363 réponses à ce sujet

[AlexXIV]

bsbcaer wrote...
First, I did kind of notice that you avoided answering my hypothetical situation there   Or, if you prefer, allow me to change my hypothetical to something less violent.  You're spending your day minding your own business, playing all your favourite bioware games.  Suddenly, you lose complete control of your body, yet remain completely aware.  You find yourself controlled to walk down to the nearest soup kitchen and serve soup for the rest of the day, even though you want to sit on your tail playing video games.  Would you not have a sense of violation that you have no control of your body and was forced to do something that you wouldn't have considered doing?

Second:  Explicitly taking out the possibility of learning the specialization via books (I hope that we can all agree that learning the specialization this way is a more mechanical, than lore, device), I find it interesting that people tend to avoid the issue of the means of acquiring such a specialization in DA:O (via the desire demon) or via the Baronness in DA:A.  Not exactly the purest of sources.  Even if you intimidate the desire demon into giving you the specialization, doesn't the source of the power corrupt any and all good done by the power?

Third:  People are going around saying that so much good can be done through blood magic, but I don't remember anything in either game (note: have not read the books) where blood magic explicitly did something good.

First: Yes I would feel violated. Also if someone stabbed me in back while playing video games. I avoided to answer on it because I don't even disagree that being mind controlled isn't nice. I am just saying there is worse. Actual rape for example.

Second: All power corrupts and I think that who you learn it from does mean less than what you use it for. You can learn something from a good person and use it for bad things and the other way round. I for example consider Morrigan not evil. Rude maybe. And if she taught me bloodmagic I wouldn't see anything bad at it. I have to admit though I don't know exactly what it means to learn or use bloodmagic because in the game it is only about pushing buttons. If it would turn out that you have to kill babies to learn bloodmagic I'd agree it is a bad thing.

Third: Well if we take the time before the Blights I'd agree. If the TI caused them to begin with. We don't know that for sure, only what the Chantry tells us. But before the blights there was no need for bloodmagic, so using it despite the dangers would be foolish at least. But now, in the Dragon Age, there is the blight already. And bloodmagic is what created the Wardens and bloodmagic is what saved my Warden's life when she killed the Archdemon. So bloodmagic may be neccessary. I never denied it is dangerous, more dangerous than every other magic. But it is not inherently evil. As in the use of bloodmagic alone does not make you evil, a fool maybe. Only if you use it to evil ends, and even then it is not the fault of the bloodmagic, but rather your fault.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 05 février 2011 - 06:49 .

[DamnThoseDisplayNames]

In my opinion allowing a mother to save her child is a pretty "good" thing.

And the most situation-logical one. You could never guess that you can make a "good ending" for them all by abandoning the whole Castle AND plot-relevant characters to Connor for more than 2 days (one day to tower, other back, plus the large quest in Circle and you never can know how much time you will spend in Fade with Sloth Demon).
If I were there, I would let Jowan do his thing, not run away to Circle.

Modifié par DamnThoseDisplayNames, 05 février 2011 - 06:49 .

[AlexXIV]

DamnThoseDisplayNames wrote...

In my opinion allowing a mother to save her child is a pretty "good" thing.

And the most situation-logical one. You could never guess that you can make a "good ending" for them all by abandoning the whole Castle AND plot-relevant characters to Connor for more than 2 days (one day to tower, other back, plus the large quest in Circle and you never can know how much time you will spend in Fade with Sloth Demon).
If I were there, I would let Jowan do his thing, not run away to Circle.

Good thing we have save games. So we can try and figure out the best. Thank the 'Maker'.

[luckyirish.dowd]

Eudaemonium wrote...

There isn't really anything *inherently* bad about controlling other people (I mean if you want to get technical, we are always controlled by a combination of past experiences and influences, the amount of free choice that goes into any decision is up for debate). Nonetheless, we live in a society that places immense value on personal liberty and the concept of free will. In such a society the idea of mind-control is somewhat abhorent to many. I think that abhorence is conditional, rather than inherent, though. In a society where the concept of the individual did not carry much weight, mind-control by community leaders for the good of 'the group' would probably not be as objectionable.

Have you ever met anyone who used to live under a totalitarian government and then where either free of that or moved away to a society with more freedom?  I have, and none of them wanted their lives to go back to the way that they were after getting a taste of freedom.  NONE OF THEM.  Mind control, or simple domination of someone's free will is bad.  Period.  Those who say that it doesn't matter usually were never in the position to were they had to experience it, or are usually in the position to were they can abuse it.

[luckyirish.dowd]

Another thing that's been bothing me is that everyone keeps saying, "Power corrupts." Has anyone ever ask WHY power corrupts? Power itself is simply the ability to do something, anything. It corrupts not because of its inherent nature, but because of ours. Simply put: People suck. We're greedy, selfish, and self-centered as a natural recourse because who we always think about first is ourselves. After all, the most intement thing in your life is... you. Of course you're going to think of yourself first. But for those that also think about others they can hold off those selfish desires and avoid power from corrupting them.



It's all a matter of both WHAT you do and WHY you do it. The ends AND the means. If you're willing to sacrifice OF YOURSELF, whether it's blood or sweat or time, and do something constructive, then isn't it good? If you're willing to sacrifice OF SOMEONE ELSE, whether it's blood or sweat or time, and do something constructive, then isn't it BAD? That shows a selfishness in your part that means that even with good intentions you still aren't willing to give from yourself. Instead you'd rather take from others to do the right thing.



On the other hand, If you're willing to sacrifice OF YOURSELF, whether it's blood or sweat or time, and do something destructive, then isn't it still bad? Every villian, dictator, or scumbag in the world has always put forth effort to achieve their goals, and ended up doing things and were atrocious. Then, If you're willing to sacrifice OF OTHERS, whether it's blood or sweat or time, and do something destructive, then isn't it bad? I mean, this seems obvious. You're going to make someone else suffer to hurt even more people.



The point that I'm getting at is that you need to consider both the means and the ends. The motive and the goal. For all those Harry Potter fans out there, would all of you not agree that Harry's mother, sacrificing herself in order to protect her son (in essence a form of blood magic) a very good thing? Means and motive were good there. With the case of Jowan protecting his girlfriend by forcing others to submit to him, you could say that will the motive was good, the means were wrong, those making it a bad decision. Then you have Flemeth, who sacrificed countless girls in order to live forever but also helped humanity against the blight. Her selfish desire to live forever at the expense of others was bad, even if she did do some good acts to ensure that her crop of host bodies was able to live on. And finally, you have the Broodmother trying to kill everyone and everything simply because she wanted everyone to suffer.



The first example was positive from both ends, the second had good intentions with bad means, the third had bad intentions with good means, and the forth was just bad all around. Simply put, blood magic or any other type of power is old good or bad dependent upon WHAT YOU DO WITH IT and WHY YOU DO IT. It's fully possible to have a blood mage that only uses his power to help and heal people, just like it is fully possible to have a blood mage that only uses his power to hurt and control people.

[Balek-Vriege]

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

... I suppose this is a little off-topic, and I'm sorry if it's been asked before, but I'm curious; can blood mages use the blood of their enemies to fuel their spells, theoretically speaking? This possibility would make blood magic a game breaker, of course, but if it was possible I can certainly understand why someone would risk a death sentence from the Chantry just to learn it.

Yes it's not only possible but that's how Blood Wound/Blood Control work and how the whole Darkspawn mess came about.  Tevinter mages used slaves as blood resevoirs to fuel their spells and so much so, they used almost all the slave blood in the Imperium to fuel a spell to send a few mages into the Fade as whole beings.  We know how that turned out... at least we think we do.

[IanPolaris]

Balek-Vriege wrote...

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

... I suppose this is a little off-topic, and I'm sorry if it's been asked before, but I'm curious; can blood mages use the blood of their enemies to fuel their spells, theoretically speaking? This possibility would make blood magic a game breaker, of course, but if it was possible I can certainly understand why someone would risk a death sentence from the Chantry just to learn it.

Yes it's not only possible but that's how Blood Wound/Blood Control work and how the whole Darkspawn mess came about.  Tevinter mages used slaves as blood resevoirs to fuel their spells and so much so, they used almost all the slave blood in the Imperium to fuel a spell to send a few mages into the Fade as whole beings.  We know how that turned out... at least we think we do.

Um no actually.  Bloodmages can only use their own blood, the blood of willing participants, or the blood of those that are unable to resist to power their spell.  Bloodmagic can be used to control the blood within an enemy true, but that doesn't power the spell (which is really how both Bloodwound and Bloodcontrol work).  As for the Darkspawn mess, we only have the Chantry mythology to go on and while I wouldn't be suprised at all if that were part of the trust, I'd be astonished if that were the whole story to put it lightly....

-Polaris

[Juggernaught203]

IanPolaris wrote...

Everyone,

The real point I was trying to get at was that Bloodmagic (and even Mind Control magic) isn't evil in of itself any more than any other tool is evil in of itself.  Furthermore there is nothing instrinsic about blood magic that requires even or even questionable acts (you can use animales to supply power as well as your own blood...it doesn't have to require involuntary human sacrifice!)

That is exactly my point. A tool is only evil if used for evil. A tool might make it easier to be tempted in using it, but it does not guarantee it *will* corrupt a person either.
My first Mage was an AW/Blood Mage, and yet she never used the blood of her companions to fuel a single spell. It was always her own.

I think you people should ask yourselves this: if you, a Blood Mage, were the only one standing between, say, a Dragon and a town full of innocents. You only have one single friend to help in the fight against the Dragon, and said friend was battered and bloodied, an inch away from death, just like you. He/she is unconscious and unable to decide whether to co-operate or no.

Would you, knowing your friend would not survive the ordeal, draw the blood of your friend in order to feul the spell that will vanquish the Dragon and save the village?
I'm assuming a situation here in which the Blood Mage him/herself needs to be alive in order to complete the spell, and therefore cannot drain his/her own blood. To clarify: using Blood Sacrifice on your friend, in order to have enough blood to cast this spell succesfully.

Would you rather be responsible for the destruction of an entire village or would you rather be responsible for the death of one (most likely two, since you yourself are also nearly finished) in order to save them?


EDIT:

Eclipse_9990 wrote...

Well I actually let Avernus live to continue his research. Why? If he
successfully  unlocks the power of the blood for Warden's it would give
them such a huge advantage in the long run, and will make killing
Darkspawn that much simpler. Sure a few Wardens might die from the
experiments, but I believe my Warden wouldn't shed a tear if it got the
job done.

Alright. So it's a matter of choosing between two evils. You prefer to choose the lesser evil. The death of a few in order to save the lives of many. See, this is the wonderful thing about morality and practicality. I would try to be a good person, but you can and should ask yourself (like in above example); would I much rather have the blood of a few on my hands, knowing that my deeds, misunderstood as they may be now, will save the lives of thousands in the future? Or would my morality prevent me from killing these people, knowing a tool to save many many more will be lost in the process? 

It's kind of like having the gift of foresight. Suppose you would have known that a young man would later become a dictator, condemning millions of innocents to death simply for belonging to a racial minority.
Would you assassinate this young man and every other person of whom you know will help him, in order to save millions, even though you know *you* will be branded as a murderer? Some might argue that because he hasn't done anything wrong yet, he shouldn't be convicted for it.
On the other hand, it would possibly weigh your conscience down much more heavily if you allow this young man to grow up and turn into the dictator you knew he would become.
In this instant, both choices aren't black/white. You could argue that murder is wrong as the Dalish are so fond of telling human Wardens; so is the inaction, letting things happen when you know that bad things will happen if you allow the people in question on their course..

EDIT 2:

luckyirish.dowd wrote...

Another thing that's been bothing me is that everyone keeps saying,
"Power corrupts." Has anyone ever ask WHY power corrupts? Power itself
is simply the ability to do something, anything. It corrupts not
because of its inherent nature, but because of ours. Simply put: People
suck. We're greedy, selfish, and self-centered as a natural recourse
because who we always think about first is ourselves. After all, the
most intement thing in your life is... you. Of course you're going to
think of yourself first. But for those that also think about others
they can hold off those selfish desires and avoid power from corrupting
them.

Exactly. Doing what is right very hard for most people to do, because of the reasons you gave. This does not mean that people cannot or will not do it. Out of their own volition, even.
"Protecting Ferelden from the Blight? Sure thing, gimme that chalice. What, only 30 to 40 years to live from now? Ok, I assume I could die tomorrow on a darkspawn blade anyway if I stand idly by. Anything goes, you say? That includes Blood Magic? Alright, i'll sacrifice my own lifeblood to stop the Blight from spreading anyway I can."

A person who thinks like this is in no way evil, if you ask me. He or she simply will do what *needs* to be done, by any means nesccesary. "For the Greater Good" as they say. It isn't pleasant in anyway to make such decisions, but it represents a willingness to sacrifice everything for the good of many. People you do not even know, most likely.

That reminds me of the end of Fable 2; the Sacrifice option. As a Good hero who had a family, I choose to leave my wife and kids deads, but bringing back all the others that died. The other choice, Love, was that you would get your family back, but those that died in the ordeal would stay dead. In a way it is a "good" coice as well, but less "Good", because it is, in a way, selfish. Another Fable 2 choice I really liked and was well thought out was the Dark Seal quest. Either sacrificing your youth and health to save a young woman's health and youth, but as a result, be less fit to combat the true threat, or choose to remain young and healthy and 100% fit for that true threat while sacrificing her health and youth.

Modifié par Juggernaught203, 05 février 2011 - 09:29 .

[jaikss]

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...


Um no actually.  Bloodmages can only use their own blood, the blood of willing participants, or the blood of those that are unable to resist to power their spell.  Bloodmagic can be used to control the blood within an enemy true, but that doesn't power the spell (which is really how both Bloodwound and Bloodcontrol work).  As for the Darkspawn mess, we only have the Chantry mythology to go on and while I wouldn't be suprised at all if that were part of the trust, I'd be astonished if that were the whole story to put it lightly....

-Polaris

What I meant was, could it be - theoretically - possible for a blood mage to use the blood of their enemies to power spells like fireball and the like? I'm not talking about what is possible within the game itself, because the ability to cast spells without spending lifeforce or mana (and at the same time, wound your enemies) would be game-breaking.

I dont think theres enough info to say for certain one way or another.

Personally I got the impression that there are some preparations required before a blood mage can use the blood of others to fuel his/her spells,and as such simply drawing power from their enemies isnt really an option.

[Juggernaught203]

luckyirish.dowd wrote...
The point that I'm getting at is that you need to consider both the means and the ends. The motive and the goal.

This whole topic in a nutshell, as far as i'm concerned.

((Oops.. Didn't mean to double post, meant to edit my existing post))

Modifié par Juggernaught203, 05 février 2011 - 09:21 .

[TJPags]

jaikss wrote...

I really dont understand how anyone can claim blood magic in and itself is "evil".In my opinions its no different from other forms of magic,in that it is very powerful and can be used for both good and bad.I mean really,if a village could be saved through a blood magic ritual that requires a sacrifice,and you had a person willing to be that sacrifice, should the village be allowed to be destroyed because "blood magic is evil"?In my opinion,no.

TJPags wrote...


Or is it the mind control?  You know, this comes up a lot, but really, do we ever actually see mind control?  The only spell close to that is Blood Control.  That controls the suspect by controlling his blood.  Not his mind.  So where's the mind control, really?  Does it actually even exist?
Let's face it, the real reasons the Chantry disdains blood magic so much are these:

 

I agree with the rest of your post,but we do see pretty clear evidence of it ingame imo.For one Bann Teagan being controlled by Connor when you enter the mainhall,ofcourse it isnt precisely mentioned that it was blood magic,but to me it was pretty evident considering the context.

Also somewhere in Wardens Keep it is mentioned that Avernus had used blood magic to influence the minds of some of the nobles to join their cause.

"Others may speak of the sanctity of the mind. To those who know the true
power of the blood, this is foolishness. The mind is no more sacred
than the knee, the small toe, or the ear. It is man's organ of
reasoning, nothing more. And true reasoning requires connection to the
rhythm of the blood, the tireless pounding of life. Interrupt this, and
even the mind is yours to attack.
"

Quote from the scrolls of Banastor would suggest a degree of mind control as possible aswell

 http://dragonage.wik...lls_of_Banastor

Well, with Teagan, that was an abomination, a mage linked with a demon.  Not actually a blood mage.

And yes, we read about in scrolls, codex entries, Avernus' notes, etc.  But we don't see it.  What we see with Teagan is not actually blood magic.

Yet we can run into several packs of blood mages (I think some, at least, are optional) in the game - not once do they use blood magic to control anyone.  We even run into Tevinter mages - they don't either.  If we choose the blood magic class, we don't even get a spell called mind control.

So maybe the mind control is just Chantry BS?  Or maybe it's highly over-hyped?

bsbcaer wrote...

TJPags wrote...

And honestly, if I use my own blood, is that anyone's choice but mine?  I mean, it's my blood, just like it's my mana.  If I want to use my mana to cast fireball rather than rock skin, that's okay.  But if I want to use my blood to power a healing spell, that's bad?

if I use the blood of a willing person, why is that bad?  People today give blood all the time - is that evil?  My companion, in a battle for our lives, offers his blood to power my spells so I can save us.  We both live - I don't kill him.  Why is that inherently evil? 

Simply put, what's to stop you from taking and using the blood of an unwilling person? 

Let's put ourselves in a morally grey situation for a second.  You're a blood mage, you're walking out of a hallway, when you're confronted by authorities (in this case Ser Cauthrien) and told that you're under arrest.  Using blood magic against creatures such as Dark Spawn is one thing, you can justify it as defending a greater good.  But how do you justify using it against someone who is acting under mistaken knowledge, but with the authority of the state behind her?

Simply put, my own self control.  What's to stop me from walking into a Chantry during services and tossing a fireball at anyone?  My own self control.  Why is one heinously evil, and the other not?

Now, your example - if your not a blood mage, do you fight Cauthrien in that situation?  I mean, you use this example, and it makes no sense.  Anyone can fight her.  By your definition, everyone who does is doing wrong.  Why single out the blood mage?

[Maconbar]

Who knows maybe we will learn more about blood magic in DA:2. I doubt that everything pertaining to this subject was revealed in DA:O + DA:A.

[bsbcaer]

IanPolaris wrote...

Balek-Vriege wrote...

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

... I suppose this is a little off-topic, and I'm sorry if it's been asked before, but I'm curious; can blood mages use the blood of their enemies to fuel their spells, theoretically speaking? This possibility would make blood magic a game breaker, of course, but if it was possible I can certainly understand why someone would risk a death sentence from the Chantry just to learn it.

Yes it's not only possible but that's how Blood Wound/Blood Control work and how the whole Darkspawn mess came about.  Tevinter mages used slaves as blood resevoirs to fuel their spells and so much so, they used almost all the slave blood in the Imperium to fuel a spell to send a few mages into the Fade as whole beings.  We know how that turned out... at least we think we do.

Um no actually.  Bloodmages can only use their own blood, the blood of willing participants, or the blood of those that are unable to resist to power their spell.  Bloodmagic can be used to control the blood within an enemy true, but that doesn't power the spell (which is really how both Bloodwound and Bloodcontrol work).  As for the Darkspawn mess, we only have the Chantry mythology to go on and while I wouldn't be suprised at all if that were part of the trust, I'd be astonished if that were the whole story to put it lightly....

-Polaris

You wouldn't happen to have a cite for the bolded part would you?  Just curious to read it myself

[AlexXIV]

If they could use the blood of their enemies they would get stronger the more enemies they have and basically wouldn't need any lyrium or blood of allies. I mean they have plenty enemies, they wouldn't run out of blood for sure.

[bsbcaer]

TJPags wrote...

Well, with Teagan, that was an abomination, a mage linked with a demon.  Not actually a blood mage.

And yes, we read about in scrolls, codex entries, Avernus' notes, etc.  But we don't see it.  What we see with Teagan is not actually blood magic.

Yet we can run into several packs of blood mages (I think some, at least, are optional) in the game - not once do they use blood magic to control anyone.  We even run into Tevinter mages - they don't either.  If we choose the blood magic class, we don't even get a spell called mind control.

So maybe the mind control is just Chantry BS?  Or maybe it's highly over-hyped?

Blood Control[/b]
Activated

Range: Medium
Activation: 40
Cooldown: 40s
Requires: Level 16

The blood mage forcibly controls the target’s blood, making the target an ally of the caster unless it passes a mental resistance check. If the target resists, it still takes great damage from the manipulation of its blood. Creatures without blood are immune

[Insomniak]

Maria Caliban wrote...

NTsikuris wrote...

But couldn't someone of benevolent nature be a Blood Mage?

Certainly. There's nothing inherently bad about blood mage. The ability to control the mind of another might be problematic, but there are other perfectly benign things blood magic can do.

Well, even mind control in and of itself isn't necessarily evil either; I mean think of the classic "jedi mind trick": that was often used for good purposes.

So I'd have to say yes, blood magic can be used as a means to a "good" end. I think it's gotten a bad rep from the Chantry, Tevinter magisters, and fools like Jowan and Uldred.

Modifié par javajedi217, 05 février 2011 - 11:55 .

[TJPags]

bsbcaer wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Well, with Teagan, that was an abomination, a mage linked with a demon.  Not actually a blood mage.

And yes, we read about in scrolls, codex entries, Avernus' notes, etc.  But we don't see it.  What we see with Teagan is not actually blood magic.

Yet we can run into several packs of blood mages (I think some, at least, are optional) in the game - not once do they use blood magic to control anyone.  We even run into Tevinter mages - they don't either.  If we choose the blood magic class, we don't even get a spell called mind control.

So maybe the mind control is just Chantry BS?  Or maybe it's highly over-hyped?

Blood Control[/b]
Activated

Range: Medium
Activation: 40
Cooldown: 40s
Requires: Level 16

The blood mage forcibly controls the target’s blood, making the target an ally of the caster unless it passes a mental resistance check. If the target resists, it still takes great damage from the manipulation of its blood. Creatures without blood are immune

Right, what are you trying to say?  I mentioned this in an earlier post.  It's controlling the blood, and by extension the body, not the mind.

So - what am I missing?

[jaikss]

TJpags wrote...

jaikss wrote...

I really dont
understand how anyone can claim blood magic in and itself is "evil".In
my opinions its no different from other forms of magic,in that it is
very powerful and can be used for both good and bad.I mean really,if a
village could be saved through a blood magic ritual that requires a
sacrifice,and you had a person willing to be that sacrifice, should the
village be allowed to be destroyed because "blood magic is evil"?In my
opinion,no.

TJPags wrote...


Or
is it the mind control?  You know, this comes up a lot, but really, do
we ever actually see mind control?  The only spell close to that is
Blood Control.  That controls the suspect by controlling his blood.  Not
his mind.  So where's the mind control, really?  Does it actually even
exist?
Let's face it, the real reasons the Chantry disdains blood magic so much are these:

 

I agree
with the rest of your post,but we do see pretty clear evidence of it
ingame imo.For one Bann Teagan being controlled by Connor when you enter
the mainhall,ofcourse it isnt precisely mentioned that it was blood
magic,but to me it was pretty evident considering the context.

Also
somewhere in Wardens Keep it is mentioned that Avernus had used blood
magic to influence the minds of some of the nobles to join their cause.

"Others may speak of the sanctity of the mind. To those who know the true
power of the blood, this is foolishness. The mind is no more sacred
than the knee, the small toe, or the ear. It is man's organ of
reasoning, nothing more. And true reasoning requires connection to the
rhythm of the blood, the tireless pounding of life. Interrupt this, and
even the mind is yours to attack.
"

Quote from the scrolls of Banastor would suggest a degree of mind control as possible aswell

 http://dragonage.wik...lls_of_Banastor

Well, with Teagan, that was an abomination, a mage linked with a demon.  Not actually a blood mage.

And
yes, we read about in scrolls, codex entries, Avernus' notes, etc.  But
we don't see it.  What we see with Teagan is not actually blood magic.

Yet
we can run into several packs of blood mages (I think some, at least,
are optional) in the game - not once do they use blood magic to control
anyone.  We even run into Tevinter mages - they don't either.  If we
choose the blood magic class, we don't even get a spell called mind
control.

So maybe the mind control is just Chantry BS?  Or maybe it's highly over-hyped?

Demons use blood magic aswell,not just blood mages.We dont really see enough to say for certain whether its blood magic or not,however as far as we can tell from game lore blood magic is the only form of magic capable of that sort of mind control,combine that with the fact that demons are known to use blood magic its not really a stretch to assume thats what Connor used to control Teagan with.

Well in all fairness most of the blood mages ingame dont use blood magic at all (which I always thought was incredibly lame)and none of them certainly use anything like Blood Wound,which we know for certain exists.

Well I dont think its completely "chantry bs",I do wonder however, if chantrys view on blood magic has more to do with their templars losing their edge vs mages when fighting a blood mage than about their claimed fear of one affecting the mind of a grand cleric,king etc.(moreso considering there are items like the litany of Adralla to completely nullify any mind control attempts) .

[Falls Edge]

It's not cool to make puppets out of people, he's right in that it would be similar to rape(though not exactly).

Anyway physical control at all would scare the heck out of literally anyone, blood magic is not a cool magic.

It's the Demon's magic, its spells are meant to terrify, control, demoralize, or make you sacrifice your own lifespan for power. This is not magic for the nice guys. It's the magic of martyrs and those who want a short cut.

Modifié par Falls Edge, 06 février 2011 - 12:17 .

[TJPags]

jaikss wrote...

TJpags wrote...

jaikss wrote...

I really dont
understand how anyone can claim blood magic in and itself is "evil".In
my opinions its no different from other forms of magic,in that it is
very powerful and can be used for both good and bad.I mean really,if a
village could be saved through a blood magic ritual that requires a
sacrifice,and you had a person willing to be that sacrifice, should the
village be allowed to be destroyed because "blood magic is evil"?In my
opinion,no.

TJPags wrote...


Or
is it the mind control?  You know, this comes up a lot, but really, do
we ever actually see mind control?  The only spell close to that is
Blood Control.  That controls the suspect by controlling his blood.  Not
his mind.  So where's the mind control, really?  Does it actually even
exist?
Let's face it, the real reasons the Chantry disdains blood magic so much are these:

 

I agree
with the rest of your post,but we do see pretty clear evidence of it
ingame imo.For one Bann Teagan being controlled by Connor when you enter
the mainhall,ofcourse it isnt precisely mentioned that it was blood
magic,but to me it was pretty evident considering the context.

Also
somewhere in Wardens Keep it is mentioned that Avernus had used blood
magic to influence the minds of some of the nobles to join their cause.

"Others may speak of the sanctity of the mind. To those who know the true
power of the blood, this is foolishness. The mind is no more sacred
than the knee, the small toe, or the ear. It is man's organ of
reasoning, nothing more. And true reasoning requires connection to the
rhythm of the blood, the tireless pounding of life. Interrupt this, and
even the mind is yours to attack.
"

Quote from the scrolls of Banastor would suggest a degree of mind control as possible aswell

 http://dragonage.wik...lls_of_Banastor

Well, with Teagan, that was an abomination, a mage linked with a demon.  Not actually a blood mage.

And
yes, we read about in scrolls, codex entries, Avernus' notes, etc.  But
we don't see it.  What we see with Teagan is not actually blood magic.

Yet
we can run into several packs of blood mages (I think some, at least,
are optional) in the game - not once do they use blood magic to control
anyone.  We even run into Tevinter mages - they don't either.  If we
choose the blood magic class, we don't even get a spell called mind
control.

So maybe the mind control is just Chantry BS?  Or maybe it's highly over-hyped?

Demons use blood magic aswell,not just blood mages.We dont really see enough to say for certain whether its blood magic or not,however as far as we can tell from game lore blood magic is the only form of magic capable of that sort of mind control,combine that with the fact that demons are known to use blood magic its not really a stretch to assume thats what Connor used to control Teagan with.

Well in all fairness most of the blood mages ingame dont use blood magic at all (which I always thought was incredibly lame)and none of them certainly use anything like Blood Wound,which we know for certain exists.

Well I dont think its completely "chantry bs",I do wonder however, if chantrys view on blood magic has more to do with their templars losing their edge vs mages when fighting a blood mage than about their claimed fear of one affecting the mind of a grand cleric,king etc.(moreso considering there are items like the litany of Adralla to completely nullify any mind control attempts) .

Well, was the Desire Demon in the Tower, the one that was controlling that Templar, using blood magic?  Was the sloth demon using blood magic on the party?  I never got that impression.  Maybe I got it wrong.  If someone can point me to the place we're told that, I'd be interested in checking it out.

I think, more than the fear that Templars might lose the edge against blood mages, it has more to do with blood magic being used by the Tevinter Imperium, from which Andraste escaped slavery and against whom Andraste fought a war.

In other words, our prophet fought these people for more than just revenge for holding her as a slave - she fought them because blood magic is teh evilz.

Falls Edge wrote...

It's not cool to make puppets out of people, he's right in that it would be similar to rape.

Anyway physical control at all would scare the heck out of literally anyone, blood magic is not a cool magic.

It's the Demon's magic, its spells are meant to terrify, control, demoralize, or make you sacrifice your own lifespan for power. This is not magic for the nice guys. It's the magic of martyrs and those who want a short cut.

It's not cool at all to make puppets out of people.  It's not cool to do most of the things mages do - setting them on fire, paralyzing them or putting them to sleep so they can't fight back, freezing them so they can be shattered, etc.

It's all just a tool, nothing more.

[SkittlesKat96]

Like nearly every single other person said there can be good blood mages but there is still more danger in blood magic then there is good, what happened with the mage circle was messed up and can easily happen.



I think it'd be logical that some of the Dalish elfs who know magic do blood magic cause the templars can't get them and stuff and they are fine using blood magic.

[Falls Edge]

Swords and maces aren't nice either if you get down to it.

Are you saying that all magic isimmoral? I'd say that healing magic isn't actually too bad all things considered, nor is buffing, or shields.

Mages have the ability to help but they're mostly perceived as war weapons right now, the problem with blood magic is that every spell it has cannot be perceived as good, its only moral application is the ability to defend yourself with a shield of blood, but then you can use an arcane shield anyway.

Modifié par Falls Edge, 06 février 2011 - 12:31 .