1019 réponses à ce sujet

[Lotion Soronarr]

LobselVith8 wrote...

XxDeonxX wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...
When you have multiple people referring to mages as cursed - Greagoir, Keli, Lily - then it's a reasonable claim to make.

Greagoir says its both a gift and a curse, which it is because mages are more likely to attract demons, Keli is unhinged by the situation in the circle and half the people she used to know are dead. Lily is the only real example there

The fact that all of them use the word makes all of them prime examples of Chantry indocturination against mages.

No. I said again, it maakes PERFECT SENSE for htem to use that word. It would make perfect senes to use that word if hte chantry never existed.

[LobselVith8]

The Archon wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Why do people say that if mages are free, there will be another Tevinter Imperium? We have history to show otherwise. We know there were mages in Arlathan (see: Witch Hunt) and they weren't anything like the Imperium. Present day Thedas has free mages among the Dalish clans and Chasind tribes, and neither group are trying to rule the world with their powers. Rivain is a nation where their mages aren't under Chantry or templar control, and the Dales was nothing like the Tevinter Imperium. I don't think oppressing a group of people because they held a protest (see: History of the Circle codex as written by a Chantry scholar) is reasonable.

Yes, there was mages in Arlathan. But if you look at the Elves, they did not even FIGHT the Imperium when they invaded, and that proves why they never bothered to try and conquer the world.

This isn't accurate. The Arlathan elves lost their nation to the Tevinter Imperium. There's no evidence that the elves did nothing against the Magisters.

The Archon wrote...

Chasind aren't exactly organized to found a magocracy and like the Dalish are a minority. I also very much doubt that they have advanced knowledge of magic, like The Circle.

It doesn't matter, because they're free mages, and they aren't trying to create an establishment like the Tevinter Imperium. The very fact that you acknowledge that the Chasind tribes and the Dalish clans aren't trying to even re-create the magocracy of the Tevinter Magisters illustrates that free mages aren't going to repeat the actions of the Tevinter Imperium. There's also a semi-permanent colony of Dalish living on the territorial border of Rivain, so I don't see how you can claim there's so few of them that it makes no difference. And we know that the Dalish are aware of magic that even a skilled student of the arcane arts has never even heard of (like the shapeshifting abilities that Morrigan uses) so I don't see how you can say the magic of the Dalish is more advanced than that of the Circle when we have no evidence to conclude either way.

The Archon wrote...

Dalish are also a minority and peaceful, but most of them are very hostile towards Humans and if they were to become a major nation again, a large massing would probably end up trying to conquer all of Thedas, due to what happened with Elvhenan and The Dales. The Dalish have also lost A LOT of their history, they didn't even know what an Eluvian was or how to use it, something they made. It's quite possible that they lost alot of their advanced magic.

There's no evidence that this would be the case. You're inserting speculation as fact. There's no proof that when the elves did have a homeland - the Dales - that they sought to conquer all of Thedas. Considering that the elves already have a semi-colony near Rivain, and the elves can get the Hinterlands with the Dalish Warden where the Keeper Lanaya keeps the peace, it doesn't support your claim that the Dalish would conquer anyone.

The Archon wrote...

Rivain are also a peaceful nation, they hold no hostilities towards Elves and they do not worship the Maker (but Tevinter didn't either, so this opinion is void), thus having no reason to form a magocracy.

So free mages don't necessarily mean there will be another magocracy.

The Archon wrote...

The Dales, were peaceful aswell and just wanted to shut themselves off from Humans and not get involved with them, they had no reason to conquer because they had gained new land.

In other words, free mages don't mean a repeat of the Tevinter Imperium.

Insom wrote...

I don't mind the chantry. Mages need to be leashed for the good of mankind.

The same excuse was used to imprison Japanese-Americans during WWII.

[LobselVith8]

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Cursed isn't an appropriate term for people who have abilities that have been used to fight darkspawn during the Blights and save the Andrastian nations from the Qunari during the New Exalted Marches. And you can claim that it's not indocturination all you want, but when multiple people refer to mages as cursed, it's clearly a sign that the Chantry has indocturinated people against mages. [/quote]

1) Magic is a curse AND blessing. It is a proper description. The most fitting one. You are the only one complaining about it. [/quote]

There are multiple people who use the term "curse" to identify mages, and they're all Andrastian. We also have Anders complaining about this in Awakening, so in canon we have mages who take issue with it. I take issue with this because I disagree that people should be taught that mages are cursed, as Keli, Lily, and Greagoir clearly were.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

2) you're overblowing the mages influence in the marches. They re a mighty asset, but they hardly won the war by themselves. [/quote]

Read Genitivi's codex on the New Exalted Marches for reference on how mages made all the difference against the Qunari and their advanced technology.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

And no. Not indoctrination. Cursed is a term that is not always used in it's literal sense. Not to mention that people reffering to mages as cursed is a sign of nothing. If fits, and people have reasons to call mages that wihout ever having heard of the Chantry. [/quote]

It's a term to give a negative stigma to all mages. It's no different than when some people said a particular group of people had the Mark of Cain.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

The fact that multiple people with the Chantry are referring to mages as cursed makes my point clear. You're welcome to defend them all you want, but there's no reason an entire group of people need to be labelled as cursed by the Chantry.[/quote]

Again with the Chantry thing. People can call mages cursed easily from their own knowledge and experience. It is a term that's wildly used. Heck, I could call you cursed...because you bring pain to all those who read your posts.
See, it fits. [/quote]

It's part of the anti-mage dogma promoted by the Andrastian Chantry, that we clearly see with characters like Isolde, Keli, and Lily.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

The quote is a direct reference to the Chantry and is clear in its distinction. I don't see how you can dispute this when the dev uses dictatorship to explain why the Magi boon was turned down.[/quote]

No. It's not clear. It doesn't say what you think it does. [/quote]

I've provided the exact quote of Hamilton to illustrate what he said. You're welcome to provide it yourself if you contest it so badly to prove me wrong.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

I find it amusing that you claim to have done so long after Ian left this discussion, and when none of the posts you made support your claim.[/quote]

The posts support my claim...are you too afraid to go back and read?
Do you really want me to go back and mine my own quotes and put you to shame again? [/quote]

You're making the claim you a won a debate with Ian when the discussion was over last month on another thread and he's long since left. You have no proof you won any debate.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Ian directly addresses your posts, Lotion. He moved on long after this discussion was over.[/quote]

no, he didn't.
You Sir, a liar. And a pathetic one at that... [/quote]

That must explain why you're using Ian's absense to now claim you won the debate with him.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

You debunked nothing, Lotion.[/quote]

It's easy to claim there is no light when keeping your eyes deliberately closed.
If at least you had the decency to admit you are wrong.
but instead, such wilfull ignorance...It doesn't paing you in a good light mind you. but then agian, this whole thread doesn't. [/quote]

Making claims that you won an argument when the other party has long since left doesn't put you in a positive light, Lotion.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Imprisoning innocent people is wrong.[/quote]

Captain Obvious, is that you? [/quote]

I thought the fact that mages were imprisoned because of a nonviolent protest in Orlais would be pretty obvious, too, since it's in the History of the Circle codex.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Multiple people have provided alternative systems to replace the Chantry system in a myraid of threads on this issue.[/quote]

Sistems that were out of touch with reality I might add. Systems that ignore logistics, social, political, economical and cultural problems.
Everyone can come up with ideas. Ideas that actually could work require a lot more thougt and planing. [/quote]

You seem to simply be siding with the Chantry and ignoring all the alternatives.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

The words of the Desire Demon using the term "contract" when she discusses Connor demonstrate that you're mistaken.[/quote]

Nope. You're so hung up on words and literal meanings.
constantly...Here's one word for you.
"Charges"..used in the blurb about DA2 and mages & templars. That does imply oversight (if you go literal), does it not? [/quote]

I'm hung up on canon and what's actually said, Lotion. And Ian already addressed oversight for the templars - when one is chastised for "chasing tail." There's no evidence of any repercussions for murdering D'Sims when he wasn't actually a mage, for instance.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Like when you endlessly claim that you won arguments against Ian that never happened?[/quote]

Arguments that I have made - FACTUAL. PROVABLE. UNDENIABLE.
Ian didn't adress them. Does that count as "won"...I dont' know. Does it?

But I cna't recall if it's in the thread or the mages one. [/quote]

Ian did address them. That's the issue I take with your claims. Ian addressed all your points, so I don't see why you now claim you won an argument when Ian tackled every one of the points that you made.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

You mean when I provided quotes and links to what you've previously said? I back up what I said with proof, Lotion. All you do is resort to childish name-calling instead of having an adult conversation about this issue.[/quote]

Except you got no proof. You provide a quote of mine that DOESN'T say what you think you say. And then people laugh at you for such shoddy debating. You are so quick to read things you want to hear or think the other person said, that you dont' pay attention to what the person actually said. [/quote]

Actually, it said precisely that. The only person in your court was Emperor, who made the comment that you supported that freeing the mages would be theft of Chantry property.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

I will have an adult conversation ith you if you start actualy reasoning like an adult...you know - thinking and reading before posting. [/quote]

You could try refraining from name-calling people and try not losing your composure because the other person takes an opposing view.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

When you have multiple people referring to mages as cursed - Greagoir, Keli, Lily - then it's a reasonable claim to make.[/quote]

No, no it is not. [/quote]

I respectfully disagree.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Except the templars aren't putting a bounty on Morrigan for being a maleficar, they're putting a bounty on her for being a blood mage. And there's nothing to show that she's a blood mage in DA:O or Witch Hunt.[/quote]

You aren't reading... [/quote]

I am, Lotion, but I see no reason to give them the benefit of the doubt when there's nothing to support the accusation.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Lack of evidence doesn't constitute evidence, Lotion. You're welcome to give them the templars the benefit of the doubt, but I see no reason why the rest of us should when there's nothing to support this claim.[/quote]

This isn't the court. You aren't privy to all the evidence.
Or when you read in the newspapers that the police is after X for robbing a bank, do you go "The police is evil! I didn't see evidence!"
Again, another thing that is useless to debate with you. You are impervious to reason. [/quote]

I disagree with you. Isn't that the issue here? I see no reason to believe that Morrigan is a blood mage when we have nothing to lead us down that road.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

I can dispute what you draw from them. The Codex entreis are writen fro mspecific POV's, are short, with lots of holes left. They are not the total and absolute truth on the matter. And interpretations of specific sentances differ.
Again, I can and I do dispute you. [/quote]

They're written from the Chantry POV, and never so much as bother to include blood mages or abominations as the reason for the creation of the Circle of Magi or the imprisonment of mages.[/quote]

And we have been over this before. Other peopel pointed out exactly why drawing such conslusions is premature. They already put a hole in that boat. [/quote]

There's no reason to dispute the reasons provided for the Circle of Magi or the imprisonment of mages when they're clearly given in the DA:O codex entries.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

We have Morrigan's word that she knows a particular ritual that involves carnal contact, not that she's a blood mage. There's no more proof that she's a blood mage than Finn is.[/quote]

Morrigan: "it is old magic. Some would label is a blood magic.".. or something like that.

You claim there's nothing to be suspicious about. But it's clear there's plenty. [/quote]

You're welcome to disagree, but I see no reason to believe she's a blood mage.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

As for blood magic - considering the templars themselves use it to find mages but don't consider it as such, and there's nothing to indicate that they'd ever find out about a clandestine moment between Morrigan and the Warden-Commander, I don't see why I should give the templars the benefit of the doubt when there's a lot of suspicion surrounding the attempted murder of a fourteen year old Aneirin and the murder of the Magnificent D'Sims because they thought he was a mage.[/quote]

You're not reading again. Again, brining up the DR and Chantr'ys proof.
Again missing the point by LIGHTYEARS.

what the templars use to track mages is NOT classified as blood magic by te Chantry. You may think it is blood magic and it's hypocritical, but that's irrelevant. From a legal stanpoint, blood magic is what the Chantry classifies as such. [/quote]

David Gaider said it was blood magic at PAX.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Morrigan isn't cheering anyone on, you're misconstruing the events of Caladrius' blood ritual to suit your own vision of DA. You're also outright lying that she lacks morals, so I don't see why I - or anyone reading this thread - should take any of your claims seriously.[/quote]

I dont' see why anyone - anywhere - should ever take you seriously. [/quote]

Why are you debating this issue with me if you seem to dislike me and my views so much, Lotion? I honestly don't see the reason why.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 22 février 2011 - 05:52 .

[Grey Dunan]

It seems to me that the argument between Lotion Soronnar and LobselVith8 is no longer about mages or the Chantry, but is instead just them yelling at one another out of anger and dislike. both of you have been, for the past few post, shoving your fingers in your ears and saying no no no while condemning the other for doing so. It is glaringly obvious that you two will never agree, so it would be best if you gave us all a break and just stopped arguing. If you keep this up it will only serve to show everyone watching just how juvenile grown men can become .

As for the Chantry. I believe that, like the church in really life, it was created by men and not a god, so it is just as fallible as the men who made it. I believe that the Cirlce of Magi could govern themselves, and would be no less strict on blood mages and the like, if only to show the world mages can control themselves. The Circle doesn't need the Chantry or the Templars to function correctly. that's how I see it anyways.

Modifié par Grey Dunan, 22 février 2011 - 05:27 .

[The Archon]

LobselVith8 wrote...

This isn't accurate. The Arlathan elves lost their nation to the Tevinter Imperium. There's no evidence that the elves did nothing against the Magisters.

"When they breached the great city of Arlathan, our people, fearing
disease and the loss of immortality the humans would bring, chose to
flee rather than to fight." There is your proof.

LobselVith8 wrote...

It doesn't matter, because they're free mages, and they aren't trying to create an establishment like the Tevinter Imperium. The very fact that you acknowledge that the Chasind tribes and the Dalish clans aren't trying to even re-create the magocracy of the Tevinter Magisters illustrates that free mages aren't going to repeat the actions of the Tevinter Imperium. There's also a semi-permanent colony of Dalish living on the territorial border of Rivain, so I don't see how you can claim there's so few of them that it makes no difference. And we know that the Dalish are aware of magic that even a skilled student of the arcane arts has never even heard of (like the shapeshifting abilities that Morrigan uses) so I don't see how you can say the magic of the Dalish is more advanced than that of the Circle when we have no evidence to conclude either way.

The shapeshifting abilities that Morrigan uses do not seem like an evolved state of magic, they may be able to shapeshift but can they cast fire and arcane out of their hands? Probably not. I also doubt that they know of how to use Blood Magic, don't forget that Chasind are classified as primitive people, so they probably study magic differently.

Dalish know how to animate trees and such under their will, but do they know how to use Circle magic? I doubt it, there are so many different versions of magic, but the Circle type seems to be the most advanced out of all of it, while the shapeshifting and elemental binding are probably classified as immoral.

And if they do not know about other forms of magic, like the Circle does, then it's less likely for them to form a magocracy. The Circle teaches people about Blood Magic and how wrong it is, that's how they know of it. Dalish Elves are probably aware, but do not know the effects of it and Chasind stay away from civilization, so they probably don't know.

LobselVith8 wrote...

There's no evidence that this would be the case. You're inserting speculation as fact. There's no proof that when the elves did have a homeland - the Dales - that they sought to conquer all of Thedas. Considering that the elves already have a semi-colony near Rivain, and the elves can get the Hinterlands with the Dalish Warden where the Keeper Lanaya keeps the peace, it doesn't support your claim that the Dalish would conquer anyone.

And it does support the claim as the epilogue states, "Tensions soon rose again." If you look at that part, then it supports that there may be another Exalted March or that the Elves will end up attacking the humans, either way, Elves have faced so much persecution that I highly doubt that they would be trusting to anybody after all that.

LobselVith8 wrote...

So free mages don't necessarily mean there will be another magocracy.

Yes it does. Even if some mages don't want a magocracy and disagree on it, other mages will still rebel. Irving didn't want to leave the Circle, but Uldred still got help from Blood Mages to overwhelm the Tower. It's proof enough that even if a selected few want to just live normally, many others will want to either:

A. Destroy the Chantry and Templars entirely because they controlled them for many years.

B. Form a magocracy and dominate all of Thedas again due to the fact that they know of how much power they have now, due to what the Circle taught them.

They have learnt alot from the Circle and that is no lie, they know more of Tevinter than just the name. Free mages would probably become inspired by this and want it to happen again.

LobselVith8 wrote...

In other words, free mages don't mean a repeat of the Tevinter Imperium.

As I said before, it's quite possible for a vast majority to rebel against the people who want to just live in peace if the Circle is disbanded. It's highly likely, rebellions always happen with change.

[LobselVith8]

Grey Dunan wrote...

It seems to me that the argument between Lotion Soronnar and LobselVith8 is no longer about mages or the Chantry, but is instead just them yelling at one another out of anger and dislike. both of you have been, for the past few post, shoving your fingers in your ears and saying no no no while condemning the other for doing so. It is glaringly obvious that you two will never agree, so it would be best if you gave us all a break and just stopped arguing. If you keep this up it will only serve to show everyone watching just how juvenile grown men can become .

As for the Chantry. I believe that, like the church in really life, it was created by men and not a god, so it is just as fallible as the men who made it. I believe that the Cirlce of Magi could govern themselves, and would be no less strict on blood mages and the like, if only to show the world mages can control themselves. The Circle doesn't need the Chantry or the Templars to function correctly. that's how I see it anyways.

You're quite right, Grey Dunan. This entire debate was become counter-productive.  No matter what one side is saying, it never changes. Rather than continue this, I'll take your advice. I appreciate what you said. No matter what's said, nothing ever changes for either side. In the spirit of letting the debate between mages and templars die down and moving forward with XxDeonxX's thread, I'll drop out of the debate with Archon and Lotion here because it hasn't accomplished anything.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 03 mars 2011 - 03:04 .

[Augustei]

LobselVith8 wrote...

XxDeonxX wrote...

Who says they are cursed? Besides the crazy lady.... And Gregoir doesn't count

Imprisoning innocent people is wrong.

Didn't you say you saved the anvil of the void? =P

I'd rather see this thread die because there's no new ground being touched on here. To answer your question and hopefully put this discussion to rest because it's become entirely meaningless, I don't compare sparing a device that can literally save the dwarven people from extinction with the oppression of an entire group of people because of a centuries old protest they held in a cathedral. They're not the same. We already know the Dalish clans have mages who are free, we know there are free mages in the Chasind tribes and in the nation of Rivain, and there's no evidence the mages of the Dales or Arlathan were restricted in any fashion.

Yeah I know, the choices are apples and oranges. Was just joking around =D

[Lotion Soronarr]

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quote]The Archon wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Why do people say that if mages are free, there will be another Tevinter Imperium? We have history to show otherwise. We know there were mages in Arlathan (see: Witch Hunt) and they weren't anything like the Imperium. Present day Thedas has free mages among the Dalish clans and Chasind tribes, and neither group are trying to rule the world with their powers. Rivain is a nation where their mages aren't under Chantry or templar control, and the Dales was nothing like the Tevinter Imperium. I don't think oppressing a group of people because they held a protest (see: History of the Circle codex as written by a Chantry scholar) is reasonable.[/quote]

Yes, there was mages in Arlathan. But if you look at the Elves, they did not even FIGHT the Imperium when they invaded, and that proves why they never bothered to try and conquer the world. [/quote]

This isn't accurate. The Arlathan elves lost their nation to the Tevinter Imperium. There's no evidence that the elves did nothing against the Magisters.[/qutoe]

We also know nothing about Arlathan. It could have been a terrible, opressive dictatorship.. do we know? No. So using it as a shining example of anything... doesn't realyl work.



[quote]The Archon wrote...

It doesn't matter, because they're free mages, and they aren't trying to create an establishment like the Tevinter Imperium.[/quote]

They aren't in position to.



[quote]
There's no proof that when the elves did have a homeland - the Dales - that they sought to conquer all of Thedas. Considering that the elves already have a semi-colony near Rivain, and the elves can get the Hinterlands with the Dalish Warden where the Keeper Lanaya keeps the peace, it doesn't support your claim that the Dalish would conquer anyone.[/quote]

Acording to the Chantry, the Dales were rather hostile to their neighbours. Red crossing?
Also, the dalish clan not waging war on a kingdom? That's only shows basic common sense. It's like saying "luxemburg never attacked US. It never would" of course it didn't and doesn't. It would be suicide. Now if Luxemburg was as big and pwoerful las Russia, then maby it would entertain such idea, no?
Opportunity has to exist before action.



[quote]
[quote]Insom wrote...
I don't mind the chantry. Mages need to be leashed for the good of mankind.[/quote]

The same excuse was used to imprison Japanese-Americans during WWII.[/quote]

They don't lob fireballs, control minds or turn into abominations.

[Steve236]

I perfer changing the people within the Chantry.

[Maj.Pain007]

Nope. One reason why I couldn't stand Leliana in the first one.

[Sable Rhapsody]

Steve236 wrote...

I perfer changing the people within the Chantry.

So...more of an Erasmus and less of a Luther? 

[Lotion Soronarr]

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
1) Magic is a curse AND blessing. It is a proper description. The most fitting one. You are the only one complaining about it. [/quote]

There are multiple people who use the term "curse" to identify mages, and they're all Andrastian. We also have Anders complaining about this in Awakening, so in canon we have mages who take issue with it. I take issue with this because I disagree that people should be taught that mages are cursed, as Keli, Lily, and Greagoir clearly were. [/quote]

Curse is a rather common term that is used in a variety of situations.
So no. There's nothing clear about it.



[quote]
Read Genitivi's codex on the New Exalted Marches for reference on how mages made all the difference against the Qunari and their advanced technology.[/quote]

I have. Mages were very usefull. But they didn't win the war by themslves. Tehy are artillery. You cna win a war without artillery..only it wil be more difficult and constly.


[quote]
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

And no. Not indoctrination. Cursed is a term that is not always used in it's literal sense. Not to mention that people reffering to mages as cursed is a sign of nothing. If fits, and people have reasons to call mages that wihout ever having heard of the Chantry. [/quote]

It's a term to give a negative stigma to all mages. It's no different than when some people said a particular group of people had the Mark of Cain.[/quote]

Except mages really are different and the word "cursed" really does fit, even if you take it literally.


[quote]
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Again with the Chantry thing. People can call mages cursed easily from their own knowledge and experience. It is a term that's wildly used. Heck, I could call you cursed...because you bring pain to all those who read your posts.
See, it fits. [/quote]

It's part of the anti-mage dogma promoted by the Andrastian Chantry, that we clearly see with characters like Isolde, Keli, and Lily.[/quote]

No, it's part of your fantasies.


[quote]
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
No. It's not clear. It doesn't say what you think it does. [/quote]

I've provided the exact quote of Hamilton to illustrate what he said. You're welcome to provide it yourself if you contest it so badly to prove me wrong.[/quote]

Why should I provide the exact same quote again? What is written doesn change. What it means is and what Hamilton tried to say ... that is very much debatable.
Hence, not clear.


[quote]
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
The posts support my claim...are you too afraid to go back and read?
Do you really want me to go back and mine my own quotes and put you to shame again? [/quote]

You're making the claim you a won a debate with Ian when the discussion was over last month on another thread and he's long since left. You have no proof you won any debate.[/quote]

The proof is in the forums. And the other poeple who debated this isue and read it (like Empeor Shalnez), know this.
Your ignorance is not my problem.


[quote]
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Ian directly addresses your posts, Lotion. He moved on long after this discussion was over.[/quote]

no, he didn't.
You Sir, a liar. And a pathetic one at that... [/quote]

That must explain why you're using Ian's absense to now claim you won the debate with him.[/quote]

Ians absence has no bearing on weather the arguments were made or not. They are on these very forums. It happened. That is a fact. Deal with it.


[quote]
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
It's easy to claim there is no light when keeping your eyes deliberately closed.
If at least you had the decency to admit you are wrong.
but instead, such wilfull ignorance...It doesn't paing you in a good light mind you. but then agian, this whole thread doesn't. [/quote]

Making claims that you won an argument when the other party has long since left doesn't put you in a positive light, Lotion.


[quote]
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Sistems that were out of touch with reality I might add. Systems that ignore logistics, social, political, economical and cultural problems.
Everyone can come up with ideas. Ideas that actually could work require a lot more thougt and planing. [/quote]

You seem to simply be siding with the Chantry and ignoring all the alternatives.[/quote]

No actually. I'm considering alternatives other people post, weigh them and analyize them..And find they do not work.
DA2 is a medieval setting, and too many people forget that.


[quote]
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Nope. You're so hung up on words and literal meanings.
constantly...Here's one word for you.
"Charges"..used in the blurb about DA2 and mages & templars. That does imply oversight (if you go literal), does it not? [/quote]

I'm hung up on canon and what's actually said, Lotion. And Ian already addressed oversight for the templars - when one is chastised for "chasing tail." There's no evidence of any repercussions for murdering D'Sims when he wasn't actually a mage, for instance.[/quote]

You're hung up on what you want to hear and read.
Again, why is the word "charges" used if there is no oversight? If a templar is never charged for cruelty, why use the word?



[quote]
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Arguments that I have made - FACTUAL. PROVABLE. UNDENIABLE.
Ian didn't adress them. Does that count as "won"...I dont' know. Does it?

But I cna't recall if it's in the thread or the mages one. [/quote]

Ian did address them. That's the issue I take with your claims. Ian addressed all your points, so I don't see why you now claim you won an argument when Ian tackled every one of the points that you made.[/quote]

Oh? He did? A minute ago you said I never even made those arguments. Now suddenly I did and Ian adressed them?
Nope. If you cannot recall those arguments and the thread, then you really have no buisness talking about what was adressed and what was not. Ian DIDN'T adress those points.
You're just very confuised.

And agin, I never claimed a "win". I said I made arguments that counter Ians theory, and those arguments were never countered. Then again, Ian couldn't counter them really.




[quote]
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
This isn't the court. You aren't privy to all the evidence.
Or when you read in the newspapers that the police is after X for robbing a bank, do you go "The police is evil! I didn't see evidence!"
Again, another thing that is useless to debate with you. You are impervious to reason. [/quote]

I disagree with you. Isn't that the issue here? I see no reason to believe that Morrigan is a blood mage when we have nothing to lead us down that road.[/quote]

And I already pointed out we do have reasons to suspect.
I already poitned out that definite statements are NOT your friend. Statements you continue to make, despite knowing very well you have no proof.

Do not belive the templars all you want. But realise that "templars are after Morrigan unjustly" is NOT a fact, but your oppinion. Yet you keep using it as a fact.


Now excuse me, as I will ignroe some of your useless spam posts.....


[quote]
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

You're not reading again. Again, brining up the DR and Chantr'ys proof.
Again missing the point by LIGHTYEARS.

what the templars use to track mages is NOT classified as blood magic by te Chantry. You may think it is blood magic and it's hypocritical, but that's irrelevant. From a legal stanpoint, blood magic is what the Chantry classifies as such. [/quote]

David Gaider said it was blood magic at PAX.[/quote]

a) He said yo ucould view it as blood magic, not that it is.
even if true it would only make the chantry hypocritical in that regard,  but legally still right, so it changes nothing.



[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
Why are you debating this issue with me if you seem to dislike me and my views so much, Lotion? I honestly don't see the reason why.[/quote]

Because I'm hoping you will go away and never return?

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 23 février 2011 - 01:21 .

[ReallyRue]

^ Those are some really long arguments.

Ones which will never be resolved.

[Lotion Soronarr]

I concur.

[Laughing_Man]

Does mages need to be policed by some force?

Certainly, the same as every other person who have capasity to do evil.

Does this police force need to be strong enough to identify and nullify a magical threat if need be?

Certainly, just like the regular police needs to be ready for any other armed criminal.

Is it smart to humiliate and imprison any and all magicaly gifted in the hopes of preventing disaster? (And thus no doubt creating a lot of resentment and anger in a lot of said individuals, and fertile ground for said disaster.)

Doubtful.

Does it smart to make a religion out of unfortunate necessities?

Doubtful.

Modifié par TheRedVipress, 23 février 2011 - 01:41 .

[Vitex]

They remind me of the Catholic church many years ago, but with cooler armor and the ability to butt**** a mage.



So, no, I don't think anyone really likes them.

[Augustei]

Vitex wrote...

They remind me of the Catholic church many years ago, but with cooler armor and the ability to butt**** a mage.

So, no, I don't think anyone really likes them.

If it is for this reason only.. Then said people are stupid

[Greed1914]

I'm indifferent toward them. They don't cause me many issues, and the only time they do tend to be Templars that are too focused on their duty to see reason. Besides, we've seen what can happen to mages that get out of control, so I can certainly see why the Chantry would want to have some control. I might not necessarily agree with it, but I get it.

[LobselVith8]

ReallyRue wrote...

^ Those are some really long arguments.<br />
Ones which will never be resolved.

The truth is, I don't think there will be a consensus when it comes to the debate between the Chantry and its templars, and the Circles and their mages. I don't think there's going to be a point where either side concedes. Personally, I think what's done to the mages is inhumane and monstrous. While we don't very little about Arlathan (and what little writing we do have about the ancient civilization is suspect because we have no way of authenticiating the accuracy of what's written) we know from Witch Hunt that they had mages; the same is true for the Dales, where elven mages lived alongside non-mages; this is true for the nation of Rivain, where the people refuse to be parted from their seers. We have nothing to indicate that what the Chantry does is necessary, or that what the templars are doing is going to accomplish anything but more centuries of unrest and revolts, unless the signs from DA2 are accurate and we'll get an all-out war between the templars and the mages.

I agree with many on the pro-Chantry side that magic is dangerous, but that doesn't mean mages should be imprisoned in what's essentially a toxic enviornment where they're stripped of their rights and oppressed to the breaking point, where we have runaways like Aneirin or extreme examples like Uldred who will cross any line to be free of those they view as their oppressors. We see examples of the kind of magic the Arlathan elves used in Witch Hunt. We know the Tevinter Imperium had the advantage of blood magic when it came to defeating the ancient elves, so Arlathan clearly isn't the same as Tevinter.

I really don't see why some people say that mages will establish another Tevinter if they're no longer being oppressed and imprisoned when we know of free mages being part of nations, and those nations weren't (and in the case of Rivain isn't) like the magocracy of Tevinter. Despite the fact that many mages are in a position to establish another magocracy, they haven't. The Dalish have a semi-permanent colony on the border of Rivain. The seers are a part of Rivain culture. The Chasind tribes trust their mages. Even the dark realm of Haven has a mage presiding over the local Chantry. In each of these cases we can assume that mages could rise up and establish another magocracy, but they don't. This is why I think people shouldn't make the claim that Tevinter will be repeated when history has shown us that every time mages have had the opportunity to create another Tevinter, they haven't.

While the Dales did go to war with Orlais, according to the Dalish: the Chantry tried to force conversion by sending in templars to force the issue. The fact that the Dalish were winning the war against Orlais until every other nation intervened during the Exalted March on the Dales demonstrates that they were powerful enough to take on the Orlesians, but didn't until the Chantry sent in templars to force elves to convert to their religion (according to the Dalish codex). This POV is likely shared by the elven mage Merrill, who will be a Dalish companion in DA2, as well as an apostate.

The same excuse for imprisoning mages was used when the United States started to imprison innocent Japanese-Americans during World War II. There's a poem that reads, "they first came for the Jews, but I wasn't a Jew so I did nothing. They then came after the Gypsies, but I wasn't a Gypsy, so I did nothing. They then came after the Socialists, but I wasn't a Socialist, so I did nothing. Then one way they came for me, and no one was there to stand with me because they had all been taken away." I find this to be an accurate parallel of why the Chantry is allowed to abuse and subjugate mages with little interference from the people of Thedas, because there are many who don't care since the mages' fate doesn't apply to them.

It doesn't help that the Andrastians are indocturinated against the mages. The word "curse" is explicitly said by members of the Andrastian faith when they're talking about mages, making it clear that it's not merely a common term when it's commonly used by active members of the Andrastian faith. We hear time and again the word 'curse' used by a myraid of Andrastians in direct reference to mages. The fact that the Magi Origin serves as our introduction into the world of Thedas from the perspective of a mage protagonist, giving us a clear view on how the Chantry shapes the perception of mages among their faithful.

The way the historical codex entries seem to reveal that restricting the rights of mages was a religious reason rather than a practical one (History of the Chantry Part Four) and how it was the protest mages held in Orlais that lead to their imprison today (History of the Circle) gives me pause to trust the pro-Chantry side of the argument when we have nothing to support the oppression and dictatorship that the Chantry has over the mages of Thedas. Although we don't know the precise details, we know that during the Ancient Age, Arlathan and Tevinter were vibrant nations. During the first hundred years of the Chantry coming into existance, the nation of the Dales was a powerful nation (one that only barely lost against the myraid of Andrastian nations that marched against them). We know those societies worked without the Chantry or the Order of Templars in control of the mages. Backed up by the Chantry scholar written codex entries, where it's revealed restricting mage rights and imprisoning them had nothing to do with protecting people, then I see no reason to side with the Chantry or the templars against the mages they wrongfully imprison.

That the Magi Origin VO admits that mages are living in a "prison" also illustrates their fate. Given the bias against mages, I give no weight to a derogatory term used by Andrastians to dehumanize mages and accuse them all of Thedas' own version of "original sin." I also don't support what the Chantry and its military do to innocent people simply because they're capable of magical feats. What the Chantry of Andraste does to mages is constantly being disputed on these threads, and even the codex entries reveal that the inception behind the mages being restricted in their abilities and their imprisonment had nothing to do with blood mages or abominations are valid reasons why the pro-mage side of the argument feels the need to properly address. What I find interesting is this quote by the Bioware dev Michael Hamilton, in direct reference to the Chantry and the Circle of Magi:

Michael Hamilton wrote...

KawaiiKatie wrote...

Oh dear, I hope this doesn't all lead up to a huge disappointment.... Then again, I suppose that's true of the entire DA2 story, and not just the mages.

I've got my fingers crossed.....!

EDIT: Ah, I'm going mad! If Mage-Hawke, all on his/her own, can free the mages... It invalidates the efforts of my Mage-Warden so much more than just the Chantry denying the request. It's, "The Chantry said no to your request, Mage-Warden. But if that Champion of Kirkwall were to ask, then we might consider it." I... I don't know how to feel about this... Then again, I'm making assumptions.... I just hope the story doesn't play out that way....

Yes, yes, all my fretting is premature, but with DA2 still a month away, I don't know what else to think...

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!"

Michael Hamilton is addressing it as a dictatorship, and as the reason why the Magi boon is turned down.

The core argument for the pro-mage side is this: Despite the fact that it's a medieval setting, people's rights shouldn't be restricted simply because their religion paints a particular group of people in a bad light. Imprisoning, killing, and especially dehumanizing mages because the Andrastian faith says they're cursed is morally wrong, and I see no reason not to contest this when we're given the facts of the Circle's inception and why the mages are imprisoned in the Chantry's own history. We're allowed to side with the mages in our run as the Grey Warden, where we can tell Wynne the Circle is a prison (which she doesn't contest) and to say that it's an oppressive place (and her retort is that the Warden can change that).

There's also the issue of oversight. We have nothing to indicate there's any oversight for the templars, which is made clear when an anti-mage Cullen can take over the Circle as the new Knight-Commander and rule it in fear. From what we've seen, a templar is charged for "chasing tail," not for killing innocent people, like the Magnificent D'Sims, so it causes issues of concern about the toxic enviornment that mages live in, to the point where the Grey Warden can address it as a place of oppression and a prison. Furthermore, we have the Orlesian Warden's entry about the templars putting a bounty on Morrigan because of their suspicions that they think she's a blood mage. Considering that even Gaider admits at PAX that the templars use blood magic to locate mages with the phylacteries, it illustrates the hypocrisy behind the Chantry and how they label blood magic as evil when they use it themselves to maintain control over the mages of the Circles of Magi.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 03 mars 2011 - 03:02 .

[Dariustwinblade]

Bumped cause its an amusing subject.

My question is this. Why the **** can't the Andrastian Nation export all Mages into the Imperium.

In that way they are no more a danger to the Andrastian nation.

Simple mages are happy, normal ppl are safe. Every one wins.

[Teddie Sage]

No. I always wanted to destroy it. And it happened. I smiled. o_o

[Zethan13]

Since im always a mage on my main character I hate the chantry. Also its hard to take my hatred for organized religion irl out of the game.

[cowoline]

I don't hate the Chantry, but i am against religion having political influence because it can mean that the people in power are more likely to do what is good for the religion than what is good for the people. Religion and the chantry is not the problem, but it is often corrupted by people who want power or are fanatical (like mother petrice).

As a thedas Ghandi would have said " I like your Andraste. I do not like you Andrastians. Your Andrastians are so unlike your Andraste"

[Lynata]

Though I dislike organized religion in real life, I find the Chantry in Dragon Age to be a positive influence on people. The Chant of Light provides moral guidance to commoners and nobles alike who would otherwise feel compelled to act on baser motives, it promotes cohesion of the community and aid (both spiritual and material) for those stricken by fate. In a world of feudal monarchies where nobles with absolute authority lord over commoners and kings contemplate war against their neighbors out of pride or greed, the Chantry acts as an international mediator attempting to keep the peace by telling everyone the Maker wants them to behave.

Yes, I do think Thedas would look somewhat worse without the Chantry. I like to believe that modern real life society doesn't require this kind of guidance anymore (as it does come with a lot of strings attached and great potential for abuse), but at the same time I cannot dismiss the stabilizing effects it had on the cultures of old.

Also, Leliana.

Modifié par Lynata, 03 avril 2012 - 01:16 .

[esper]

The chantry have to many negative sides:
Like being too tightly involved with an expanding empire, being oppressive, being a military with a religous zeal, understanding their own chant of light in the worst possibleway, and waring on races with a different religon, wanting to spread their religion to all four corners of the world, not to mention having an evil deity which attention they want back (they don't even try to please him, they want him back).

Frankly I find the way the chantry says I've to behave appaling. And I don't mean the chant of light, I mean how the chantry priests says the chant of light must be understood.