500 réponses à ce sujet

[lx_theo]

Yes, because most people see the sacrifice of life for power as bad.

[LobselVith8]

lx_theo wrote...

Yes, because most people see the sacrifice of life for power as bad.

Except how the Tevinter Imperium used blood magic isn't the only means. We have everything from the Joining to Finn's relatively harmless ritual in Witch Hunt as examples of blood magic. Even the templars use of phylacteries is technically blood magic.

[TEWR]

There's a lot about Thedosian lore we don't know, but for now let's look at what we do know. For whatever reason, Dumat taught the Tevinter Magisters how to use Blood Magic. Most likely as a reward for worshipping them. The Tevinter Magisters then abused their newfound power, and as far as the world knows, entered into the Golden City, effectively creating the first Darkspawn. To the eyes, this makes Blood magic the root of all Thedas' problems, but it is in truth all due to an uncontrollable lust for power and lack of reason that the Tevinter Magisters had.

We also know from playing as a Mage Warden that Demons or Spirits, whatever you want to call them since we have the recent changes to their names, can teach Blood Magic too. However, they most likely do this as a method of possessing a mage. Desire demons are the only ones we know of so far, but they feed a person's lust for power, the part of the human psyche they represent. So this must bring them closer to turning the mage into an abomination.

Now for some examples of Blood Mages:

Jowan: A kind, compassionate, slightly awkward Mage Apprentice who only had one fault: Everything he thought he was doing right ended up failing miserably. He fell in love and wanted to protect Lily, but his protection of her through Blood Magic destroyed what they had.

Jump to Redcliffe-

In a Jowan thread, I posted my reasons on why he wasn't at all to blame for what happened, given there are still some unknown areas in what happened.

We know Loghain ordered him to poison Eamon as "Eamon was a threat to Ferelden". We know from talking with Ser Donall in Lothering that Eamon fell ill prior to Cailan's death, Since to us, we're operating in a linear fashion, weeks could've gone by from Jowan's escape. Loghain at the time was still considered a hero, so Jowan had no reason not to believe Loghain, though I will admit he should've at least had some doubts about Eamon being a threat.

Jowan was teaching Connor about magic, but we don't know how much and for how long he was able to teach Connor before being caught. Meaning he could've just started to teach Connor after starting to poison Eamon and then he was caught, effectively ruining his chances of warning Connor about demons. Jowan couldn't have been a good spy, so this supports this idea.

Then the demon preyed on Connor, who knew nothing about demons, and started to turn Redcliffe into Corpseville. It can be reasonably said that all this stems from Loghain just as much as it did from Jowan, but I feel Loghain is more the culprit.

Jumping now to Avernus, will post in another comment

[JamesX]

LobselVith8 wrote...

No, James. What I said is clear for anyone to read on the prior page. The sacrifice of one life is what every Grey Warden makes in the Joining in order to battle the darkspawn. If one life being brought to an end would mean there would be no more Blights for all time, I think it's a good thing. I don't think it's evil to prevent the apocalypse. You're welcome to disagree, of course.

Unless I miss quoted

LobselVith8 wrote...

Trintrin86 wrote...
If a Grey Warden found out that the only way to end the all the blights forever was to murder a little old lady they would do it. That doesn't make murder a "good" thing, it makes it necessary evil.

If it stops people from getting eaten and women from getting violated, I'd say it's a very good thing. I doubt we're going to agree on this issue, though, so let's agree to disagree?

What you posted was not about the Gray Warden sacrifing himself.  What you quoted is someone mudering someoelse achieving great good making the act of murder a very good thing.

You are confusing the means with the Ends.  You seem to see them as a singular thing.  The means and the ends are two distinct things.  Which is what the original quote you quoted is saying.

If your point was that Gray Wardens entered the Blood Pact willingly and only used it to achieve great good, then I would agree with you.  Which is why I never said Blood Magic is inherently evil.

LobselVith8 wrote...

If there are examples of blood magic that don't involve the murder or death of someone, like Finn's ritual, or where it's necessary to stop the greatest threat to all life on the planet, like the Joining, then I don't see blood magic as being inherently bad. 

Which again what we agree on.  Blood Magic is not inherent evil.  Or did you still believe I said Blood Magic is evil?

LobselVith8 wrote...

JamesX wrote...
Dark Spawn Teeth, Archdemon Teeth, and Magic = The Joining = TEETH MAGIC!!!!   

No. If the phylactery is a form of blood magic when it involves a mage's blood and magic in order to locate him or her, then using magic and darkspawn blood with Archdemon blood is also a form of blood magic. So is Finn's ritual of using elven blood and magic to locate the Eluvian, when all Finn's ritual does is locate something.

The Original quote about Blood Magic is that it draws magic from within the Blood and not from the Fade.  That is the definition of blood magic.  Magic power from the Blood, and not just involve blood.  

The example I gave is to demonstrate that.  If the Magic is Powered by the Teeth then it is Teeth magic.  If I use normal magic (e.g. from the Fade) and then channel that to create a resonance between the actual person and something very personal to him, such as his teeth, that is not Teeth magic.  That is just normal magic ritual involving teeth.

However, someone in the thread said that Bioware commented that the Phylactery is a form of Blood Magic.  So its magic is indeed powered by the blood itself.  But that is why it is Blood Magic, and not because it involved blood.

E.g. a mage that create a spell powered by Lyrium or Fade to transfuse blood from healthy people to sick people to cure them is not blood magic, because the power is not from the blood.  

Taleroth wrote...

JamesX wrote...
Except again you seems to believe anything magical involving blood is blood magic.

That's actually the entire definition of Blood Magic.  Magic that uses or affects blood.

That is not the definition of Blood Magic.  Blood Magic is specifically the magic of drawing power from Life Force and use it to power spells.  One of its most infamous application is the stripping of a person's will (e.g. domination).  

Modifié par JamesX, 01 mars 2011 - 04:31 .

[Joy Divison]

^^ You're putting words into his mouth

[JamesX]

Joy Divison wrote...

^^ You're putting words into his mouth

Oops.  Did I miss quote? >.<;  Sorry, the quote tree was pretty messy.

[TEWR]

Avernus: A Grey Warden Blood Mage who fought under the fearless leadership and bravery that was Sophia Dryden. While it is Grey Warden policy to abstain from being involved in political disputes, Sophia saw Arland as the merciless, incompetent tyrant ruler that he was. While I'm not sure how to feel about her neutrality waving, Avernus is the main focus of this comment.

Arland forces the Grey Wardens to retreat into Soldier's Peak, where even with many months worth of supplies, they had to do something. So when the Peak was finally breached, Avernus called forth Demons. Foolish? Yes. But little choice they had against an entire army of soldiers with only at best, 100-200 Wardens. Do I condone it? No.

However, through Avernus' research he discovered new ways for the Grey Wardens to combat Darkspawn. A combination of the Taint and Blood Magic was the source of these new powers. The taint is alien to demons, so perhaps that prevents Grey Wardens from becoming Abominations? or maybe lessens the likelihood of it? I cannot say. But anyway....

Through Avernus' true research into Blood Magic he discovered a better way to defeat the darkspawn. While having a very skewed sense of morality, he is ultimately a good person, allowing justice to be dispensed after all the havoc he's wrought, when he could've easily fought back.

So back to my original point. Blood Magic is only "bad" when used by truly evil people with truly evil plans. But it is as dangerous as a sword, cannon, grenade, or Mages. Everything has a risk to it.

edit: some feedback, opinions, and any other points that can be added to what I have said would be appreciated. Since this is a topic that will require an intellectual discussion, let us make it so. I'd like to know other people's thoughts on the matter.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 01 mars 2011 - 04:41 .

[LobselVith8]

JamesX wrote...

What you posted was not about the Gray Warden sacrifing himself.  What you quoted is someone mudering someoelse achieving great good making the act of murder a very good thing.

Putting an end to women getting raped and people getting eaten by darkspawn and the total destruction of the enviornment by an irrevocable threat that forever turns land desolate is a good thing, James, but I can see we're not going to agree on this issue.

JamesX wrote...

You are confusing the means with the Ends.  You seem to see them as a singular thing.  The means and the ends are two distinct things.  Which is what the original quote you quoted is saying.

My post addressed that the loss of one life to save the entire world wouldn't be a bad thing, especially in the world of DA where Grey Wardens all made such a sacrifice in the hopes that the Blight and the darkspawn will come to an irrevocable end.

JamesX wrote...

If your point was that Gray Wardens entered the Blood Pact willingly and only used it to achieve great good, then I would agree with you.  Which is why I never said Blood Magic is inherently evil.

It's blood magic, James. The Joining is blood magic; Archdemon blood, darkspawn blood, and magic. Let's not fan fic words into a conversation about lore.

JamesX wrote...

The Original quote about Blood Magic is that it draws magic from within the Blood and not from the Fade.  That is the definition of blood magic.  Magic power from the Blood, and not just involve blood.  

The example I gave is to demonstrate that.  If the Magic is Powered by the Teeth then it is Teeth magic.  If I use normal magic (e.g. from the Fade) and then channel that to create a resonance between the actual person and something very personal to him, such as his teeth, that is not Teeth magic.  That is just normal magic ritual involving teeth.

The example you gave ignores Finn's admittance of the ritual he performs in Witch Hunt that's basically blood magic when it involves Dalish blood and magic to locate the Eluvian, which is why he asks the Warden and the others to keep it a secret. There's also Gaider saying that the phylacteries are a form of blood magic at PAX.

JamesX wrote... 

Taleroth wrote...

JamesX wrote...

Except again you seems to believe anything magical involving blood is blood magic.

That's actually the entire definition of Blood Magic.  Magic that uses or affects blood.

That is not the definition of Blood Magic.  Blood Magic is specifically the magic of drawing power from Life Force and use it to power spells.  One of its most infamous application is the stripping of a person's will (e.g. domination).  

Clearly, the lore doesn't agree with your assessment, given what we know from Finn in Witch Hunt and Gaider's own comments at PAX about the phylacteries being blood magic.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 01 mars 2011 - 04:48 .

[Taleroth]

JamesX wrote...

Taleroth wrote...

JamesX wrote...
Except again you seems to believe anything magical involving blood is blood magic.

That's actually the entire definition of Blood Magic.  Magic that uses or affects blood.

That is not the definition of Blood Magic.  Blood Magic is specifically the magic of drawing power from Life Force and use it to power spells.  One of its most infamous application is the stripping of a person's will (e.g. domination).  

What I said is the definition of blood magic.

Stripping a person's will is not powered by blood.  It is manipulation of blood, the flows of blood through the brain.

[TEWR]

question: wasn't there something about Arlathan elves using Blood Magic? I seem to remember that vaguely.

[Ziggeh]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Putting an end to women getting raped and people getting eaten by darkspawn and the total destruction of the enviornment by an irrevocable threat that forever turns land desolate is a good thing, James, but I can see we're not going to agree on this issue.

You've not quite grasped the thrust of his parry there.

He's saying that you can't combine a bad deed and a good outcome into some sort of moral equation. 1 bad plus 3 good does not equal 2 good, it equals 3 good and 1 bad. There was still bad done.

LobselVith8 wrote...
Clearly, the lore doesn't agree with your assessment, given what we know from Finn in Witch Hunt and Gaider's own comments at PAX about the phylacteries being blood magic.

So if those spells draw their power from the blood involved, you're both right!

The gray warden ritual is rather an odd man out. We know that the taint is a crucial part of the process, and indeed that the darkspawn use it to power their own spells (so is it both taint AND blood magic, as both are involved?), so it's possible that the blood is merely a vehicle for the real ingredient.

Modifié par Ziggeh, 01 mars 2011 - 05:07 .

[Sandy2009]

I think of magic as a technology. The technology itself is neither good or bad, it is how people use it that makes it good or bad. For example, atomic energy knowledge. You can use it to make nuclear power plants or use to to make atomic bombs. The technology itself is not good or bad. We know what can happen if atomic energy knowledge falls into evil hands...

Another anology I would like to draw is from Starwars universe. What is the differnce betwen Jedi and Sith lords. Both know force, but one group uses it for good of society, other for its own evil intentions. Sith lords have more power since they can stop people from dying (the bait Empreror used to lure Aniken, don't know if it was a lie). Dark side of force gives them power over life and that corrupts its users (just like blood magic). The users of dark side start behaving like demi-gods. Once Aniken turns to dark side, he is the most evil force in that universe.

So why does chantry oppose blood magic? History tells them most practitioners of blood magic are corrupt. We also see that in game in circle of magi. Can your warden be an exception? Yes, but it is hard for society to place such trust in one man (or group). After all, grey wardens are just an elite fighting force with taint, there is no requirement they have to be morally perfect. .

I think all origins stories have you commit a major crime before Duncan recruits you. In city elf origin, you murder that guy who raped Shaini (including killing so many guards). Duncan uses your crime to force you into becoming grey warden (you either go with police to be hanged or with Duncan). You do not become grey warden because you had some grand ambition to fight archdeamon. . The society does not see you in high esteem at the time when you become grey warden.

Modifié par Sandy2009, 01 mars 2011 - 05:59 .

[Ziggeh]

Sandy2009 wrote...

Another anology I would like to draw is from Starwars universe. What is the differnce betwen Jedi and Sith lords. Both know force, but one group uses it for good of society, other for its own evil intentions.

At the risk of derailing into a star wars discussion, I feel this is quite a good illustration of the point I made earlier.

The Force has a definite dichotomy. It's not that the people who use the dark side start out bad and so misuse the same tool, there is literally a dark force and a "light" force (which is just refered to as The Force). It's a good old harmony versus discipline trope. Because of this in-universe distinction, we can say that the dark side is inherently evil.

Now, we know that there are similar absolutes in Thedas, especially when related to the fade. There are positive and negative emotions, for example. There is a definite divide between good and bad spirits, and so I think we can say that inherent evil does exist, and it's not merely an applied term as in our reality.

Now we can't say for sure that blood magic is demonic, as it's source is questionable, but it operates in many of the same ways. There are several parallels. I think the most we can say is that it possibly relates to something that is inherently evil, which leads me to believe it is possibly inherently evil itself.

Though in fairness that is 4 paragraphs to conclude that "your guess is as good as mine."

[mesmerizedish]

I think blood magic is bad insofar as any drug is bad. What draws people to it is the rush of power they get by its use, but it has powerful addictive qualities. I don't think that something should be discounted just because it can be addictive. But I think that it definitely merits more careful consideration than many blood mages give it. Its uses are pretty dark, and it can certainly lead reckless young mages down a terrible path.

Basically, I think it's inherently dangerous, but not inherently wrong. Its use within the Circle should be restricted to those with proper training, like military weapons are in the real world. It shouldn't be condemned outright, though.

[LobselVith8]

Ziggeh wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Putting an end to women getting raped and people getting eaten by darkspawn and the total destruction of the enviornment by an irrevocable threat that forever turns land desolate is a good thing, James, but I can see we're not going to agree on this issue.

You've not quite grasped the thrust of his parry there.

He's saying that you can't combine a bad deed and a good outcome into some sort of moral equation. 1 bad plus 3 good does not equal 2 good, it equals 3 good and 1 bad. There was still bad done.

What's moral is relative, there's no universal standard. Anyone can tell from the Loghain debates or the mage vs. templar discussions that the perception of what's moral and good is an issue of perception.

Ziggeh wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Clearly, the lore doesn't agree with your assessment, given what we know from Finn in Witch Hunt and Gaider's own comments at PAX about the phylacteries being blood magic.

So if those spells draw their power from the blood involved, you're both right!

The gray warden ritual is rather an odd man out. We know that the taint is a crucial part of the process, and indeed that the darkspawn use it to power their own spells (so is it both taint AND blood magic, as both are involved?), so it's possible that the blood is merely a vehicle for the real ingredient.

The ingredients are darkspawn and Archdemon blood, with magic.

[Ziggeh]

I'm afraid I'm slightly baffled by your non sequitur approach.

[mesmerizedish]

LobselVith8 wrote...

What's moral is relative, there's no universal standard. Anyone can tell from the Loghain debates or the mage vs. templar discussions that the perception of what's moral and good is an issue of perception.

Well, what Ziggeh argued was that morality isn't relative, not in Dragon Age. And Loghain was unambiguously insane, so there's not a lot of argument to be done there.

[LobselVith8]

Ziggeh wrote...

I'm afraid I'm slightly baffled by your non sequitur approach.

That's a fallacious statement.

[LobselVith8]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

What's moral is relative, there's no universal standard. Anyone can tell from the Loghain debates or the mage vs. templar discussions that the perception of what's moral and good is an issue of perception.

Well, what Ziggeh argued was that morality isn't relative, not in Dragon Age. And Loghain was unambiguously insane, so there's not a lot of argument to be done there.

You've clearly never encountered one of the Loghain debate threads before.

[mesmerizedish]

LobselVith8 wrote...

You've clearly never encountered one of the Loghain debate threads before.

I haven't, but if people are arguing that Loghain was NOT acting completely irrationally and like a paranoid schizophrenic, then they're objectively wrong. So... *shrug*

[Ziggeh]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Well, what Ziggeh argued was that morality isn't relative, not in Dragon Age.

Oh no, there's definitely moral relativism, it's a major element of the game. It's in both the name of the protagonist in Origins and an active part of the gameplay.

What I'm saying is that there are also certain moral absolutes.

[Ziggeh]

LobselVith8 wrote...
That's a fallacious statement.

What can I say? I'm a fallic kind of guy.

[sreaction]

TheCreeper wrote...

So I notice that there is no really good Blood mage in Dragon Age, there is Jowan who means well but messes up everything he touches and of course PC and companion mages if you so chose but that is barely touched on in dialogue. So that raises the question, is Blood Magic an inherently bad kind of magic that only a few select people can use without abusing it, abusing others with it or consorting with demons? Or can it be a genuine force for good if used by people with self control?

Baby Jesus kills a kitten everytime blood magic is used.

[mesmerizedish]

sreaction wrote...

Baby Jesus kills a kitten everytime blood magic is used.

No... Ser Pounce-a-Lot!!!

Ziggeh wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Well, what Ziggeh argued was that morality isn't relative, not in Dragon Age.

Oh
no, there's definitely moral relativism, it's a major element of the
game. It's in both the name of the protagonist in Origins and an active
part of the gameplay.

What I'm saying is that there are also certain moral absolutes.

Ah, alright. I understood what you meant, but didn't properly communicate it when I responded

Modifié par ishmaeltheforsaken, 01 mars 2011 - 06:29 .

[LobselVith8]

sreaction wrote...

TheCreeper wrote...

So I notice that there is no really good Blood mage in Dragon Age, there is Jowan who means well but messes up everything he touches and of course PC and companion mages if you so chose but that is barely touched on in dialogue. So that raises the question, is Blood Magic an inherently bad kind of magic that only a few select people can use without abusing it, abusing others with it or consorting with demons? Or can it be a genuine force for good if used by people with self control?

Baby Jesus kills a kitten everytime blood magic is used.

So every time a templar uses a phylactery to hunt a mage, then...?