171 réponses à ce sujet

[Lotion Soronarr]

DKJaigen wrote...

No, the reasoning is not redicolous. Mages are exceptionally dangerous to others and themselves.
You keep assuming that. what evidence do you bring? most mages:  apostate or circle mage never turn into an abomination

Since when does one need evidence for something obvious? Want proof that the sun is shining?
Mages are undeniably dangerous. They have poeer above normal men.
They have a very specific kind of power, that is extreemly tempting and prone to corruption. They can become posesed and be as deadly as a natural disaster.

The lore confirms just how dangerous they are again and again.

And I say again - such a thing like "basic human rights" does not exist as a concept back then. that the mages rebel to their oppressors is simply a natural part of human society

Indeed thats why rebellion and the destruction of the old orders in our past let to democracy and human rights.

There is no perfect society. Rebbelions will always exist.
I ppoint to you that rebelions can happen in democratic societies. That rebellions happen in prisions. Does that mean we should tear both of those? No.

Non-mages can ONLY be possesed under specialy circumstances, and when they are, they are nowhere near as powerfull as posessed mages.

Unfortunately we dont know this to be true . their is to few evidence in the game to support this. but their are cases that  possession happened even without a tear in the veil

Actually, we know this to be true. Read the codexes.

Just training won't fix the problem. No training makes one immune to possession or corruption.
No world leader or noble would want mages running around free (ESPECIALLY blood mages) - they are a threat to their power and popularity among the people.

Thats a form of needless oppression mate. convincing ignorant people that they should follow you because you are the only one who can protect them from some imaginary enemy is the oldest trick of  tyrants

Needles? Mindeless? Not in the least.
The danger is very real.

[Rompa87]

Agreed with poster above. You have to look further than the tip of your nose and overcome your pre-concieved notions that some sort of anarchy will pan out for the best

[marcusgs221]

taking away freedom from the few to protect the many works well in theory, but when it comes down to it the few are the ones that end up rising up and making changes. no matter how well your treated in captivity its still just that, captivity.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Indolence wrote...
Please tell me if you noticed one married mage couple or that mages are allowed to have children [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/tongue.png[/smilie]
... they can't marry, can't have kids... having a kid with magic is a "shame" that happens to normal people... having 2 powerful mages "breed" is, I'm sure, something they can't allow.

Incorrect. Mages CAN marry. It just doesn't happen very often.

They also can have children..but are not allowed to raise them. It seems brutal, but apparently tehy were allowed this before, but it caused so many problems the Chantry dissalowed it.


Also, you have no idea just how harsh and brutal life was back then. No idea. Do some history research and you will see that life in the Circle looks like a blessing in comparison.
From the mage Origin, the Circle looks like it's run more like a college than a prison. And mages CAN leave the tower (after the harrowing). They need permission, but they can travel outside.

All in all, life in the Circle is not bad at all.
I'm frankly amused that peopel call it torture.

Is it at the end of hte day still moraly shaky? Yes. But wouldn't letting them go free also be? Yes.

To ask another question - if a plane was hijacked, and the hijackers planed to crash it right in the middle of the city, would you support shooting the plane down? Shooting it down means killinginnocent passangers. Defintely not moral. But not shooting it down means even mroe innocents will die. Is not shooting any more moral then?
A hard choice here, morally iffy either way.

And that's what people in power do. They play the numbers game. A few must be sacrificed to save the many. Brutal, harsh, but very much reality.
To those that end up sacrificed, there are only 2 choices left - accept it with dignity, or fight a ultimatively useless fight.

Yes, let's imprison a whole class of people to safeguard another class of people. Instead of investing into better trained Templars to track down those mages who do use blood magic and leave every other mage alone as he is a normal human being guaranteed the same rights as poor farmer Joe.

Letting the mages roam free is a very inefficient and chaotic system. It would have a far worse total death toll than the Circle system.

By your standards, in any marvel or DC univerce people with superpowers should be held in state-governed, militarised facilities to protect poor farmer Joe who can't run his fist through a wall or has infravision. Nevermind that Anne-superhero can only turn green. She's abnormal! Nefermind that most mages prove they can resist the lure of demons by going through the Harrowing. They're abnormal!

If super-powered mutants existed, that's exactly what would happen. People would want them off te streets. The government would want them off the streets.

And b.t.w. - the only thing the Harrowing proves is that you were abel to resist a specific demon in a specific point in time. It's no imunization. No guarantee you will suceed the next time.

[Red Templar]

@ LobselVith8 You are not countering my points so much as you are making an empassioned rant. Consider what I'm saying more objectively please.

[quote]
LobselVith8 wrote...
I used the words "I imagine" so I could made it clear it was speculation, but something I don't think should be dismissed given the two thousand years of Thedas history. We have nothing to prove it one way or another, and I noticed how you didn't address that there are a myraid of mages who are not under the command of a demon. Clearly, the issue is more complicated than you make it out to be.[/quote]

As I said, even if there are hundreds of tears in the veil it is completely meaningless in this discussion. A human or a tree can be possessed in some spooky dungeon. They can't be possessed in the middle of Highever and start killing innocents. A mage can. A mage can be possessed anywhere.

And I did address that not all mages are under demonic control. That's because 1) it is relatively uncommon, like getting chicken pox as an adult. It happens all the time, to a lot of people, just not to everyone. Something doesn't have to happen to every single person in a demographic to still comprise a significant portion of that demographic. And 2) because the Circle trains mages with an emphasis on discipline and self-control, Circle mages tend to be more disciplined and self-controlled and therefore are more capable at resisting possession.

And I'm not making the issue out to be less than complicated. I acknowledge that there is a moral dilemma in denying people freedom, but contend that it is valid to do so for the best interests and protection of society. You, on the other hand, dismiss the entire templar organisation as performing no service to society, having no value, and existing just to oppress mages and propagate Chantry power. You're making the templars out to be black and the mages out to be white. That just isn't Dragon Age.

[quote]
LobselVith8 wrote...
Not when it addresses that mages aren't alone as people who can be possessed.[/quote]

Not every person who has HIV got it through having sex or a bad blood transfusion. There's other ways to get it, and it happens, but those other ways make up a minority. Here in Africa where AIDS is a huge, huge problem, we try to stop the spread of the virus by increasing public awareness of it and trying to get people to practice safe sex, because that has proven to be the best way to keep AIDS from running rampant. Just because there are other ways to get HIV doesn't mean we ignore the most common way for it to propagate.

Non-mages being possessed is a very specific, very small-scale problem that only occurs in select areas. Non-mages being possessed is not a problem that poses a significant threat to the population at large. Mage possession is a significant threat to the population at large. The more significant threat is the one that must be dealt with.

[quote]
LobselVith8 wrote...
The Circle can also have the Knight-Commander sentence a mage tobe made tranquil or to death without showing the evidence to the First Enchanter or giving a mage a chance to defend himself against the charges. [/quote]

So maybe the system should be reformed...? Maybe committees should be established and votes be held. But it is irrelevant. Not every single mage is made tranquil or killed, only those who are deemed to pose a significant threat to everyone else if they are left as is. That represents the system working. It is brutal, sure, but it protects people.

[quote]
LobselVith8 wrote...
Taking someone's humanity from them is barbaric, and we know from Aneirin that not every mage charged with being maleficar is one. [/quote]

Not every person suspected of being a terrorist is a terrorist. That doesn't mean we stop screening for terrorists completely and drop airport security.
Not every person who recently traveled to a place where Bird Flu is running rampant is sick. That doesn't mean that the best thing isn't to keep as tight a lid on the Flu as possible.

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
Wehave the descendants of Parlathan as an example of how a long line of apostates can live outside of Chantry or templar rule without the need for being oppressed and mistreated, and still prevent demonic possession.[/quote]

Which doesn't prove anything on a large scale. Apostates live alone or in small groups, not in a large cluster that is integrated into large cities. Something that is viable and even successful on the small scale isn't necessarily viable on a large scale. If you release one tiger into the countryside, you can make a reasonable guess that it won't kill anyone. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. If you release two hundred tigers into the same countryside, it is not at all reasonable to assume the same.

[quote]
LobselVith8 wrote...
So they're treated like a lot of real life slaves were treated, given fine things because of their master's wealth and having no rights and no agency over their own lives?[/quote]

Pretty much... except for the fact that they aren't even slaves, just permanent detainees living in comfort.

Is it an ideal way of living? No. Are mages grossly mistreated? No, only insofar as they have to go through trials to prove that they won't be eating anyone's face any time soon. The lives of Circle mages are much better than the lives of many. Considering how their isolation protects people, it is a fair deal.

[quote]
LobselVith8 wrote...
Some would say it's better to die on your feet than live on your knees, since many have left the comforts of the Circle and risked their lives to seek freedom over the creature comforts you've put forth.

[/quote]

There are children who threaten to run away from home because mommy is an unfair meanie who doesn't let them stay out all night and wants them to eat their vegetables. There are children who skip school because they don't like being forced to do schoolwork.

Just because people have opinions and act on them does not mean that their viewpoint is fundamentally valid, or that they are in the right. It just means a different perspective. Sometimes when a person fails to conform to society, it represents their own failing rather than that of society. The circle mages we've met who decided thhe would be better off without the circle and the templars.... Jowun, Uldred, even Anders....have all shown a capacity for poor judgement and they have all damaged the legitimacy of their cause by doing really bad stuff in its name. Compared to responsible Circle mages like Irving and Wynne... it is pretty clear to me where the failings lie here.

[quote]
LobselVith8 wrote...
If it never served that function in the first place, why should I trust it serves that function now? If the Harrowing is setting up mages to fail and the Circles do little more than put mages under the heel of the Chantry and it's military arm, why should I believe it's protecting anyone by robbing innocent people of their rights and subjugating them?[/quote]

Logic. Mages have great power. Great power corrupts, and magical power is tremendously open to abuse. If mages were not contained, the corruptable mages would be able to mind control and crispy fry the people of Thedas with impunity. Because of the templars, the common people are spared this fear. Regardless of Chantry motivation, the templars serve a very real social function, and that is why they are seen as heroes and righteous protectors by the people outside the tower.

[quote]
LobselVith8 wrote...
Instead of killing them, the Chantry controls all the mages of Thedas and has them under their boot. Forcing people to be little more than thralls sounds like they're the new Tevinter Imperium to me.[/quote]

To quite Mr. Gaider;

[quote]David Gaider wrote...
Imprisonment, sure, but I'm not sure you can equate the mages to being slaves. Their life is not their own, but they are not servants to anyone.
[/quote]

Detaining someone to protect society is not the same as enlsaving them.

[quote]
LobselVith8 wrote...
Considering the revolutions that have been fought for freedom throughout human history, it seems like you're scoffing at the idea that people would desire freedom over subjugation.[/quote]

No. What I'm scoffing at is the idea that freedom > everything else. In the real world, people have fought for freedom against the oppression of greed, imperialism, and various injusticies. Every such situation is different and could warrant it's own discussion. But no real world civilization has ever had to deal with the threat of an entire class of people born into the world with invisible bombs strapped to their chests, which can detonate at any time without the conscious choice of the carrier. Freedom for a select few is not worth it if their freedom means that the populace is at the mercy of supernatural terror and violence that they can not protect themselves against.

[quote]
LobselVith8 wrote...
Mages aren't infected, they aren't diseased, and they aren't terrorists,so I don't see the point in bringing up those analogies when they have nothing to do with imprisoning innocent people as a result of a nonviolent protest mages held in Orlais centuries ago.[/quote]

No, mages are not infected with a disease and they aren't terrorists.... but they may as well be both combined. Mages pose a very real threat to everyone around them without consciously meaning to do so. They have invisible bombs strapped to their chests.

To quote Mr. Gaider again

[quote]David Gaider wrote...
I think an argument can definitely be made that magic is inherently dangerous, yes.

...

The problem with mages is that even those with the best intentions can still present a threat. It complicates the issue precisely because thereis no set criteria for who is at risk.
[/quote]

[quote]
LobselVith8 wrote...
We also saw how a Blight devastated Ferelden because the Chantry wasmore concerned with keeping mages locked up than allowing more than seven mages to fight the darkspawn. How many innocents died because of
their refusal to allow the mages to help save the nation from a Blight?[/quote]

A blight devastated Fereldan because Loghain betrayed his King and left the army at Ostagor to die. Every mage in the Circle wouldn't have turned the tide in a battle where the guy who drew up the battle plan intentionally hung everyone else out to dry. The Circle is not directly responsible for any losses during the Blight.

Modifié par Red Templar, 28 février 2011 - 09:32 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

marcusgs221 wrote...

taking away freedom from the few to protect the many works well in theory, but when it comes down to it the few are the ones that end up rising up and making changes. no matter how well your treated in captivity its still just that, captivity.

Any form of opression, no matter how just or justified - will eventually lead to some form of resistance. (exmaple: prisons and prison riots)

Taking into acount the masive numbers disadvantage of mages, and the feeling of common folk on the matter, any mage uprising is highly unlikely to suceed.

It looks like a cyclical process. A few mages start a rebellion, it gets quelled, and it gets quite for a while.
Rinse and repeat.
If anything, it weeds out the biggest malcontents and the most power-hungry individuals among the mages.

[borelocin]

Slavery is evil. Enslaving a whole class of people because they might be dangerous ? Still evil. Those people doing whatever it takes to liberate themselves ? Not evil.

Modifié par borelocin, 28 février 2011 - 01:45 .

[Augustei]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

XxDeonxX wrote...
The problem lies with the fact that mages are locked up as soon as they are discovered and not permitted the humans rights others are given and the true reasoning behind it is just rediculous. Not because they are dangerous or anything.. No its because they defyed the Emperor and had a protest. So the true reasoning behind why they are locked up is not a good one.

No, the reasoning is not redicolous. Mages are exceptionally dangerous to others and themselves.
And I say again - such a thing like "basic human rights" does not exist as a concept back then. And if it does, the mages have a few - tehy are restricted with rights that would cause problems.
We do things like that today in our modern, sensible world too. We restrict rights if we think i'ts necessary.

As for the whole getting possessed by demons thing.. Everyone can be possessed by demons in Thedas its just that since mages are powerful they are considered the ones who should be locked up... But then, what about Political leaders and Millitant Leaders.. They are even more powerful not in raw power but Political power and command over numeral forces power. If one of them was possessed by say... a pride demon. they would be considered far more dangerous then any Mage. So shouldn't they be locked up and guarded by the templars as well?

Mages should only be forced to learn basic discipline so they dont fall prey to demons. Then released from the tower and given proper rights and freedoms if you ask me.,

Non-mages can ONLY be possesed under specialy circumstances, and when they are, they are nowhere near as powerfull as posessed mages. Hence, the chance of nbeing possesed and the danger that comes wiht it, is FAR greater with mages.

Just training won't fix the problem. No training makes one immune to possession or corruption.
No world leader or noble would want mages running around free (ESPECIALLY blood mages) - they are a threat to their power and popularity among the people.
In other words "let the mages free" is not a realistic solution.

The true reasoning IS rediculous because they originally weren't lock up because they were dangerous or anything to that degree.. They were locked up because they locked themselves in a cathedral in protest... Im not saying the reasoning given today is rediculous, im saying the original reasoning is rediculous

The circumstances of non mage possession seems no different to me? The girl in Honnleah was forcibly possessed..

[Augustei]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

XxDeonxX wrote...
The populance follows blindly they are rather foolish.. One day the world followed the tevinter gods, the next they follow Andreste.. One day Fereldan distrusted the Grey Wardens and agreed with Loghain that they were responsable for the kings death.. Then as soon as one is King they follow him.

There will be some initial resentment of the mages being in control but eventually they will come to terms with it and be like "That damned chantry, can't believe they did that those evil bastards!" or something like that... and if the mages fail then it will be "Those darn mages.. we should kill them all for what they tried on us"

No actually. You believe people mistrust mages only because of the Chantry. But that is a very limited and narrow view.
As DG himself pointed out, the pesants have completley legitimate reasons to mistrust and fear mages.

You also believe all people are sheep. Some are. but not all. There was struggle in Ferelden, civil war. And most didnt even believe the Grey Wardens were involved in the kings death.
There really is no massive population pressure or will to change anything. The poeple are happy with the way it is. Tehre are even plenty of mages who are happy wiht the way things are.
You cannot lead a revolution when only 2% of the populace wants that revolution. It is doomed to fail.

If thats true.. Then the Tevinter Imperium would have never come into existance... In fact it would not even exist today.. People still follow the Mage Archons there, and the Mage divines.. And the dalish still follow their keepers

2% of the population? The mages would gain Elven and mage support.. The Libertarions we find out in Awakening outnumber the loyalists.. So most mages within the circle want change as well. and like I said, Nevarra would side with them if they could bring down The Orlesian empire in the process

2) That templars aren't black-and-white. Laws are laws. It's as simple
as that. Police officers aren't bound by religious dogma, and they can
still kill unjustly and get away with it. They still have to follow the
law. If mages police themselves there WILL be dick mages among that
force, and mages WILL suffer at hte hands of others mages, just like
non-mages can suffer at the hands of non-mages.

3) What the
population thinks matters. Always has and always will.Rulers have to
follow hte will of the people or risk rebellion and civil war. You can
call the population ignorant, but is that true? I'd argue they know more
about living in TheDas than you. In fact, I'd call your views rather
ignorant of the bigger picture.

Dont recall bringing up mages policing mages but ok? Also Police officers are a modern issue and have no relevency.. And idk about your country, but in mine if a police officer kills unjustly they certainly dont get away with it.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...
The mistrust of mages comes from the Chantry.

No.

Considering that prior to the chantrys existance everyone was fine with mages and they were running the show.. Im pretty sure he may be right... The Grey Wardens even say that the story the chantry provides regarding the tevinter imperium and darkspawn mighten even be true. Nobody knows, and if the grey wardens and dwarves dont know.. And the Deciples dont mention anything when giving out their riddles.. Then why would an organisation that has NFI about the darkspawn know any better then the people who have a much clearer idea?

Modifié par XxDeonxX, 28 février 2011 - 01:59 .

[Augustei]

XxDeonxX wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

XxDeonxX wrote...
The populance follows blindly they are rather foolish.. One day the world followed the tevinter gods, the next they follow Andreste.. One day Fereldan distrusted the Grey Wardens and agreed with Loghain that they were responsable for the kings death.. Then as soon as one is King they follow him.

There will be some initial resentment of the mages being in control but eventually they will come to terms with it and be like "That damned chantry, can't believe they did that those evil bastards!" or something like that... and if the mages fail then it will be "Those darn mages.. we should kill them all for what they tried on us"

No actually. You believe people mistrust mages only because of the Chantry. But that is a very limited and narrow view.
As DG himself pointed out, the pesants have completley legitimate reasons to mistrust and fear mages.

You also believe all people are sheep. Some are. but not all. There was struggle in Ferelden, civil war. And most didnt even believe the Grey Wardens were involved in the kings death.
There really is no massive population pressure or will to change anything. The poeple are happy with the way it is. Tehre are even plenty of mages who are happy wiht the way things are.
You cannot lead a revolution when only 2% of the populace wants that revolution. It is doomed to fail.

If thats true.. Then the Tevinter Imperium would have never come into existance... In fact it would not even exist today.. People still follow the Mage Archons there, and the Mage divines.. And the dalish still follow their keepers

2% of the population? The mages would gain Elven and mage support.. The Libertarions we find out in Awakening outnumber the loyalists.. So most mages within the circle want change as well. and like I said, Nevarra would side with them if they could bring down The Orlesian empire in the process

2) That templars aren't black-and-white. Laws are laws. It's as simple
as that. Police officers aren't bound by religious dogma, and they can
still kill unjustly and get away with it. They still have to follow the
law. If mages police themselves there WILL be dick mages among that
force, and mages WILL suffer at hte hands of others mages, just like
non-mages can suffer at the hands of non-mages.

3) What the
population thinks matters. Always has and always will.Rulers have to
follow hte will of the people or risk rebellion and civil war. You can
call the population ignorant, but is that true? I'd argue they know more
about living in TheDas than you. In fact, I'd call your views rather
ignorant of the bigger picture.

Dont recall bringing up mages policing mages but ok? Also Police officers are a modern issue and have no relevency.. And idk about your country, but in mine if a police officer kills unjustly they certainly dont get away with it.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...
The mistrust of mages comes from the Chantry.

No.

Considering that prior to the chantrys existance everyone was fine with mages and they were running the show.. Im pretty sure he may be right... The Grey Wardens even say that the story the chantry provides regarding the tevinter imperium and darkspawn mighten even be true. Nobody knows, and if the grey wardens and dwarves dont know.. And the Deciples dont mention anything when giving out their riddles.. Then why would an organisation that has NFI about the darkspawn know any better then the people who have a much clearer idea?

LobselVith8 wrote..
When we consider that the nation of Rivain and the Chasind tribes
don't treat mages like the Andrastians do, I don't see how it's wrong to
point out that calling mages cursed (Magi Origin) and blaming them for
the Andrastian version of "original sin" doesn't cause mistrust.

Gregoir says its a gift and a curse, which he is right in alot of contexts because A) Its a curse because they have to be locked up in a damn tower because they have it lol. And they are more likely to attract demons since they are powerful.

[Augustei]

moilami wrote...

Is someone still believing in this chantry crap killing innocent is grey area?

I didn't specificy on a point within the Chantry.. But Removing them can definitly considered both very good and very evil.

[Augustei]

Red Templar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

As for demons, anyone can be possessed - people, corpses, animals, and even trees.

I've seen you make this point several times now, but I think you keep missing the point. Yes, non-mages and animals and trees can be possessed by demons, but only under extremely rare circumstances - these things get possessed where the veil is torn.

The veil doesn't need to be torn for mages to be possessed. Any mage could turn into a demon anywhere at any time. When a non-mage is possessed, it represents a freak occurance from being in the wrong place. When a mage gets possessed, it represents the metaphorical bomb that has been strapped to their chest finally going off... and this bomb is strapped to the chest of every mage alive, and they don't need to even be aware of it for it to detonate.

The threat of demonic possession between mages and non-mages is not the same.

If you're concerned about possession, isn't that a point for mages to be properly trained in the use of their abilities, rather than subjugated to the point where they would make a deal with a demon rather than live under templar rule?

That's exactly what the Circle does. It trains mages while under controlled, secure circumstances so as to limit disaster as much as possible. If mages train under any greater degree of freedom, it means a statistical increase in the amount of times disaster strikes.

The templar solution is uncompromising, but there simply isn't a more efficient solution that trains mages without a threat to the general public and to each other. Any solution that is more compassionate will be less effective on those specific grounds.

Well Rivain and Tevinter still seem to be on the map, The Chasind tribes still seem to all be around, and so are the dalish.. They seem fine to me. And if the Chantry is such an efficient solution. Then why does the right of annulment exist?

FaeQueenCory wrote...

kjdhgfiliuhwe wrote...

Good
and evil are relative to your own moral compass that was likely shaped
by the social environment you were raised in. Making any discussion of
the moral implications completely pointless.

This. And if I could pronounce your name... I would want your babies, Mr(s). kjdhgfiliuhwe.

But
as to the topic... It would apper that supporting one over the other is
equally damning... So just like in real life, any choice you make will
be bad![smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/wizard.png[/smilie]

Yeah this is what i was saying Thankyou

Supporting chantry would not only be bad. It would be moronical and just plain stupid.

Not necessarily.. It could be considered the wise thing to do, removing them could also be considered the moronical and just plain stupid thing to do because it would resolve in Alot of death.

So really the 2 choices are.. Mass Death (Removing) or Mass Slavery and Opression (Keeping them)

Red Templar wrote...
And I'm sure the Circle has a lot to do with the relative rarity of
abominations in Adrastian Thedas. People who live in rididly structured
environments are more disciplined than people who live in complete
freedom.  The Circle trains mages with an
emphasis on discipline and responsible use of their power. That counts
for a lot in comparison to some bitter, reckless apostate living on the
run and training his apprentices to take what they can and fight the
system with a passionate sense of entitlement.

And yet abominations spread through the circle tower, and it must have happened before Origins because the Right of Annulment exists.. And Rivain is still on the map, And the chasind and Dalish tribes still exist? Isn't that funny? 

Modifié par XxDeonxX, 28 février 2011 - 02:13 .

[sythsillis]

No matter what system is in place, there will always be a ruling class. The major difference is that in a Democratic system, you're allowed to complain about it.

[Augustei]

We have the descendants of Parlathan as an example of how a long line of
apostates can live outside of Chantry or templar rule without the need
for being oppressed and mistreated, and still prevent demonic
possession.

Actually... *Spoilers*

Malcolm Hawke, Playable Hawke's father was a mage in the circle prior to leaving it to become an apostate. But yeah there is invitably long lines of families and Parlathan's line was probably long before Malcom of mages living outside chantry rule without demonic possession and by exstension the need for being oppressed & mistreated

Modifié par XxDeonxX, 28 février 2011 - 02:34 .

[Xewaka]

You forgot to add the Qunari to the grey major choice.

[Augustei]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
To ask another question - if a plane was hijacked, and the hijackers
planed to crash it right in the middle of the city, would you support
shooting the plane down? Shooting it down means killinginnocent
passangers. Defintely not moral. But not shooting it down means even
mroe innocents will die. Is not shooting any more moral then?
A hard choice here, morally iffy either way.

Well... Considering said people are going to die in both outcomes of that choice.. I dont see how shooting them down can be considered evil at all... Bad example is bad

And b.t.w. - the only thing the Harrowing proves is that you were
abel to resist a specific demon in a specific point in time. It's no
imunization. No guarantee you will suceed the next time.

And so the point of the harrowing is......?

Modifié par XxDeonxX, 28 février 2011 - 02:47 .

[Xewaka]

XxDeonxX wrote...
And so the point of the harrowing is......?

To prove that you have been trained properly enough that you can recognize possession attempts and avoid them.

[DKJaigen]

@ lotion

Nobody is arguing that mages hold power and as such they are indeed dangerous without proper training. but you seem to be supporting an organisation that causes more problems then it solves. the chantry is indirectly responsible for the problems in redcliff and the circle tower. because without the templars these events wouldn't have happened.

furthermore the templars are incompetent to say the least. despite being under heavy guard the mages of circle where still able to practice bloodmagic under the very noses of the templars.And when abominations did appear they where unable to halt them. This gives a good indication that the templars are not able to prevent abominations from occurring or stopping them.

furthermore the templars are easily corrupted. they are addicted to lyrium and as such they can be bought by any mage that has access to lyrium . It simply baffles me that would support such a power structure for the sole reason of "safety". But whose safety are we talking about. Not the common population because templars are inept. No this is the chantry wishing to stay in power by oppressing the 2 organisations (mages and templars) that are threat to it.

[LobselVith8]

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

When we consider that the nation of Rivain and the Chasind tribes don't treat mages like the Andrastians do, I don't see how it's wrong to point out that calling mages cursed (Magi Origin) and blaming them for the Andrastian version of "original sin" doesn't cause mistrust.[/quote]

1) We know little of Rivain and how mages are treated there. Of coruse, some mages certanly belive life there is better, but you know what they say about grass and the other side? DG once confirmed that many mages think Tevinter is a better place for mages to live, but they mihght end up severly dissapointed if they went there.

2) Chasing TRIBES. Completely different lifestyle and culture. And beliefs. For all we know, what do Chasind even know of magic? If they don't know how it works, when an abomination takes out a tribe, they might as well think of it as punishment from the gods, and thus not blame the mages.
Again, what worlds for a tribal society does not work for a empire/nation. [/quote]


1) I never claimed to know everything about Rivain. I address it as an alternative, because it's a nation where the mages aren't treated as they are in Andrastian society. We know they have no Chantry or templars controlling their mages in the nation of Rivain, as we know from the Genitivi codex about the nation and the DA2 codex. I made no other claim.

2) Despite the Chasind being a different culture than Andrastians, they also have no Chantry or templar oversight. Just like the Dalish clans, who emulate their fallen nation of the Dales.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

There are also Grey Warden mages who use blood magic and don't use slaves to power spells. The Hero of Ferelden can use blood magic. The fact is that simply because the Tevinter Magisters abused the abilities of magic doesn't mean "every Blood Mage of note" has done the same.[/quote]

Ture. But Blood magis is, and will remain dangerous, mistrusted and feared. Why do you think the GW's hide the Joining?
And b.t.w. - GW's are hardly the paragons of morality, so what does that tell us? Avernus is certanly not the kind of guy I'd ever trust. [/quote]

Elves are also hated and subject to racism, so I don't put much faith in the perceptions of the common person. Regarding your assertion about the Wardens, I never said they were paragons of morality, I addressed that they use blood magic and aren't evil. Being pragmatic in order to stop the greatest threat to humanity doesn't make one evil. If Avernus' research ends up saving lives by giving the Grey Wardens a necessary weapon against the darkspawn or giving Wardens more life, I'd say his research was worth it. Whatever it takes to stop the darkspawn and save the sentient races of both Thedas and the dwarven civilizations.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

And the Chantry of Andraste is built around a woman who fought Tevinter, who is viewed as the Bride of the Maker, and whose teachings have lead to mages being viewed as "cursed" and what amounts to imprisoning innocent people for what they might do. Considering the elves also fought Tevinter and didn't establish a stigma against mages, it's fair to point out that the Chantry is responsible for the mistrust we see in Andrastian societies that differs from the alternative societies out there that don't share their religious views.[/quote]

Wrong. This "cursed" obession of yours is flat out wrong.
The stigma of mages depends on several factors - history, exposure, knowledge (of the wrokings of magic), culture and area.
Your conclusion is premature. [/quote]

The storyline from the Magi Origin is canon. So is the dialogue.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

The fact is that the Andrastian societies have a negative attitude towards mages while we see other societies that don't share such a view. As for demons, anyone can be possessed - people, corpses, animals, and even trees. If you're concerned about possession, isn't that a point for mages to be properly trained in the use of their abilities, rather than subjugated to the point where they would make a deal with a demon rather than live under templar rule?[/quote]

Other societies? Like the Qun?
Funny to note that all large, advanced empires seem to have such a stygma, while tribal societies (Dalish, Chasind) don't. [/quote]

You mean like the nation of the Dales, which we know because the descendants of the nobility who ruled the Dales are now the Keepers, and the ones we've seen were mages? Your theory doesn't stand up to canon.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quote]swk3000 wrote...
As Lotion Soronnar has said, the Chantry is not the only source promoting mistrust of Mage's; the very nature of Magic itself promotes even more mistrust. [/quote]

That comment ignores the fundamental difference between the mistrust of mages in Andrastian nations and the completely different attitude towards magic we see and hear about in alternative societies that aren't part of the Chantry of Andraste. Clearly, magic doesn't automatically promote mistrust.[/quote]

And your comment ignores the OTHER findamental differences between those societies, beside the Chantry.[/quote]

The difference is in the anti-magic stigma with the Andrastian nations and the mage tolerant societies of the Chasind, the Dalish, the people of Rivain, and even the isolated society of Haven. Hatred of mages and fear of magic is not automatic, it's taught.

[Red Templar]

XxDeonxX wrote...
Well Rivain and Tevinter still seem to be on the map, The Chasind tribes still seem to all be around, and so are the dalish.. They seem fine to me. And if the Chantry is such an efficient solution. Then why does the right of annulment exist?

We know next to nothing about the seers of Rivain. You can't use something as evidence if you don't how anything about them. For all we know, the seers of Rivain could be tyrranical blood mages who remain free through liberal use of mind controls.

Tevinter is ruled by mages who use their power to exploit non-mages and rule over others. Not a good solution.

The Chasind are barbarians. They deal with problems like barbarians do; they don't plan for it, they don't ward against it, and then it happens they deal with it as crudely as possible. A system where abominations are only dealt with after they kill half the people in a village is not a good system for any civilized, city-dwelling society to emulate.

The Dalish exist in small tribes, with only a handful of magic users per tribe. We don't know how they deal with demons, but whatever it is might well work for a small group. But it is a completely different situation from the reality of hundreds and thousands of human mages throughout the human realms.

The right of annulment exists because sometimes a bad apple like Uldred contaminates the whole barrel.

[LobselVith8]

[quote]Red Templar wrote...

@ LobselVith8 You are not countering my points so much as you are making an empassioned rant. Consider what I'm saying more objectively please. [/quote]

I find it odd that you're claiming that I'm not countering anything simply because I disagree with you.

[quote]Red Templar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

I used the words "I imagine" so I could made it clear it was speculation, but something I don't think should be dismissed given the two thousand years of Thedas history. We have nothing to prove it one way or another, and I noticed how you didn't address that there are a myraid of mages who are not under the command of a demon. Clearly, the issue is more complicated than you make it out to be.[/quote]

As I said, even if there are hundreds of tears in the veil it is completely meaningless in this discussion. A human or a tree can be possessed in some spooky dungeon. They can't be possessed in the middle of Highever and start killing innocents. A mage can. A mage can be possessed anywhere. [/quote]

In other words, you intentionally twisted the intent of what I said to suit your argument. The cases we've seen of demonic possession with mages happened because one made a deal (Connor) and one lost a battle of wills with a myraid of demons he summoned (Uldred) where the Veil may have been weak because of the milennia that the Circle Tower endured under the reign of the Avaars. We haven't encountered a mage who was simply possessed out of the blue.

[quote]Red Templar wrote...

And I did address that not all mages are under demonic control. That's because 1) it is relatively uncommon, like getting chicken pox as an adult. It happens all the time, to a lot of people, just not to everyone. Something doesn't have to happen to every single person in a demographic to still comprise a significant portion of that demographic. And 2) because the Circle trains mages with an emphasis on discipline and self-control, Circle mages tend to be more disciplined and self-controlled and therefore are more capable at resisting possession. [/quote]

Yet we have an entire line of apostates descended from Parlathan who were also able to resist demonic possession for hundreds of years.

[quote]Red Templar wrote...

And I'm not making the issue out to be less than complicated. I acknowledge that there is a moral dilemma in denying people freedom, but contend that it is valid to do so for the best interests and protection of society. You, on the other hand, dismiss the entire templar organisation as performing no service to society, having no value, and existing just to oppress mages and propagate Chantry power. You're making the templars out to be black and the mages out to be white. That just isn't Dragon Age. [/quote]

I dismiss their motives when their own history illustrates that imprisoning mages had nothing to do with protecting people or stopping abominations.

[quote]Red Templar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Not when it addresses that mages aren't alone as people who can be possessed.[/quote]

Not every person who has HIV got it through having sex or a bad blood transfusion. There's other ways to get it, and it happens, but those other ways make up a minority. Here in Africa where AIDS is a huge, huge problem, we try to stop the spread of the virus by increasing public awareness of it and trying to get people to practice safe sex, because that has proven to be the best way to keep AIDS from running rampant. Just because there are other ways to get HIV doesn't mean we ignore the most common way for it to propagate.

Non-mages being possessed is a very specific, very small-scale problem that only occurs in select areas. Non-mages being possessed is not a problem that poses a significant threat to the population at large. Mage possession is a significant threat to the population at large. The more significant threat is the one that must be dealt with. [/quote]

Considering two thousand years of history of Thedas history, I don't think the cases would be as isolated or small scale as you seem to think. We know the entire Brecillian Forest is an example of this.

[quote]Red Templar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

The Circle can also have the Knight-Commander sentence a mage tobe made tranquil or to death without showing the evidence to the First Enchanter or giving a mage a chance to defend himself against the charges. [/quote]

So maybe the system should be reformed...? Maybe committees should be established and votes be held. But it is irrelevant. Not every single mage is made tranquil or killed, only those who are deemed to pose a significant threat to everyone else if they are left as is. That represents the system working. It is brutal, sure, but it protects people. [/quote]

We have no proof Aneirin was ever a threat. We don't know how many other cases like Aneirin there might be. We know an anti-mage Cullen can come to power for the Ferelden Circle and have authority over all the mages he'd otherwise kill if he didn't receive his position. And the system doesn't protect people when it causes mages to revolt and causes abominations to result, i.e. Abomination codex, Rite of Tranquility codex, and A Broken Circle storyline. The likely war that's going to result is an example of how bad it can for anyone who gets between the templars and the mages fighting each other in an all-out war.

[quote]Red Templar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Taking someone's humanity from them is barbaric, and we know from Aneirin that not every mage charged with being maleficar is one. [/quote]

Not every person suspected of being a terrorist is a terrorist. That doesn't mean we stop screening for terrorists completely and drop airport security.
Not every person who recently traveled to a place where Bird Flu is running rampant is sick. That doesn't mean that the best thing isn't to keep as tight a lid on the Flu as possible. [/quote]

Those analogies aren't remotely the same. We don't take their humanity from them, Red Templar.

[quote]Red Templar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Wehave the descendants of Parlathan as an example of how a long line of apostates can live outside of Chantry or templar rule without the need for being oppressed and mistreated, and still prevent demonic possession.[/quote]

Which doesn't prove anything on a large scale. Apostates live alone or in small groups, not in a large cluster that is integrated into large cities. Something that is viable and even successful on the small scale isn't necessarily viable on a large scale. If you release one tiger into the countryside, you can make a reasonable guess that it won't kill anyone. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. If you release two hundred tigers into the same countryside, it is not at all reasonable to assume the same. [/quote]

Those analogies of animals don't measure to people, Red Templar. You oppress a group of people, and sooner or later they're going to fight to emancipate themselves from their oppressors.

[quote]Red Templar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

So they're treated like a lot of real life slaves were treated, given fine things because of their master's wealth and having no rights and no agency over their own lives?[/quote]

Pretty much... except for the fact that they aren't even slaves, just permanent detainees living in comfort. [/quote]

No rights, can't marry in some places or have relationships, have no agency over their own lives... sounds like slavery to me, but I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree here.

[quote]Red Templar wrote...

Is it an ideal way of living? No. Are mages grossly mistreated? No, only insofar as they have to go through trials to prove that they won't be eating anyone's face any time soon. The lives of Circle mages are much better than the lives of many. Considering how their isolation protects people, it is a fair deal. [/quote]

Having no freedom doesn't make their lives better than others, Red. That's proven by the mages who risk their lives for freedom and the others who fought to be free.

[quote]Red Templar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Some would say it's better to die on your feet than live on your knees, since many have left the comforts of the Circle and risked their lives to seek freedom over the creature comforts you've put forth.[/quote]

There are children who threaten to run away from home because mommy is an unfair meanie who doesn't let them stay out all night and wants them to eat their vegetables. There are children who skip school because they don't like being forced to do schoolwork. [/quote]

There were slaves who also ran to be free from their slave-masters.

[quote]Red Templar wrote...

Just because people have opinions and act on them does not mean that their viewpoint is fundamentally valid, or that they are in the right. It just means a different perspective. Sometimes when a person fails to conform to society, it represents their own failing rather than that of society. The circle mages we've met who decided thhe would be better off without the circle and the templars.... Jowun, Uldred, even Anders....have all shown a capacity for poor judgement and they have all damaged the legitimacy of their cause by doing really bad stuff in its name. Compared to responsible Circle mages like Irving and Wynne... it is pretty clear to me where the failings lie here. [/quote]

Irving is thrilled when the mages are released from their "shackles" (his words) because of the Magi boon that's supported by the ruler of Ferelden and Wynne says the mages trying to be free would lead to the Chantry outright killing every man, woman, and child with magical ability in reference to Cumberland.

[quote]Red Templar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

If it never served that function in the first place, why should I trust it serves that function now? If the Harrowing is setting up mages to fail and the Circles do little more than put mages under the heel of the Chantry and it's military arm, why should I believe it's protecting anyone by robbing innocent people of their rights and subjugating them?[/quote]

Logic. Mages have great power. Great power corrupts, and magical power is tremendously open to abuse. If mages were not contained, the corruptable mages would be able to mind control and crispy fry the people of Thedas with impunity. Because of the templars, the common people are spared this fear. Regardless of Chantry motivation, the templars serve a very real social function, and that is why they are seen as heroes and righteous protectors by the people outside the tower. [/quote]

Logic also dictates that facts should back up claims, Red, and there's nothing to back up imprisoning mages to protect people when the Chantry's own history doesn't back them up.

[quote]Red Templar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Instead of killing them, the Chantry controls all the mages of Thedas and has them under their boot. Forcing people to be little more than thralls sounds like they're the new Tevinter Imperium to me.[/quote]

To quite Mr. Gaider;

David Gaider wrote...
Imprisonment, sure, but I'm not sure you can equate the mages to being slaves. Their life is not their own, but they are not servants to anyone.

Detaining someone to protect society is not the same as enlsaving them. [/quote]

"I'm not sure" isn't no. Considering the blood mage equates the Chantry and the templars with the Tevinter Imperium, it's clearly a view some hold.

[quote]Red Templar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Considering the revolutions that have been fought for freedom throughout human history, it seems like you're scoffing at the idea that people would desire freedom over subjugation.[/quote]

No. What I'm scoffing at is the idea that freedom > everything else. In the real world, people have fought for freedom against the oppression of greed, imperialism, and various injusticies. Every such situation is different and could warrant it's own discussion. But no real world civilization has ever had to deal with the threat of an entire class of people born into the world with invisible bombs strapped to their chests, which can detonate at any time without the conscious choice of the carrier. Freedom for a select few is not worth it if their freedom means that the populace is at the mercy of supernatural terror and violence that they can not protect themselves against. [/quote]

You treat people as sub-human and deny them basic rights, and you get revolutionaries who fight for their rights and try to free themselves from their oppressors. I'm surprised you don't realize the inevitable result of what the Chantry is doing to mages will lead to a war between them. I'd rather have a mage tolerant society than one that oppresses them to the breaking point and leads to a war.

[quote]Red Templar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Mages aren't infected, they aren't diseased, and they aren't terrorists,so I don't see the point in bringing up those analogies when they have nothing to do with imprisoning innocent people as a result of a nonviolent protest mages held in Orlais centuries ago.[/quote]

No, mages are not infected with a disease and they aren't terrorists.... but they may as well be both combined. Mages pose a very real threat to everyone around them without consciously meaning to do so. They have invisible bombs strapped to their chests.

To quote Mr. Gaider again

David Gaider wrote...
I think an argument can definitely be made that magic is inherently dangerous, yes.

...

The problem with mages is that even those with the best intentions can still present a threat. It complicates the issue precisely because thereis no set criteria for who is at risk.
[/quote]

So properly instruct mages on the use of their powers to prevent possession and misuse of their abilities, don't deny them rights under an oppressive regime that many will fight against. 

[quote]Red Templar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

We also saw how a Blight devastated Ferelden because the Chantry was more concerned with keeping mages locked up than allowing more than seven mages to fight the darkspawn. How many innocents died because of
their refusal to allow the mages to help save the nation from a Blight?[/quote]

A blight devastated Fereldan because Loghain betrayed his King and left the army at Ostagor to die. Every mage in the Circle wouldn't have turned the tide in a battle where the guy who drew up the battle plan intentionally hung everyone else out to dry. The Circle is not directly responsible for any losses during the Blight.
[/quote]

Because Knight-Commander Greagoir only allowed seven mages at Ostagar, and Loghain calls Wynne out on how the mages conduct in RtO. I don't blame Loghain for withdrawing from a battle that couldn't be won.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 28 février 2011 - 05:03 .

[Tamcia]

Is there an option to sit it out and let them kill one another? Screw mages and templars, I will establish warrior caste that will chop off heads of anyone that disagrees with them.

[LobselVith8]

Red Templar wrote...

XxDeonxX wrote...

Well Rivain and Tevinter still seem to be on the map, The Chasind tribes still seem to all be around, and so are the dalish.. They seem fine to me. And if the Chantry is such an efficient solution. Then why does the right of annulment exist?

We know next to nothing about the seers of Rivain. You can't use something as evidence if you don't how anything about them. For all we know, the seers of Rivain could be tyrranical blood mages who remain free through liberal use of mind controls.

It's addressed in the codex that the nation of Rivain has mages who are free from Chantry and templar oversight:

"Some are saying, however, that this needs to change. They remind the world that mages are not controlled by templars everywhere in Thedas: not among the Rivaini witches, the Dalish keepers or the Tevinter magisters… and those societies are, arguably, no worse off."

Why shouldn't this be addressed?

Red Templar wrote...

Tevinter is ruled by mages who use their power to exploit non-mages and rule over others. Not a good solution.

XxDeonxX isn't making the case supporting what Tevinter does, he's addressing that Tevinter hasn't been overrun with abominations or destroyed despite not having the Chantry of Andraste or the Order of Templars controlling the mages. The "doom" scenerios that some bring up if there was no Chantry or templars controlling mages clearly haven't transpired in these societies that have free mages.

Red Templar wrote...

The Chasind are barbarians. They deal with problems like barbarians do; they don't plan for it, they don't ward against it, and then it happens they deal with it as crudely as possible. A system where abominations are only dealt with after they kill half the people in a village is not a good system for any civilized, city-dwelling society to emulate.

The Chasinds live outside of Andrastian society, but I don't see a reason to diminish them because of it. They were capable of finding Fergus and saving his life through their medical knowledge, after all.

Red Templar wrote...

The Dalish exist in small tribes, with only a handful of magic users per tribe. We don't know how they deal with demons, but whatever it is might well work for a small group. But it is a completely different situation from the reality of hundreds and thousands of human mages throughout the human realms.

The right of annulment exists because sometimes a bad apple like Uldred contaminates the whole barrel.

The Dalish clans emulate what they did in the nation of the Dales, which is why the Keepers tend to be lead by the former nobility of the Dales. An entire nation of mages and non-mages clearly weren't swallowed by any of the abominations.

[Itkovian]

Gaider stated that other nations who don't have the Circle and Templars basically deal with the losses when abominations arise. They are not free of abominations and have not found a way to protect mages from it. Even the Dalish get their abominations, but they simply accept the losses and inevitably comes.

Does that mean that is the perfect solution? How well would that work in crowded cities?
There is no simple solution to this problem. The Templars DO render a service to society, and it DOES come at a great price (for the mages, that is). The people accept this price readily because it keeps them safe and because of their long history with the Tevinter Imperium that definitly made them distrustful of mages (would you trust people who could control your mind at any time?). Other cultures don't have that initial bias, and some have found other solutions.

Personally, I think a compromise is in order. Having an order of mage-hunters is good for when they go as abominations, and so is ensuring mages are properly trained to fight off demons. But that does not necessarily mean that mages should be imprisoned and denied freedom. Perhaps mages could be allowed freedom, so long as they remain in regular contact and Templars keep their phylacteries.

It's not complete freedom, but is a good compromise. But that is unlikely to happen. For one thing the general populace distrust and fear mages too much for it, and secondly it is likely the rebelling mages will demand complete freedom (and will likely resort to extreme measures to attain it, much like Uldred, which will work against them).

Either way, this is definitely a grey area. The Templar and Circle structure serves a valuable purpose, AND the mages are quite oppressed. Which is why the choice will be a difficult one (and I doubt the game will allow us to ignore the consequences of the choice. )

Itkovian

[Lotion Soronarr]

borelocin wrote...

Slavery is evil. Enslaving a whole class of people because they might be dangerous ? Still evil. Those people doing whatever it takes to liberate themselves ? Not evil.

People doing whatever it takes to protect themselves? Not evil.

The circle is not slavery (DG's own words)