363 réponses à ce sujet

[TJPags]

My Avatar is a Lizard wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

My Avatar is a Lizard wrote...

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.

Isn't the ability to control the mind of another Inherently bad?
If your government had tech to control your thoughts but didn't use them would you still want your government to have them? 

Blood magic gives the user the possibility to use blood (his or of another person) to fuel his spells. Blood magic gives the possibility to control mind, but you don't have to use it. A blood mage could simply use his blood to fuel his spell (as I do when I played BM in Origins) without controlling minds or using other person's blood.

But isn't the ability in itself simply bad? What's better everyone having nukes no one dare uses, or Having no nukes at all? Sure no country is dropping the A bomb right now but at any point in the future they could, and that in itself is going to make anyone nervous i think.

No, not at all.  An ability is neither good or bad.  What you do with it can be good or bad.

Your comparison is flawed.  You should be comparing blood magic to nuclear technology, not nuclear weapons.  Nuclear technocolgy can be used to make power plants, which is good, or nukes, which may be bad.

Blood mages can use blood to fuel spells.  I'd even argue that the mind control is not inherently bad.  What if it was used to stop someone who was planning to kill themself by jumping off a roof?  Or if it was used to kill a despot?  Or stop a serial killer?

[Falls Edge]

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.

Actuallym I think I would object to that on moral grounds, we derserve what we get, making people do good things defeats the point beyond self-satisfaction and self-preservation, allowing or granting someone the capability to do good is morally good however, thus blood magic is actually morally evil from todays standards.

[My Avatar is a Lizard]

hhh89 wrote...

My Avatar is a Lizard wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

My Avatar is a Lizard wrote...

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.

Isn't the ability to control the mind of another Inherently bad?

An ability isn't inherently bad.

If your government had tech to control your thoughts but didn't use them would you still want your government to have them? 

If my government had tech to control thoughts but didn't use them, it wouldn't matter whether my government had them or not.

So you would feel completley safe knowing your government had the tech to control your thoughts?
You would have no problem with that, really?

Jedi can control minds. Nobody seem particulary worried in SW.
I have a question: if a mage knows blood magic, he/she is immune to blood domination in your opinion?

No because jedi are the embodiement of all things good and are basically jesus.
But do people fear the sith? Would you wanna stand next to darth vader(ok maybe you would if you a SW fan)
Anakin simply turned to the darkside to protect his wife in good intention but it turned out his intention just backfired and corrupted him with power. Why can't a sith use his powers for good?


Jowan said he only experimented with blood magic but later attacks 7 templars when they try to take his girlfriend for breaking laws in place.
With all that power Jowan is basically deciding what he sees fit as right and wrong, what laws he chooses to follow is up to him because if you try to stop him or tell him he's wrong your simply going to wind up a pile of goo.

[blothulfur]

Is it just blood that powers blood magic or is it life and maybe the soul, supposedly it is the magic of demons and according to Avernus at soldiers keep they are its masters, not even he can best them in its practise and that old gammers one cunning fox.

Yet demons have no blood or even bodies in their natural state in the fade so maybe the shedding of blood is an unspoken agreement between the powers of the fade and a mage whereby he gains a deeper connection to the fade and they are drawn closer to the real world through the consumption of his offered soul.

As to why it is a school mainly focusing on mental manipulation, perhaps that is the only way they know how to affect reality, shape it as they do their own realm through their gathered will.

[The Bard From Hell]

IanPolaris wrote...

The Bard From Hell wrote...

You could make Wynne a Blood Mage in Origins, and I made Anders one too. None of them is evil, and none of them complains about it.

Well Anders does albeit half-heartedly when he complains that the Templars would have labeled him "Malificar, true or not" and just killed him, you can say (if you made him a bloodmage), "Well you are a maleficar" at which point he rather snarkily replies, "Yeah, and don't think the irony isn't lost on me."  Anders doesn't like bloodmagic one bit.

-Polaris

Wynne still did nothing about being a Blood Mage, in case you made her one. I mentioned Anders 'cuz I never got that conversation, anyways, but it's good to know.

[Vearsin]

The way i look at it blood magic isn't that much more powerfull than regular weapons or regular magic, so why is it used if not for the desire for that little extra power?

[The Elder King]

My Avatar is a Lizard wrote...

But isn't the ability in itself simply bad? What's better everyone having nukes no one dare uses, or Having no nukes at all? Sure no country is dropping the A bomb right now but at any point in the future they could, and that in itself is going to make anyone nervous i think.

I'm not sure if for becoming a BM you have to learn how to control mind. It could be a specific ability that you don't have to learn to become blood mage. Even if you have to learn it in order to become a blood magic, it don't seem to me a big deal. Of course mages could learn BM to control minds (which is wrong), buta mage can use his normal power to kill people in infinite ways, if he's a bad person. Mages have great power even if they don't know BM.

[DamnThoseDisplayNames]

But isn't the ability in itself simply bad?

Why? It is, in basic, sacrificing yourself to achieve some greater goals. You use your own life force to cast spells.

On the other hand lies lyrium, which is a horrible addictive drug, which makes those who use it dreamwalking slaves.

[Maria Caliban]

My Avatar is a Lizard wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

My Avatar is a Lizard wrote...

If your government had tech to control your thoughts but didn't use them would you still want your government to have them? 

If my government had tech to control thoughts but didn't use them, it wouldn't matter whether my government had them or not.

So you would feel completley safe knowing your government had the tech to control your thoughts?
You would have no problem with that, really?

If they never used it, yes.

[NTsikuris]

I think the Devs should chime in on this. They are the ones who created the Blood Mages.

[NTsikuris]

DamnThoseDisplayNames wrote...

But isn't the ability in itself simply bad?

Why? It is, in basic, sacrificing yourself to achieve some greater goals. You use your own life force to cast spells.
On the other hand lies lyrium, which is a horrible addictive drug, which makes those who use it dreamwalking slaves.

I agree. The individual does not have to use another person life force. They can use their own. Thus, they sacrifice themselves to achieve greater goals. They are making the exact same sacrifice as any Grey Warden.

[Falls Edge]

NTsikuris wrote...

I think the Devs should chime in on this. They are the ones who created the Blood Mages.

You're going to ask the dev team whether controlling others is morally corrupt?

[Altima Darkspells]

Well, Blood Magic is the magic of demons...

Still, as previously stated, there's nothing necessarily wrong with Blood Magic.  It's just that it's open to extreme abuse.  Controlling someone's mind (like a monarch or a Divine) is one example.  Using *other* people to fuel your spells is another.

Remember, one particularly silly spell used by Ancient Tevinter used the lives of hundreds of slaves to power it.

Falls Edge wrote...

You could just read the dresden files if you like fiction, they basically answer the quest of why it is a horrible idea to learn magic that control minds, and what would realistically happen if you gave someone that ability.

Well, there's a bit of a difference between Dresden Files' magic and DAO's.  In DF, there's a clear split on 'black' magic and normal magic.  Black Magic is insidious and encourages the user to use it more and more (like the Dark Side in Star Wars) then twists you into what you are.

Mental magic in that setting is particularly nasty because, depending on how you feel about the person, using the exact same spell on two different people can have drastically different effects (usually insanity).

Besides, the way you can tell who is the bad guy and who is the...nicer guy in DF, is that the bad guys universally mind rape mortals in their employ.

[The Elder King]

@MyAvatarisaLizard: I was taling about the ability. Maybe I have to be more clear. Mind Control is an ability that have both BM and Jedi/Sith. BM can choose to be "Jedi" or "Sith". But I believe it depends on your opinion of BM. I believe blood magic isn't necessarily evil (although mages should treat it cautious), so a BM can be good or evil. If someone believe blood magic is evil, of course BM can only be evil.

Edit: I believe that it isn't an obvious response on this topic, because we don't have a confirm if blood magic is really evil, or if a mage could resist the "corruption". For this I believe that all of us can have a different opinion. IMHO I respect every different opinion.

Modifié par hhh89, 03 février 2011 - 11:04 .

[My Avatar is a Lizard]

TJPags wrote...

My Avatar is a Lizard wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

My Avatar is a Lizard wrote...

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.

Isn't the ability to control the mind of another Inherently bad?
If your government had tech to control your thoughts but didn't use them would you still want your government to have them? 

Blood magic gives the user the possibility to use blood (his or of another person) to fuel his spells. Blood magic gives the possibility to control mind, but you don't have to use it. A blood mage could simply use his blood to fuel his spell (as I do when I played BM in Origins) without controlling minds or using other person's blood.

But isn't the ability in itself simply bad? What's better everyone having nukes no one dare uses, or Having no nukes at all? Sure no country is dropping the A bomb right now but at any point in the future they could, and that in itself is going to make anyone nervous i think.

No, not at all.  An ability is neither good or bad.  What you do with it can be good or bad.

Your comparison is flawed.  You should be comparing blood magic to nuclear technology, not nuclear weapons.  Nuclear technocolgy can be used to make power plants, which is good, or nukes, which may be bad.

Blood mages can use blood to fuel spells.  I'd even argue that the mind control is not inherently bad.  What if it was used to stop someone who was planning to kill themself by jumping off a roof?  Or if it was used to kill a despot?  Or stop a serial killer?

So now you're deciding whats right and wrong, What people can and can't do. Because you think suicide is never justfied your going to decide people aren't allowed and they no longer have say. You have become god in other words
Why does someone need that much power?
Your already a mage if you want to stop a serial killer cast a damn fireball.

[Falls Edge]

Maybe it would be easier just to state the obvious here and say that YOU'RE MAKING A CONTRACT WITH A DEMON FOR POWER THIS COULD NOT POSSIBLY GO WRONG.

[TJPags]

My Avatar is a Lizard wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

My Avatar is a Lizard wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

My Avatar is a Lizard wrote...

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.

Isn't the ability to control the mind of another Inherently bad?

An ability isn't inherently bad.

If your government had tech to control your thoughts but didn't use them would you still want your government to have them? 

If my government had tech to control thoughts but didn't use them, it wouldn't matter whether my government had them or not.

So you would feel completley safe knowing your government had the tech to control your thoughts?
You would have no problem with that, really?

Jedi can control minds. Nobody seem particulary worried in SW.
I have a question: if a mage knows blood magic, he/she is immune to blood domination in your opinion?

No because jedi are the embodiement of all things good and are basically jesus.
But do people fear the sith? Would you wanna stand next to darth vader(ok maybe you would if you a SW fan)
Anakin simply turned to the darkside to protect his wife in good intention but it turned out his intention just backfired and corrupted him with power. Why can't a sith use his powers for good?


Jowan said he only experimented with blood magic but later attacks 7 templars when they try to take his girlfriend for breaking laws in place.
With all that power Jowan is basically deciding what he sees fit as right and wrong, what laws he chooses to follow is up to him because if you try to stop him or tell him he's wrong your simply going to wind up a pile of goo.

Isn't Annikan  - and by extension, darth vader - a sith?

Wouldn't that make Luke a sith?

He doesn't use his power for evil, does he?

[Granitehands]

I thought that the Chantry labeled it as evil because of the Tevinter Imperium and their use of it. No need to bring up Tevinter History, Although it HAS mainly been used for evil

[My Avatar is a Lizard]

Maria Caliban wrote...

My Avatar is a Lizard wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

My Avatar is a Lizard wrote...

If your government had tech to control your thoughts but didn't use them would you still want your government to have them? 

If my government had tech to control thoughts but didn't use them, it wouldn't matter whether my government had them or not.

So you would feel completley safe knowing your government had the tech to control your thoughts?
You would have no problem with that, really?

If they never used it, yes.

I find it hard to believe that you would have no problem with your government having the ability to take utter control over you anytime they decide to. Even though they've never done it before.

[Eudaemonium]

Falls Edge wrote...

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.

Actuallym I think I would object to that on moral grounds, we derserve what we get, making people do good things defeats the point beyond self-satisfaction and self-preservation, allowing or granting someone the capability to do good is morally good however, thus blood magic is actually morally evil from todays standards.

This is the point really. In our modern society where values such as 'we deserve what we get' the ability to control the actions of others is morally wrong. The point is really that what is morally right or wrong depends entirely on the age and society in which these morals operate. In a society with an entirely different moral and ethical system, controlling others for the purpose of some 'greater good' might be seen as morally good.

[tickles44]

Blood Magic doesn't mean you automatically have the ability to control another person. I doubt that the second a mage uses blood magic for a spell they are given the knowledge to control the body and mind of another person. In order to get the ability you would have to actively seek out the spell. so any blood mage with the ability to control another would already be evil without the blood magic. Of course I could be completely wrong but that's just my opinion.

[TJPags]

My Avatar is a Lizard wrote...

TJPags wrote...

My Avatar is a Lizard wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

My Avatar is a Lizard wrote...

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.

Isn't the ability to control the mind of another Inherently bad?
If your government had tech to control your thoughts but didn't use them would you still want your government to have them? 

Blood magic gives the user the possibility to use blood (his or of another person) to fuel his spells. Blood magic gives the possibility to control mind, but you don't have to use it. A blood mage could simply use his blood to fuel his spell (as I do when I played BM in Origins) without controlling minds or using other person's blood.

But isn't the ability in itself simply bad? What's better everyone having nukes no one dare uses, or Having no nukes at all? Sure no country is dropping the A bomb right now but at any point in the future they could, and that in itself is going to make anyone nervous i think.

No, not at all.  An ability is neither good or bad.  What you do with it can be good or bad.

Your comparison is flawed.  You should be comparing blood magic to nuclear technology, not nuclear weapons.  Nuclear technocolgy can be used to make power plants, which is good, or nukes, which may be bad.

Blood mages can use blood to fuel spells.  I'd even argue that the mind control is not inherently bad.  What if it was used to stop someone who was planning to kill themself by jumping off a roof?  Or if it was used to kill a despot?  Or stop a serial killer?

So now you're deciding whats right and wrong, What people can and can't do. Because you think suicide is never justfied your going to decide people aren't allowed and they no longer have say. You have become god in other words
Why does someone need that much power?
Your already a mage if you want to stop a serial killer cast a damn fireball.

Wow, jump on one example much? 

Yea, I think suicide is bad, but hey, someone wants to, let them.  I'd only try to stop my family or close friends from doing it - I wasn't even thinking of trying to stop some dude I never met.

But you're the one deciding what's right or wrong.  You think it's fine to kill someone with a fireball, but not to stop them from doing what you'd have to kill them for with blood magic?

I mean, think about that - "Oh look, he's going to kill that woman!!!"  "don't worry, once he does, I'll kill him with this fireball"  "what?  stop him now!!" "oh no, that would be wrong"

That's . . .silly.

If I use my fireball to destroy a roomful of innocent children, is that better than someone using blood magic to stop me?

[Eudaemonium]

Maria Caliban wrote...

My Avatar is a Lizard wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

My Avatar is a Lizard wrote...

If your government had tech to control your thoughts but didn't use them would you still want your government to have them? 

If my government had tech to control thoughts but didn't use them, it wouldn't matter whether my government had them or not.

So you would feel completley safe knowing your government had the tech to control your thoughts?
You would have no problem with that, really?

If they never used it, yes.

Surely the issue is kind of a moot point: If they never used it they might as well not have it. If they are using it already then we're all none-the-wiser and everything seems to be working perfectly normal, which means it doesn't really seem to matter. =P

[Falls Edge]

Eudaemonium wrote...

Falls Edge wrote...

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.

Actuallym I think I would object to that on moral grounds, we derserve what we get, making people do good things defeats the point beyond self-satisfaction and self-preservation, allowing or granting someone the capability to do good is morally good however, thus blood magic is actually morally evil from todays standards.

This is the point really. In our modern society where values such as 'we deserve what we get' the ability to control the actions of others is morally wrong. The point is really that what is morally right or wrong depends entirely on the age and society in which these morals operate. In a society with an entirely different moral and ethical system, controlling others for the purpose of some 'greater good' might be seen as morally good.

Don't you think that because of the use of force in these particular situations that you could infer that they'd eventually become intolerable or unlikable because of their actions? I mean, for the greater good you'll do what I say, when to do it,  saying things like "You're too dumb and inexperienced, here let me take over" is going to be a boon to your social interaction or likeability is something I can't imagine is in store for humanity a ways down, it goes against your self-interest to like someone who controls others because he thinks they're wrong, especially when you aren't the same person as them.

It's kind of, like, the path of dictators.

[Eudaemonium]

tickles44 wrote...

Blood Magic doesn't mean you automatically have the ability to control another person. I doubt that the second a mage uses blood magic for a spell they are given the knowledge to control the body and mind of another person. In order to get the ability you would have to actively seek out the spell. so any blood mage with the ability to control another would already be evil without the blood magic. Of course I could be completely wrong but that's just my opinion.

Looking at it from a gameplay perspective - there is probably a lore reason Blood Control was the Tier 4 ability. I doubt Jowan, for example, could control people. He seemed a pretty inept Blood Mage.