MichaelFinnegan wrote...
I'll agree with that. Their monopoly on lyrium seems like a means to an end - as you said to keep both mages and templars in line. The Chantry's primary motive, as that of any organized religion, is to spread itself. And it has ridden on the waves of the aftermath of the events of the ancient Tevinter Imperium. But these waves have dampened in intensity over time.
Yes, which is another problem with the Chantry, they are too stuck in the past, and do not adapt and evolve with the times. This is a problem that many religions have and continue to have, so the Chantry is not unique here.
It is not just the inertia of the inaction of status quo, I suppose. As you hinted above, it's also that if mages became less dangerous, the Chantry'd lose credibility in their action to confine mages to the Circles and thus also to have their templar custodians. If I understand it correctly, isn't the templar order, including the Circle mages, a mighty military force in itself - say, to declare Exalted Marches? Keeping mages that way has other benefits.
I have actually entertained this theory, and it does seem likely, even at a subconcious level. If mages themselves could better master and reduce the danger that having magic poses signifgantly, then many of the regulations and measures the Chantry imposes might not seem so necessary.
Yes, I think we've debated one such in the past. And although I considered it an improbable idea there, I didn't think it was an impossible one. Certainly, if things went really dire one has to have options.
the isolationist option is only one. I've considered many changes and reforms to systems within existing Thedas, as more than likely, most mages will want to stay.
Although I suppose one could find good-natured and progressives among the Chantry folk, I think whoever they are, are clearly in the minority. So, overall, I'd have to agree with you again.
As the Chantry faces crisis and turmoil, the Chantry progressives and potential heretics will start to become more vocal and important, because opposition will be weaker.
I could debate this point, though. No matter how powerful some individuals might be, it'd still not work in the longer run to "contain" them, and regard them as threat always. At some point something has to give. And I for one think that it'd be beneficial in the long run to let things work out as they might, outside of captivity, in the wild, so to say; to allow people to decide for themselves. I'm sure it'd not work out in every case, but it is the only thing I feel can work without jumping into some catastrophe in the future.
I'm not talking about the permanent and total containment of the Chantry. I'm talking about adaptable, sustainable, and limited containment, always aimed at further improving the safety and survivability of the mages themselves, and ways to productively and effectively integrate them into society better.
Yes, but in my own perspective desiring power, either for doing good or evil is never a good thing. Because the thing - power - itself corrupts.
Even if that is so, corruption is not necessarily always a bad thing. In fact, I find certain amounts desirable in any system. I worry more about idealistically driven or purely honor driven leaders and systems than I do about a few shady individuals with a bit of power. Not too much corruption, just enough of a touch to keep the system young and vibrant.
Purity corrupts more than power, I think.
Yes, the idol could have been merely the catalyst, in some sense. But I still wonder, even when Meredith was so totally gone to madness at the end - something within her still seems to want to fight it. I know it isn't much of a case for Meredith, but it is something, even if merely 0.001%.
What, maybe it was a bit of whatever was left of meredith's rationality? Possible. But by that time, the deeds had been done. Meredith by then had become a potential source of compost for Hawke's planned opium poppy garden. Regrets or brief rants of sanity would not deter me in this task.
Retour en haut
