1283 réponses à ce sujet

[LobselVith8]

David Gaider wrote...

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.

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. 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?

David Gaider wrote...

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".

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.

[_Somebody]

Is there any way to tell if someone is a mage? Like if they somehow learn on their own to control their power, and never use it, would it be possible for the templars to find by other means?

Modifié par Somebody, 03 février 2011 - 05:14 .

[IanPolaris]

Xewaka wrote...

David Gaider wrote...
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 italiced part is the best justification I found as to why nations and groups in Thedas without a stablished control of magi (Tevinter, the Dalish) have them -the magi- as rulers.

This is not a universal truth.  If mages aren't locked away, they don't always become the automatic ruling class.  That was true in Tevinter, yes, but that doesn't seem to be the case with Haven, and the Chasind certainly (the magi form a respected class whose opinion is always consulted but not the absolute ruler...much like Shamans in many Aboriginal societies), and the Dales are similiar...the Keeper may be the person that decides things in a Dalish clan, but never without consulting the Hahren and other senior members of the tribe.  Similiarly, I don't see how the Witches of Rivvain actually "rule" that society (athough their influence is certainl very important).

-Polaris

[AlexXIV]

Bad King wrote...

elfdwarf wrote...

about dalish keeper who are elven mages leader

That's actually a very good point. The Dalish are perfectly happy to be ruled over by mages.

Elves are by nature good. Humans are bad natured by default. Or so I am led to believe.

[Elsariel]

David Gaider wrote...

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.

I think it should be"  "... and provides plenty of evidence for what can happen when mages rule."   Certainly not all mage-centric societies are destined to be tyrranical.  I know you didn't say that exactly but I wanted to make that distinction.

[YourFunnyUncle]

Watch out! It's a Libertarian Blood-Mage!

[silentassassin264]

David Gaider wrote...

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.

I was saying we had that type of tyranny in real life and that era was viewed as a Golden Age.  You keep on saying that if mages were in real life people would try to overthrow them and whatnot but that is not necessarily true.  If mages had the power to heal power, save crop failure with spellbloom, negate bad storms and what not, many people would gladly accept them as divine kings like the Pharaohs in Ancient Egpyt believed that the Pharaoh was instrumental for the forces of nature to continue.  Yes they could be tyrannical but we have had that before and it was no big deal.  I am not putting words in your mouth, you are skirting the main point.  We have had that type of tyranny before and those rulers did not even have the magic to be treated as divine.  If we had magic kings who could do all those wonderful things to help us out now, that "tyranny" would most likely be accepted. 

[October Sixth]

YourFunnyUncle wrote...

Watch out! It's a Libertarian Blood-Mage!

And there are even rumors, fellow forumites, of mages so powerful that they can enter our minds and control our thoughts, taking away our Maker-given free will. Now I think the Ferelden people deserve the right to decide if they want their children to be in school with mages. To be taught by mages! Ladies and gentlemen, the truth is that mages are very real, and that they are among us. We must know who they are, and above all, what they can do!

Modifié par October Sixth, 03 février 2011 - 05:22 .

[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

[HopHazzard]

David Gaider wrote...

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.

Not fireballs, but certainly grenades and automatic weapons if he really wanted to. I do live in the USA, after all. And it's quite possible for a person with a serious psychiatric problem to go completely unnoticed until there's a violent outburst. I don't how well you know your neighbors, but I don't even know the names of most of mine let alone the state of their mental health. And insanity does have a genetic component. Fortunately, I live in a country where that can't be held against you (now if only we could do something about how easy it is to obtain military grade ordnance).

Modifié par HopHazzard, 03 février 2011 - 05:24 .

[IanPolaris]

YourFunnyUncle wrote...

Watch out! It's a Libertarian Blood-Mage!

This IS the only alternative when the Chanty won't permit people like Professoer Xavier exist and help police and teach mages without trodding over their basic human rights.  That btw was just as true in the 14th century as it is now, David Gaider.  Don't think so?  Google: Peasent's War.

-Polaris

[Bad King]

YourFunnyUncle wrote...

Watch out! It's a Libertarian Blood-Mage!

Use teh litany!!!!!!!!!!11111111!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Modifié par Bad King, 03 février 2011 - 05:25 .

[IanPolaris]

HopHazzard wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

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.

Not fireballs, but certainly grenades and automatic weapons if he really wanted to. I do live in the USA, after all. And it's quite possible for a person with a serious psychiatric problem to go completely unnoticed until there's a violent outburst. I don't how well you know your neighbors, but I don't even know the names of most of mine let alone the state of their mental health. And insanity does have a genetic component. Fortunately, I live in a country where that can't be held against you (now if only we could do something about how easy it is to obtain military grade ordnance).

I can even do this one matter.  A mentally ill person could with just a little bit of knowledge (far less than what most mages have by comparison) go to the local hardware and gardening store and get some Diesel Fuel and some Ammonium Nitrate Fertilizer.  The death toll from that would exceed any from your fantasy mage, I promise you.

-Polaris

[October Sixth]

HopHazzard wrote...

Not fireballs, but certainly grenades and automatic weapons if he really wanted to. I do live in the USA, after all. And it's quite possible for a person with a serious psychiatric problem to go completely unnoticed until there's a violent outburst. I don't how well you know your neighbors, but I don't even know the names of most of mine let alone the state of their mental health. And insanity does have a genetic component. Fortunately, I live in a country where that can't be held against you (now if only we could do something about how easy it is to obtain military grade ordnance).

Yes, but we do license people to carry firearms, don't we?

If we know a person is susceptible to violent outbursts we won't license him.

[Herr Uhl]

IanPolaris wrote...

I can even do this one matter.  A mentally ill person could with just a little bit of knowledge (far less than what most mages have by comparison) go to the local hardware and gardening store and get some Diesel Fuel and some Ammonium Nitrate Fertilizer.  The death toll from that would exceed any from your fantasy mage, I promise you.

-Polaris

Just how do you know this? There was a specific one almost killing an entire village IIRC, and that was a child.

[shumworld]

I played a mage in my first play through and I still find it to be my fav class among the 3.

[IanPolaris]

David Gaider wrote...

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.

OK then, David.  Where is the social footprint for all of this?  Dalish Clans are small and have (per capita) a very high percentage of mages (compared with other societies).  If abominations were as a dire problem as you are trying to claim, then the impact of such should be devestating to small clans especially without immediate support from other clans.  That should be reflected in the society, just as the horrific death toll from the Black Plague is still reflected in our own (down to our nursery rhymes).  Yet we see NO evidence of this.

The reasonable explaination would seem to be that the Dalish (and Rivaiin, and Chasind, and others) all either have ways of controlling abominations that don't involve massive death OR they don't occure a statistically meaningful percentage of the time.  Either way, it puts the entire Chantry justification in dire doubt.

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".

What about the Avvaar, Chasind, Rivain, and others.  What about even Chantry societies prior to Ambrosia II?  The commonality seems to be that when mages are permitted to live as respected members of society without undue fear (we all agree that magic can be dangerous and should be regulated and mages need to be educated) abominations don't seem to be the problem that you are trying to make it out to be (nor the Chantry).

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 you think the chantry not raising mobs against mages might not be a good start?  (See Rev Mother in Redcliff).

"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

I reserve paralyze for such fools myself.

-Polaris

[AlexXIV]

Herr Uhl wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

I can even do this one matter.  A mentally ill person could with just a little bit of knowledge (far less than what most mages have by comparison) go to the local hardware and gardening store and get some Diesel Fuel and some Ammonium Nitrate Fertilizer.  The death toll from that would exceed any from your fantasy mage, I promise you.

-Polaris

Just how do you know this? There was a specific one almost killing an entire village IIRC, and that was a child.

Yet it was a non mage who caused it. Lady Isolde. And she got away with it. But then again they had their bloodmage scapegoat.

[IanPolaris]

Herr Uhl wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

I can even do this one matter.  A mentally ill person could with just a little bit of knowledge (far less than what most mages have by comparison) go to the local hardware and gardening store and get some Diesel Fuel and some Ammonium Nitrate Fertilizer.  The death toll from that would exceed any from your fantasy mage, I promise you.

-Polaris

Just how do you know this? There was a specific one almost killing an entire village IIRC, and that was a child.

Oklahoma City.  Galvason near the turn of the 20th century.  One person with an ammonium nitrate bomb can do more casualties than is even possible in a midaeval village....and the Redcliff incident happened because of the Chantry and the Circle system not in spite of it.

-Polaris

Edit PS:  Any fool with a little insanity, a quick read of the anarchists cookbook, and no regard for human life can easily make an amomium-nitrate bomb that will take out potentially several city blocks....in a modern city with modern construction.

Modifié par IanPolaris, 03 février 2011 - 05:38 .

[megaz635]

Mages are the same as everyone else.

But they can shoot lightning from their hands.

Modifié par megaz635, 03 février 2011 - 05:37 .

[The Elder King]

silentassassin264 wrote...

I was saying we had that type of tyranny in real life and that era was viewed as a Golden Age.  You keep on saying that if mages were in real life people would try to overthrow them and whatnot but that is not necessarily true.  If mages had the power to heal power, save crop failure with spellbloom, negate bad storms and what not, many people would gladly accept them as divine kings like the Pharaohs in Ancient Egpyt believed that the Pharaoh was instrumental for the forces of nature to continue.  Yes they could be tyrannical but we have had that before and it was no big deal.  I am not putting words in your mouth, you are skirting the main point.  We have had that type of tyranny before and those rulers did not even have the magic to be treated as divine.  If we had magic kings who could do all those wonderful things to help us out now, that "tyranny" would most likely be accepted. 

There isn't any Golden Age, There is a Goldend Century, the 2nd century AC, where the Roman emperors where adopted by the previous. And they were adopted in merit of they're capacity. Traian, Adrian, Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius (which stopped this method) and his co-emperor Lucius Verus . The very reason of the prosperity of this century was the fact that this emperors weren't chosen in base of a divine rights, but in base of a "meritocrativ" method.

Modifié par hhh89, 03 février 2011 - 05:43 .

[LobselVith8]

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?

I don't think that's a fair claim to make. A few of us are descended from families where we know that oppression is bad. My grandfather left Cuba because of the dictator Fulgencio Batista, and a lot of innocent people died in his reign long before Fidel took over the island. I can freely admit that it colors my perceptions when it comes to the concept of oppression in the name of the greater good, but I also don't see people saying that the Chantry or templars are "evil" as much as people have debated and argued over whether what they're doing is the right course of action and how effective it is.

When we read the Abomination codex, a mage has become an abomination when templars are pursuing him. When we discover what happened during "A Broken Circle," an outbreak of abominations has transpired during the mages attempts to free themselves from the Chantry. Don't we have the right to illustrate the flaws with the Chantry system and wonder if another solution wouldn't be more effective?

[IanPolaris]

megaz635 wrote...

Mages are the same as everyone else.

But they can shoot lightning from their hands.

And IRL any fool can shoot shoot lethal projectiles from their hands, but we don't lock away the mentally ill (at least not any more) because of this.  What's the difference?

-Polaris

[October Sixth]

I can't believe people are challenging Word of God on this. Ridiculousness I say!

[SnakeStrike8]

HopHazzard wrote...

Not fireballs, but certainly grenades and automatic weapons if he really wanted to. I do live in the USA, after all. And it's quite possible for a person with a serious psychiatric problem to go completely unnoticed until there's a violent outburst. I don't how well you know your neighbors, but I don't even know the names of most of mine let alone the state of their mental health. And insanity does have a genetic component. Fortunately, I live in a country where that can't be held against you (now if only we could do something about how easy it is to obtain military grade ordnance).

Good thing there were no grenades in medeival Ferelden, then- or if there were, they were much harder to get ahold of than they are today.
The whole point is that the mage can throw fireballs around. He can kill six people at once. He can torch an entire village if he wanted to, or if a demon possesed him and made him do so. The average person in a Ferelden village, no matter how unhinged, can do none of those things. At best they'll kill two or three people by sword or strangulation before the rest of the populace overruns them. Medieval peasants were far less cowardly than us cushioned modern day folks. They could fight, and fight well.
Those skills would not, however, stand much help against a mage that can shoot lightning and raise dead people, but therein lies the point: Mages are simply more dangerous than guys with swords. Hence the regulation. And the Circle is a far better alternative than the Qunari system of chopping of tongues, and even despite the occasional mishap (like what happens to Ferelden's Circle), it stays that way. The Chantry didn't decide to suddenly chop off the tongues of all FErelden mages after all those blood mages popped up in the Circle, did they?