13 réponses à ce sujet

[Beerfish]

I mean my cousin Mathias, a merchant in Red cliffe was killed because some young kid became a demon and slaughtered the town.  Poor fellow, sad story he had a wife and 3 kids to feed back in Denerim.  Why was the Chantry asleep on that one, why wasn't that kid controlled properly?

Then there was my Aunt Ramona, fine woman, hard worker she was.  Worked her way up to assistant head housekeeper in the Mage tower.  Killed horribly in that towere incident, some power ful mage or other got loose and killed all sorts of Templars and other mages and all the servants in the tower.  Both mages and Templars assured her it was a safe place to work, what went wrong?

I once courted a pretty young gal from a village called Honneleath.  I heard she got killed by a hoard of darkspawn.  There was rumours that a powerful mage lived there and dabbled in demonology.  Some even say after the mage died there was an actual demon in his basement, just waiting to possess someone, can you believe that!

Myself and some merchant friends were drinking it up one eve and this one guy, Levi Dryden starts telling us this story about his Great granny being a Warden and her and a mage letting loose all sorts of them demons.  Place was haunted for years they say.

I had a real good buddy, Haskel was his name, hard working merchant.  Elf lover some called him cause he actually, can you believe it traded with the dalish at times.  Welll I heard he went to do some trading and some crazed elf witch named Velana or something like that just up and kills him and his friends.

Damndable mages, all of em.  They ought to lock em up tight or kill em all.  I sure wouldn't want one in my village WOULD YOU?

[David Gaider]

Alodar wrote...
If a group of people existed in todays supposedly educated society that had these abilites, those modern mages would be controlled/locked up/persecuted without thought.

There is no question it is 100% reasonable for ordinary folks to want mages locked up or killed.

Indeed. The reason the "templars are bad" view is so prevalent is because most of us live in cushy western societies where anything that smells like oppression is Very Bad, and the only determining factor in how one should treat mages is how fair that treatment is. Of course, we don't have to live with the idea that Poor Oppressed Joe living next door to us might be secretly controlling our mind to make us like him-- or one day turn into a monster and kill our entire family-- but that doesn't need to stop us from being idealistic in our fantasy worlds, now, does it?

Modifié par David Gaider, 03 février 2011 - 03:46 .

[David Gaider]

HopHazzard wrote...
Any person in my neighborhood could snap one day and go on a killing spree. That doesn't mean no one should be allowed to live near me. Also, in modern society we have the means to track and monitor potentially dangerous people without imprisoning them.

Sure, but could that person snap and start lobbing off fireballs and torch your entire neighborhood, requiring an entire unit of policemen to bring him down? Does he do that through no will of his own, or personal defect, but could literally transform into this killer without any warning signs? What if modern society found that this wasn't the act of a lone madman, but an entire class of people with the same genetic makeup? Do you honestly think that something wouldn't be done to safeguard against these "potentially dangerous" people?

Sorry, but it's a simplistic comparison that doesn't hold water.

Elsariel wrote...
THIS.  I wanted to write this earlier but I got lazy.    To play devil's advocate though, I think it all depends on how prevelent magic appears within people.  If only a small fraction of the populace actually exhibits magical power, it's conceivable that they'd be oppressed for a long long time.  The more people with magic, the more likely they'd be the one's on top.

And the Tevinter Imperium would show that can, indeed, happen. The Exalted March of Andraste would also show what it takes to dislodge that "superior order", and why people might think it's not okay to allow mages to "do as thou wilt".

Modifié par David Gaider, 03 février 2011 - 04:53 .

[David Gaider]

silentassassin264 wrote...
You are using the Tevinter Imperium like it is some curse word.  We had a more a less real life example of the Tevinter Imperium (sans the magic of course) with the Roman empire.  It had the slavery and all those vices as well.  We still however treat the age of the Roman Empire as a great period or learning, culture, and all that jazz.

And? Yes, the Tevinter Imperium no doubt brought a great many advancements -- they introduced dwarven commerce and engineering to the world, for instance. That doesn't stop the fact that it was created through the tyranny of mages over the non-magical... and provides plenty of evidence for what happens when mages rule (and thus why the non-magical might be leery today). Any moralizing you want to mix into that is kind of beside the point.

[David Gaider]

silentassassin264 wrote...
So you are saying the Roman empire and even Republican Rome was not classes ruling tyrannically over people?

When did I say anything about the Roman Empire?

Before the Imperial period, we had Senators and equestrians who ruled over people simply because of their birth.  After that we had Imperial dynasties that likened themselves to gods complete with temples to themselves simply because of the position in birth (or being adopted).  It was the tyranny of the elite over the mundane.  It was the same thing.

And what's your point? Did I say "tyranny is bad"? If anything, tyranny certainly gives those who are ruled a clear reason to dislike the tyrannical. Please stop putting words into my mouth.

SnowHeart1 wrote...
Well, to play devil's advocate, why shouldn't mages have ruled? They had the power to put together a nation and protect the people within it, and presumably more education and knowledge than 99% of the rest of the people. Add to that the benefits and then compare the negatives to other large empires that did the same thing but without magic, and I just see using magic as using another tool, as someone else might use mastery of the blade and horse and military tactics.

Sure. Mages are a superior breed of people, who just use the superior tools put at their disposal. I can't imagine why anyone who wasn't a mage would find that objectionable.

Modifié par David Gaider, 03 février 2011 - 05:08 .

[David Gaider]

LobselVith8 wrote...
But while we see that was done with the Andrastian societies, don't we see and read that there are alternatives to what the templars and Chantry are doing to mages - the nation of Rivain, the Dalish clans, the Chasind.

They exist without controlling mages. Meaning that if a mage turns into an abomination and causes destruction, or otherwise causes problems, they simply suffer and deal with it. I don't think it's a stretch to suggest that not everyone is going to consider that a viable alternative.

The Dales and Arlathan were also two nations that had mages. Possibly even the town of Haven, given Kolgrim's attack of the Chantry's views on "forbidden magic" and Father Eirik presiding over the Haven Chantry and he was a mage. Doesn't this illustrate that we can question the validity of what the Chantry is doing with their templars, and how effective it is?

Based on what? You know nothing about how the Dales and ancient Arlathan dealt with magic. And I'm not sure that citing a village full of religious zealots that drank the blood of dragons and killed all strangers that came upon them is a particularly good example of "why mages aren't bad".

But if the Dalish POV of the attack on the Dales is accurate (with the codex referencing templars heading into the Dales when they kicked out the missionaries) the same can be said of nations run by non-mages, where people with power can do bad things. Also, the Chantry made use of its Circle of Magi to battle the Qunari armies during the New Exalted Marches; Genitivi's codex made it clear that they were an edge against the advanted technology that the Qunari had. As much as magic can be misused (like with your example of the Tevinter Imperium) it's also played a role in protecting people as well.

If you're suggesting that the argument against magic isn't clear-cut, as magic has its uses and there's clearly no "better" solution... then you'd be correct. I'm not sure arguing that "non-mage societies can also be bad" is really a way to convince people who are frightened of mages for very good reasons that they shouldn't be.

"Don't be scared of that monster! That man over there with the sword could also kill you! If he wanted to!"
"Ahhh! Someone spare us, for the love of Andraste!"
squish

[John Epler]

A) Keep it civil. Some of you are crossing the line into hostility and nonconstructive posting.



If you aren't interested in discussing things with other posters but are only interested in a response from a Dev, I recommend that you simply don't post in the thread. It's Saturday, for one, and most everyone is out of the office (and likely avoiding anything even remotely work-related), and secondly, we don't really respond well to people demanding that we, and only we, respond to them.



Thanks.

[John Epler]

A reminder that personal attacks are not welcome on these forums. If you can't stay civil, you will not be welcome here for long.

[Stanley Woo]

Let's remember to keep it civil, please, and to be excellent to each other.

[Michael Hamilton]

David Gaider wrote...

Alodar wrote...
If a group of people existed in todays supposedly educated society that had these abilites, those modern mages would be controlled/locked up/persecuted without thought.

There is no question it is 100% reasonable for ordinary folks to want mages locked up or killed.

Indeed. The reason the "templars are bad" view is so prevalent is because most of us live in cushy western societies where anything that smells like oppression is Very Bad, and the only determining factor in how one should treat mages is how fair that treatment is. Of course, we don't have to live with the idea that Poor Oppressed Joe living next door to us might be secretly controlling our mind to make us like him-- or one day turn into a monster and kill our entire family-- but that doesn't need to stop us from being idealistic in our fantasy worlds, now, does it?

The issue is this basically.  What follows is all just personal opinion.

It seems there is no "right side" because while not all mages are bad, I can't count the number of times I've done my best to be reasonable and assist mages only to have them get all crazy, ugly, and personal the moment I turn my back.  Power can corrupt, and it often does.  Blood magic is so readily available and so easily exploitable that most mages when faced with desparation will embrace the easily corruptable power and the demons that come to them in doing so.

Not always, but often enough that it really does get kind of annoying when you're helping someone out only to be stabbed in the back by an abomination a few minutes later.  Makes you really consider the templar's cause as just even if it is oppressive.

Mages are basically like walking timebombs, some may never go off, but when one does do you really want it going off in the villiage square?  I'm no fan of the templars either, however, I love mages when they are sane, in control, and put together.  Templars are also succeptable to corruption as they are placed in a position of control.

Essentially the problem is not black and white.

Modifié par Michael Hamilton, 09 février 2011 - 09:34 .

[Michael Hamilton]

I'm not proposing a solution.



I believe that's up to the player as they approach each decision in the game.

[Michael Hamilton]

KawaiiKatie wrote...

Michael Hamilton wrote...

I'm not proposing a solution.

I believe that's up to the player as they approach each decision in the game.

But.... The Mage-Warden had a chance to make things better for all mages (or, at least the mages of Ferelden), only to learn much later that this request was denied. I already made that decision in-game, why do we have to do it again, and how can we know that this time, it'll stick? What makes the Champion of Kirkwall so much more influential than the Hero of Ferelden?

Guess you'll have to wait and see.

Modifié par Michael Hamilton, 09 février 2011 - 09:45 .

[Michael Hamilton]

IanPolaris wrote...

Michael Hamilton wrote...
Not always, but often enough that it really does get kind of annoying when you're helping someone out only to be stabbed in the back by an abomination a few minutes later.  Makes you really consider the templar's cause as just even if it is oppressive.

Mages are basically like walking timebombs, some may never go off, but when one does do you really want it going off in the villiage square?  I'm no fan of the templars either, however, I love mages when they are sane, in control, and put together.  Templars are also succeptable to corruption as they are placed in a position of control.

Essentially the problem is not black and white.

Michael, proof of this in the game might be nice.  That is don't tell us, show us.  Right now there is no incontravertable evidence that mages spontaneously become abominations at anything like what you are implying unless deliberately put in a no-win situation (like being hunted by Templars).  Again, I point to your own blog referring to the Rivain, Dalish, and Chasind (just to name three). 

If it turns out (which I believe to be the case based on the game evidence) that the odds of a mage spontaneously and for no reason becoming an abomination is virtually zero, then it's not a grey issue at all.

-Polaris

I wasn't trying to literally say anything about spontaneous abominations.  I think you're reading me wrong.

Templars are hardly the only threat that can spark desparation.  That's really all I'm getting at.

Modifié par Michael Hamilton, 09 février 2011 - 10:31 .

[Michael Hamilton]

KawaiiKatie wrote...

Michael Hamilton wrote...

KawaiiKatie wrote...

But.... The Mage-Warden had a chance to make things better for all mages (or, at least the mages of Ferelden), only to learn much later that this request was denied. I already made that decision in-game, why do we have to do it again, and how can we know that this time, it'll stick? What makes the Champion of Kirkwall so much more influential than the Hero of Ferelden?

Guess you'll have to wait and see.

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!"

Modifié par Michael Hamilton, 09 février 2011 - 10:27 .