février 2011 - 12:55 .

[Urazz]

Buffy-Summers wrote...

After playing through my Mage in DAO I now despise the Chantry

Anyone who locks every mage into a tower against their free will is little more then dictators

A person is innocent until they do something not because what they might do or what could happen

The chantry's treatment of mages is akin to locking up the offspring of criminal because they MIGHT cause a problem.

Exactly, I believe the circle is needed to train mages but it needs to be changed to become more of a school to prepare mages to fight against demonic possession instead of being basically a prison that is basically setting students up to fail.

[Augustei]

IanPolaris wrote...
My point is that even if this were true, the Chantry HAS NO EVIDENCE

I find it ammusing that you take this approach now when a few pages back you said with the Dales incident The Chantrys actions CAN be condemned:lol:
Back at page 20

IanPolaris wrote...
They most certainly can be condemned.

But dw, that means we are making development in this discussion and people are changing their prospective even if ever so slightly which is better then completely because if everyone went Pro Mage or everyone went Pro Chantry then we wouldn't really have much to discuss.... Or Argue about which seems to be more the case here. Lol

and you wondered why I remained neutral
...well you probably didn't but.... =P

Modifié par XxDeonxX, 13 février 2011 - 07:09 .

[Augustei]

Augoeides wrote...

I'm willing to bet the Chantry has/had nothing on Morrigan except that she was an apostate which was only brought to light due to her involvement in ending the Blight.

Highly likely they know she is a Maleficar.. All that shapeshifting was bound to be seen by someone who would have reported it to the templars.
The difference here is that we aren't totally sure she is a Blood mage.. But we are CERTAIN she is a Maleficar

[Augustei]

IanPolaris wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

How do you know the Chantry has no proof? How do you know what happened in he two years in Orlais? None of us are saying that they do have proof. We are saying that they might have proof. Since they suspect her of being a Blood Mage, they must have some form of evidence, otherwise they would just label her Apostate (and still hunt her anyway).

Becuase it doesn't seem to stop the Chantry in the past (see Anders, D'Sims, Anerin, and even the PC if Wynne tries to rat you out).  Basically given the anti-magic bias of the Chantry, I am not willing to take their unsupported word that they have any evidence and neither should you.

-Polaris

Oh hey yeah I remember this.. Stupid arrogant circle mages and Templars try to kill me even though Im a Grey Warden which should protect me from that bs. And that theres a blight going on and im one of the only grey wardens left should be reason not to attack me.

But the stupid people at the circle dont care about that

[Stevie 402]

XxDeonxX wrote...

Augoeides wrote...

I'm willing to bet the Chantry has/had nothing on Morrigan except that she was an apostate which was only brought to light due to her involvement in ending the Blight.

Highly likely they know she is a Maleficar.. All that shapeshifting was bound to be seen by someone who would have reported it to the templars.
The difference here is that we aren't totally sure she is a Blood mage.. But we are CERTAIN she is a Maleficar

She did state during the talk with my blood mage warden about the dark ritual that some would consider the ritual to be "blood magic" but that shoud mean little to some one like me.  So I assumed that meant that she knew some blood magic or was a blood mage in hiding.

[LobselVith8]

XxDeonxX wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

My point is that even if this were true, the Chantry HAS NO EVIDENCE

I find it ammusing that you take this approach now when a few pages back you said with the Dales incident The Chantrys actions CAN be condemned 

Why can't Ian take the Chantry to task for what we know they did? The Exalted March against the Dales has two different versions to the story, but we know the end result: the Dales was sacked, and many elves were forced to give up their religion and worship the Maker in exchange for living in ghettos where they would have no political power. Given that one of the nations involved in the Exalted March has made three different attempts to seize control of Ferelden (the actual occupation was the second attempt) and is now trying to take territory from Nevarra, why can't Ian disagree with what the Chantry did?
 
In contast, there's nothing to support the templars' assumption that Morrigan is a blood mage; at best, the carnal contact can be construed by some to be blood magic, but it's no different than when Finn uses blood to find the Eluvians (which he also admits can be seen as blood magic). Is Finn a blood mage? He certainly never exhibits the same type of abilities that Jowan or the Caldrius do. Neither does Morrigan.

XxDeonxX wrote...

Augoeides wrote...

I'm willing to bet the Chantry has/had nothing on Morrigan except that she was an apostate which was only brought to light due to her involvement in ending the Blight.

Highly likely they know she is a Maleficar.. All that shapeshifting was bound to be seen by someone who would have reported it to the templars.
The difference here is that we aren't totally sure she is a Blood mage.. But we are CERTAIN she is a Maleficar

Alistair calls her an apostate when speaking to Flemeth; Morrigan herself terms maleficar as mages who perform blood magic. Morrigan is certainly an apostate, but one who was recruited by the Grey Wardens to aid against the darkspawn. If the templars had to resort to labelling her a blood mage to get people to hunt her down, it calls into question how legitiment this bounty is.

[LobselVith8]

Stevie 402 wrote...

She did state during the talk with my blood mage warden about the dark ritual that some would consider the ritual to be "blood magic" but that shoud mean little to some one like me.  So I assumed that meant that she knew some blood magic or was a blood mage in hiding.

Morrigan says that because you're a blood mage, so she knows the fact that some would consider the dark ritual "blood magic" would mean little to you, given that you already mastered specialized blood magic.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Maleficar is a mage practicing any forbidden magic including, but not limited to, Blood Magic. Shapeshifting is forbidden. Morrigan is a shapeshifter. Morrigan is a Maleficar.

[IanPolaris]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Maleficar is a mage practicing any forbidden magic including, but not limited to, Blood Magic. Shapeshifting is forbidden. Morrigan is a shapeshifter. Morrigan is a Maleficar.

Then technically any mage using Arcane Warrior or Shapeshifter magic (or Keeper Magic) should also be called a Maleficar then?  It also doesn't matter.  What lob is getting at is that the Chantry puts a bounter on Morrigan not for being a Maleficar but for being a BLOOD MAGE.  I also note that the same wiki entry that says that Maleficar don't have to be bloodmages also says that many templars will simply assume that any apostate mage is also a maleficar (true or not).

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

Actually if you read the actual Codex Entry on Maleficarum and not the Wiki entry (which can frequently be wrong), your defense of the chantry is even sketchier. Justina I defines Maleficarum as those who transgress the Maker's Law when using magic in one of two ways:

1. Dominate the Minds and Hearts of others.

2. Magic which fuels itself by harming others, by letting blood.

Nothing Morrigan has done falls into either category.

http://dragonage.wik...ry:_Maleficarum


-Polaris

Modifié par IanPolaris, 13 février 2011 - 08:35 .

[Augustei]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Why can't Ian take the Chantry to task for what we know they did? The Exalted March against the Dales has two different versions to the story, but we know the end result: the Dales was sacked, and many elves were forced to give up their religion and worship the Maker in exchange for living in ghettos where they would have no political power. Given that one of the nations involved in the Exalted March has made three different attempts to seize control of Ferelden (the actual occupation was the second attempt) and is now trying to take territory from Nevarra, why can't Ian disagree with what the Chantry did?

You bring into account the follow up actions of the dales but at the time I was referring to the event of the actual dales war itself and not the follow up actions. Which I said.
One can make an assumption that the chantry could be right or wrong and say "I think... blah blah blah" but He said their actions can be condemned.. which they cant due to lack of non bias evidence and what evidence there is, is very little at all anyway.

Given that one of the nations involved in the Exalted March has made three
different attempts to seize control of Ferelden (the actual occupation
was the second attempt) and is now trying to take territory from
Nevarra, why can't Ian disagree with what the Chantry did?

You CANNOT relate the future actions of an organisation to their actions 600 years prior. You cant say "Ohh well 600 years later they did this"

Also Orlais isn't trying to take neverran territory.. Perendale was Orlesian territory taken by Nevarra. Orlais is trying to take back their own territory. and there is no evidence of Chantry support for this anyway.

[LobselVith8]

XxDeonxX wrote...

You bring into account the follow up actions of the dales but at the time I was referring to the event of the actual dales war itself and not the follow up actions. Which I said.

I bring it into account because it's part of the Exalted March against the Dales, and shouldn't be ignored when we account for the events of the war between Orlais and the Dales.

XxDeonxX wrote...

One can make an assumption that the chantry could be right or wrong and say "I think... blah blah blah" but He said their actions can be condemned.. which they cant due to lack of non bias evidence and what evidence there is, is very little at all anyway.

Given that forcing the elves to move into Alienages, making their religion illegal, and forcibly converting them to their religion is a part of the Exalted March against the Dales, I don't see why such actions shouldn't be frowned upon.

XxDeonxX wrote...

You CANNOT relate the future actions of an organisation to their actions 600 years prior. You cant say "Ohh well 600 years later they did this"

While we don't know for certain what happened between Orlais and the Dales, Orlais does have a history of conquest that dates back to its inception (and the Exalted Marches that were declared by Drakon so he could assume the mantle of Emperor) and the recent attempts to take over Ferelden. Empress Celene I's plan for an alliance and marriage to King Cailan would have been the most recent for Orlais to assume control of the nation. You can't ignore its history and dismiss it. You also ignore how Tevinter and Orlais used their victory against the darkspawn to conquer lands they "liberated" from the Archdemon after the Third Blight, since the Orlesian Empire commandered control over the nation of Nevarra while the Tevinter Imperium assumed control over Hunter Fell. Like I said, Orlais has a history of conquest.

XxDeonxX wrote...


Also Orlais isn't trying to take neverran territory.. Perendale was Orlesian territory taken by Nevarra. Orlais is trying to take back their own territory. and there is no evidence of Chantry support for this anyway.

You realize Orlais conquered Nevarra in the Towers Age, correct? Nevarra achieved independence from Orlais in 3:65 Tower. It's not quite as one-sided as you make it out to be.

[IanPolaris]

In addition (to XxDeonxX), you do realize that the Chnatry did support and back the (very brutal by all acounts) conquest and occupation of Fereldan by Orlais starting in 8:34 as I recall, and the Chantry only later changed it's stance when:



1. Gen Loghain looked like he might actually win.

2. King Maric and Gen Loghain privately but not too subtlely threatened to dissolve the Chantry within Fereldan borders.



The Chantry's pro-Orlais bias is well known and is becoming an increasing problem for it not just in Fereldan but Nevarra and other places.



-Polaris

[Augustei]

IanPolaris wrote...

In addition (to XxDeonxX), you do realize that the Chnatry did support and back the (very brutal by all acounts) conquest and occupation of Fereldan by Orlais starting in 8:34 as I recall, and the Chantry only later changed it's stance when:

1. Gen Loghain looked like he might actually win.
2. King Maric and Gen Loghain privately but not too subtlely threatened to dissolve the Chantry within Fereldan borders.

The Chantry's pro-Orlais bias is well known and is becoming an increasing problem for it not just in Fereldan but Nevarra and other places.

-Polaris

Yes I know of the ferelden incident which doesn't at all count since it happens a wopping 600+ years after the dales. And with the chantrys actions with the dales incident only the follow up actions really taken by them can be taken into account not the actual war itself.
I know they have a Pro-Orlais bias but the chantry seemingly has an annoying habit of supporting those in which side the wind is blowing.

As soon as Nevarra has the strength to fight Orlais.. The Chantry will most likely side with them, The same case in Ferelden.

Modifié par XxDeonxX, 14 février 2011 - 08:00 .

[Augustei]

LobselVith8 wrote...

While we don't know for certain what happened between Orlais and the Dales, Orlais does have a history of conquest that dates back to its inception (and the Exalted Marches that were declared by Drakon so he could assume the mantle of Emperor) and the recent attempts to take over Ferelden. Empress Celene I's plan for an alliance and marriage to King Cailan would have been the most recent for Orlais to assume control of the nation. You can't ignore its history and dismiss it. You also ignore how Tevinter and Orlais used their victory against the darkspawn to conquer lands they "liberated" from the Archdemon after the Third Blight, since the Orlesian Empire commandered control over the nation of Nevarra while the Tevinter Imperium assumed control over Hunter Fell. Like I said, Orlais has a history of conquest.

History? And how would something that happened 600 years afterwards be considered history when compaired to an event 600 years prior? 

and the recent attempts to take over Ferelden. Empress Celene I's plan
for an alliance and marriage to King Cailan would have been the most
recent for Orlais to assume control of the nation

Right, the ones that have nothing to do with the dales incident.. those attempts.

Orlais has a history of conquest.

Right, but thats different to Chantry supported Millitant conquest.. Which we only know of one chantry supported event.
You may say that when the Emperor says jump the divine responds with "How high?"  but three things. 1) That is an assumption and 2) that is a matter of opinion and 3) That is assuming how it really is and its not really the complete other way round. I included 3 for the sake of supporting your side of the discussion.

Im not completely disagreeing with you.. You may be right for all I know, Im simply providing other sides to the discussion which should not and can not easily be factored out

Modifié par XxDeonxX, 14 février 2011 - 08:06 .

[Augustei]

Maleficarum most likely derive form Malleus Maleficarum which includes the whole ideal of Witchcraft.. Morrigan being a WITCH of the wilds.. well She would definitly fit this description...

Just saying..

[Lotion Soronarr]

IanPolaris wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Again, proof that Chantry has no evidence would also be nice.

You cannot just say "They don't have any evidence".
We don't know what they have.

Maybe they really have nothing.
Maybe the only have rumors
Or maybe Morrigan did some Blood Magic in front of a dozen witnesses and the Divine herself.

Let's start from the fact that for most of the games that are played, Morrigan is not in fact a bloodmage.  Moreoever, except for POSSIBLY the Dark Ritual (which the Chantry can't know anything about), there is no evidence that we can see that Morrigan is a bloodmage.

Innocent until proven guilty.  Try it sometime.

-Polaris

You cannot ignore the Dark Ritual. Morrigan KNOWS and is willing to use magic that would be labeled as blood magic by the Chantry. This is canon.
You can argue that it's not "really" blood magic, but that is not up to you. It's the Cahtnry's definition that matters here. So yeah...there's your proof.

That doesn't prove that the Chantry has solid proof, but there is no proof that they don't...hence, using your own words, the Chanry is innocent of the charges of having no evidence..untill proven guilty.

[IanPolaris]

Lotion,



I most certainly can ignore the Dark Ritual. Not only is it not clearly bloodmagic anyway (Morrigan is quite coy about that), but there is no possible way the Chantry can know about it, so you can't include it as a reason for the Chantry to hunt her. You are metagaming.



-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

[dp]