209 réponses à ce sujet

[Medhia Nox]

@Everwarden - a mage just blew up a religious center. Funny - that mage who they protected was the terrorist who did it.

Oh - and since magic is learned - you think the "Grow Crop" spell is a very popular one? "I learned 'Grow Crops' what did you learn?" "Oh, umm..." "Go on, tell me." "I learned Storm of the Century."

And then, there's the demons who are going to have a field day with this. That explosion probably just broke the Veil over Kirkwall. The city is going to probably be destroyed. Then - everywhere mages start practicing magic - the Veil is going to weaken and snap.

Remember - for all their evil - the VAST majority of mages in Tevinter are servants to the most poweful ones. Fenris tells you this when talking about Ander's stupid idea. It's still just slavery - only it's slavery to your fellow mages. The Tevinter Imperium must know how dangerous wanton spellcasting would be - and regulate it greatly.

[Dean_the_Young]

Taleroth wrote...

Here's a hint. If you have to say "what they call" then it's not actually that.

I'd disagree. Different cultures have different conceptions of similar things.

What I would call justice, and what you would call justice, are not necessarily the same thing. That doesn't mean either definition is wrong in and of itself.

In the case of the Circle, there is a strong argument that the Circle system does protect mages from themselves: it teaches skills, mitigates dangers, and enforces a certain level of mental fortitude on people so as to avoid the danger they all are at risk of.

[MortalEngines]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Mortal, how is the Chantry going to take out the Circles one by one when the Order of Templars have defected from them as well? Varric said the Chantry was "in pieces." And if Cassandra is trying to get Hawke to talk down the mages, I don't think victory is so certain for the Chantry if their military is no longer following their orders.

The templars aren't the Chantry's only military arm. Also, not to mention the dozens of other non-magical forces probably signing up to fight the mages after Ander's actions. I never said victory was certain and I never said that the mages weren't a threat. But unless something drastic happens (which normally does in DA) then the Chantry has a better advantage.

Taleroth wrote...
People having different opinions and viewpoints does not prevent them from working together.  That line of reasoning is simply absurd.  They share a common enemy and a common goal.

Most of the time, conflicting ideals causes break downs in comunnication and in-fighting. Not only that, you assume that all the mages are aiming for this 'freedom'. Firstly, I'm not sure if the mages even know what sort of freedom they want, technically by breaking away from the circles they have freedom, but what then? Where do mages go from there? Some mages want to rule, some what to master magics, some think that magic should still be watched, some believe mages should be hermits, some believe mages should turn to blood magic and some believe they should join the imperium. There is too many conflicting ideals there, I'm not sure most mages themselves know what they want.

It's not like the Mages are so disagreeable that they've started murdering each other in their beds.  They've gotten along more or less civily for ages.

Mages are more than capable on turning on each other if they think that the other is getting in their way. Point and case, Anders about to kill that girl or even better Uldred attempting to kill the First Enchanter if he didn't conform to his imagine of freedom. 

My mage Hawke, who supported mages, killed more blood mages then templars. So yes, mages do kill each other, the chances are the tended not to because they were in the circle and they couldn't actively fight one another. Out of the cricle however...

All freedom has a price.

[Taleroth]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Taleroth wrote...

Here's a hint. If you have to say "what they call" then it's not actually that.

I'd disagree. Different cultures have different conceptions of similar things.

What I would call justice, and what you would call justice, are not necessarily the same thing. That doesn't mean either definition is wrong in and of itself.

If you feel the need to qualify it as such, it calls into question your conviction with regards to its meaning.

[Lithuasil]

Dean_the_Young wrote...


In the case of the Circle, there is a strong argument that the Circle system does protect mages from themselves: it teaches skills, mitigates dangers, and enforces a certain level of mental fortitude on people so as to avoid the danger they all are at risk of.

Of course, the circles are a good and reasonable thing, as long as you're no mage, and don't have any close relatives with such powers. That's what makes this conflict so wonderful, isn't it

[Everwarden]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

A bunch of peasants is pretty much what overthrough the Tevinter Imperium, which was far greater and not only had blood mages but great conventional armies as well.

Different context, though. The Tevinter Imperium had overstretched (much like Rome, the real life inspiration for Tevinter) itself and was then hit with the first blight. I think one could say that Andraste wasn't the real cause for Tevinter falling, and instead credit that to Dumat. Andraste rallied the commoners when Tevinter was severely wounded.

[ISpeakTheTruth]

Very true. After the first Blight the Imperium was extremely weakened then there was a mass revolt that broke it apart. If anyone gets credit for bringing down the Empire it would be the Darkspawn. Andraste was the straw that broke the camel's back.

[Everwarden]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@Everwarden - a mage just blew up a religious center. Funny - that mage who they protected was the terrorist who did it.

A fair point. But I don't think that every mage with the inclination to heal people is going to blow up buildings. And the point wasn't what Anders did, but the way the common people treated him when they thought he was using his power to help them. 

Oh - and since magic is learned - you think the "Grow Crop" spell is a very popular one? "I learned 'Grow Crops' what did you learn?" "Oh, umm..." "Go on, tell me." "I learned Storm of the Century."

It's a spell I'd want to learn if I was a mage. I'd sell the 'grow crop' spell to farmers and make bank. You're thinking of magic in terms of game mechanics, not practical application. 'Grow crop' would be a hell of a lot more useful in everyday life than fireball or walking bomb. 

And then, there's the demons who are going to have a field day with this. That explosion probably just broke the Veil over Kirkwall. The city is going to probably be destroyed. Then - everywhere mages start practicing magic - the Veil is going to weaken and snap.

This argument is completely invalid. Far, far more mages were practicing magic during the time of Arlathan and the Tevinter Imperium. The veil didn't snap then, and it won't in contemporary Thedas. 

Remember - for all their evil - the VAST majority of mages in Tevinter are servants to the most poweful ones. Fenris tells you this when talking about Ander's stupid idea. It's still just slavery - only it's slavery to your fellow mages. The Tevinter Imperium must know how dangerous wanton spellcasting would be - and regulate it greatly.

One example of a mage society does not form a pattern. And since we haven't seen Tevinter to comment firmly one way or another on the quality of life there, I'll decline further comment. 

[Dean_the_Young]

Taleroth wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Taleroth wrote...

Here's a hint. If you have to say "what they call" then it's not actually that.

I'd disagree. Different cultures have different conceptions of similar things.

What I would call justice, and what you would call justice, are not necessarily the same thing. That doesn't mean either definition is wrong in and of itself.

If you feel the need to qualify it as such, it calls into question your conviction with regards to its meaning.

Or it means that you don't share the definition, but understand that someone else does. Since the definition in question is the Chantry's definition, not necessarily the poster's, the distinction is relevant.

[Dean_the_Young]

Everwarden wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

A bunch of peasants is pretty much what overthrough the Tevinter Imperium, which was far greater and not only had blood mages but great conventional armies as well.

Different context, though. The Tevinter Imperium had overstretched (much like Rome, the real life inspiration for Tevinter) itself and was then hit with the first blight. I think one could say that Andraste wasn't the real cause for Tevinter falling, and instead credit that to Dumat. Andraste rallied the commoners when Tevinter was severely wounded.

And yet, even wounded, the Imperium had much of what you described as making a nigh-unbeatable  defense: trained mages (experienced in war, no less), defensive positions, organization.

Political context is different, but not necessarily military context at whatever defensive line you wish to draw. Magic is powerful, but not unasailable by anyone who doesn't have the fortune not to be in the Warden/Champion's party.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 16 mars 2011 - 09:04 .

[Taleroth]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Taleroth wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Taleroth wrote...

Here's a hint. If you have to say "what they call" then it's not actually that.

I'd disagree. Different cultures have different conceptions of similar things.

What I would call justice, and what you would call justice, are not necessarily the same thing. That doesn't mean either definition is wrong in and of itself.

If you feel the need to qualify it as such, it calls into question your conviction with regards to its meaning.

Or it means that you don't share the definition, but understand that someone else does. Since the definition in question is the Chantry's definition, not necessarily the poster's, the distinction is relevant.

Which fully supports my argument.  It's no defense of a position to point out you disagree with them.

[Everwarden]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
And yet, even wounded, the Imperium had much of what you described as making a nigh-unbeatable  defense: trained mages (experienced in war, no less), defensive positions, organization.

Not really. The Mage Lords went through the portal into the fade and became darkspawn. The system was thrown into chaos without leadership, and I imagine the mages who weren't on top helped destoy what was left of the ruling regime. 

[Dean_the_Young]

Taleroth wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Taleroth wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Taleroth wrote...

Here's a hint. If you have to say "what they call" then it's not actually that.

I'd disagree. Different cultures have different conceptions of similar things.

What I would call justice, and what you would call justice, are not necessarily the same thing. That doesn't mean either definition is wrong in and of itself.

If you feel the need to qualify it as such, it calls into question your conviction with regards to its meaning.

Or it means that you don't share the definition, but understand that someone else does. Since the definition in question is the Chantry's definition, not necessarily the poster's, the distinction is relevant.

Which fully supports my argument.  It's no defense of a position to point out you disagree with them.

Depends on the position, and the argument, especially on moral/ethical issues relating to other cultures.

You can't argue that a society has, say, no respect for women simply because it doesn't adhere to western feminist progressivism. How respect manifests itself varies by culture. So do concepts of caring, justice,  love, and honor.

[Dean_the_Young]

Everwarden wrote...

Not really. The Mage Lords went through the portal into the fade and became darkspawn. The system was thrown into chaos without leadership, and I imagine the mages who weren't on top helped destoy what was left of the ruling regime. 

The Mage Lords disappearing doesn't mean every officer, army, and organization suddenly collapse and lost all cohesion at all points.

In any way you want, we can make parallels. Not all mages will necessarily side against the Templars, for example: The Circles that do stand apart may themselves not be organized.

[Dean_the_Young]

Lithuasil wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...


In the case of the Circle, there is a strong argument that the Circle system does protect mages from themselves: it teaches skills, mitigates dangers, and enforces a certain level of mental fortitude on people so as to avoid the danger they all are at risk of.

Of course, the circles are a good and reasonable thing, as long as you're no mage, and don't have any close relatives with such powers. That's what makes this conflict so wonderful, isn't it

Compared to realistic alternatives, the circles are a good and reasonable thing even if you are a mage.

Certainly beats being actively hunted by templars, a lynch mob, or untrained to resist demonic possession. Also beats being homeless, jobless, starving, at risk of banditry, and alone in the world.

[Lithuasil]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Lithuasil wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...


In the case of the Circle, there is a strong argument that the Circle system does protect mages from themselves: it teaches skills, mitigates dangers, and enforces a certain level of mental fortitude on people so as to avoid the danger they all are at risk of.

Of course, the circles are a good and reasonable thing, as long as you're no mage, and don't have any close relatives with such powers. That's what makes this conflict so wonderful, isn't it

Compared to realistic alternatives, the circles are a good and reasonable thing even if you are a mage.

Certainly beats being actively hunted by templars, a lynch mob, or untrained to resist demonic possession. Also beats being homeless, jobless, starving, at risk of banditry, and alone in the world.

I'd agree on principle, though there's plenty of mages that disagrre, with all the fleeing, the suicides etc - it's a bit of a shame we never get to see how life looks inside the circle.

[Everwarden]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Compared to realistic alternatives, the circles are a good and reasonable thing even if you are a mage.

Certainly beats being actively hunted by templars, a lynch mob, or untrained to resist demonic possession. Also beats being homeless, jobless, starving, at risk of banditry, and alone in the world.

Sadly, no, circles aren't a reasonable thing. That's the point. The mages are stripped of their basic human rights for a crime they -could- commit.  Mages need to be watched and taught, but the former (now broken) system didn't work, and that is shown quite clearly in DA2, despite the various shortcomings in the way the story was told. 

I never claimed that mages are invulnerable, by the way. You're taking what I said out of context and using a false analogy to prove me wrong. Tevinter was not toppled by commoners, so (rather than concede that you were wrong and forgot about the big scary dragon), you just shift the goal post. 

Modifié par Everwarden, 16 mars 2011 - 09:25 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Certainly beats being actively hunted by templars, a lynch mob, or untrained to resist demonic possession. Also beats being homeless, jobless, starving, at risk of banditry, and alone in the world.

That's a social attitude that can be partially attributed to the Chantry itself. And from what we have seen, it's not really trying to change that attitude.

Now the fear of magic is not an unreasonable sentiment, but it could be moderated more if the Chantry was willing to. And not only by rethoric. But also by actively trying to integrate mages into society, gradually. The Circle, in its current form, practically isolates mages.

I personally believe that the Circle system, in principle, doesn't have to be mutually exclusive with social integration. Out of all fraternities, I personally like the Lucrosians, who want money. It may sound banal at first, but the expanded integration of mages into the economny can serve as an impetus for social integration. This and changing attitudes, imo, can go hand in hand. Ways to integrate mages into the economy can include hospitals, firefighters (why not), something involved in the agriculture and enriching the soil. I am sure the creation school of magic can provide spells that can be implemented in a practical sense.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 16 mars 2011 - 09:23 .

[TexasToast712]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

So Anders, one way or another, gets what he wanted: the Circles are in Rebellion.

Now, do they have a real chance of winning the war? That's the question. Because if they lose, no one got their freedom, and Anders desire of victory or death for all Magi may well still be fulfilled to his satisfaction.

Here's a thread to discuss this question that will probably come up a lot in the next few years.

Its a major plot hole as they really dont have a chance. There are 14 Circles in Thedas and each one has what? about 200 to 300 mages a Circle while the countries of Thedas outnumber them 4 to 1. Its a plot hole.

[TexasToast712]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

That's a social attitude that can be partially attributed to the Chantry itself. And from what we have seen, it's not really trying to change that attitude.

Now the fear of magic is not an unreasonable sentiment, but it could be moderated more if the Chantry was willing to. And not only by retthoric. But also by actively trying to integrate mages into society, gradually. The Circle, in its current form, practically isolates mages.

Have you heard of the Tevinter Imperium and the Magisters? That is what happens when mages are allowed status in society. What the Chantry does isnt perfect but the alternative is much worse.

[ISpeakTheTruth]

I remember have a multi-page debate with people about what an ideal solution would be for mages and to put it simply we came up with this.

When a child shows signs of being a mage than blood is taken for a philactory. Then the new system ran by Mages and Templars in unison. Then the child can be taken to a circle to have his/her magic trained. The difference being that it isn't a prison, there stay is only temporary until they learn enough about their power to take part in a Harrowing.

Once they prove themselves capable of resisting demon influence they can leave the tower if they want or stay on as a teacher. If they want to leave than they are made away that they have to report to a Mage/Templar facility once a week to be checked out to assure that no demons are trying to corrupt them. Once they are checked out they are free to go. Any mage that doesn't show up for their weekly check up will be searched out using the Philactory.

And there you go a sane solution. You see mages only make deals with demons because they feel that they are forever traped and have their backs up against the wall. With this system a mage would know that they are only in the circle for a few years and then they are free to live their lives. This will make things like blood magic and making deals with demons far far less common. If a mage has nothing to fight against and nothing to gain from making deals with demons except to lose their freedom and be hunted down they won't do it.

[Dean_the_Young]

Everwarden wrote...

Sadly, no, circles aren't a reasonable thing. That's the point. The mages are stripped of their basic human rights for a crime they -could- commit.  Mages need to be watched and taught, but the former (now broken) system didn't work, and that is shown quite clearly in DA2, despite the various shortcomings in the way the story was told. 

Human rights, as we know them, developed because people don't have huge innate power differences over others. When they do, intentionally or not, their rights are curtailed.

In a world such as Thedas, the classical liberalism basis of 'all men were created equal' is invalid on the face of it. All people are not equal: a significant minority has extremely huge advantages, and dangers, that the lay-common person can not match on his own.

While I certainly agree the Circles can and should be better, they are not unreasonable. Especially not in light of the situation and context in which they have been contained and managed, a broad culture that would put the mages in just as much danger from the common people as anyone else.

I never claimed that mages are invulnerable, by the way. You're taking what I said out of context and using a false analogy to prove me wrong. The Tevinter was not toppled by commoners, so (rather than concede that you were wrong and forgot about the big scary dragon), you just shift the goal post. 

The Tevinter was largely toppled by commoners. The Darkspawn weakned it and gave those commoners the opportunity, but the Tevinter wasn't out-magiced by renegade mages.

This is relevant because it does contrast your (repeated) befuddlement as to how non-magical forces could provide credible threats to groups of magi.

[Everwarden]

ISpeakTheTruth wrote...

I remember have a multi-page debate with people about what an ideal solution would be for mages and to put it simply we came up with this.

When a child shows signs of being a mage than blood is taken for a philactory. Then the new system ran by Mages and Templars in unison. Then the child can be taken to a circle to have his/her magic trained. The difference being that it isn't a prison, there stay is only temporary until they learn enough about their power to take part in a Harrowing.

Once they prove themselves capable of resisting demon influence they can leave the tower if they want or stay on as a teacher. If they want to leave than they are made away that they have to report to a Mage/Templar facility once a week to be checked out to assure that no demons are trying to corrupt them. Once they are checked out they are free to go. Any mage that doesn't show up for their weekly check up will be searched out using the Philactory.

And there you go a sane solution. You see mages only make deals with demons because they feel that they are forever traped and have their backs up against the wall. With this system a mage would know that they are only in the circle for a few years and then they are free to live their lives. This will make things like blood magic and making deals with demons far far less common. If a mage has nothing to fight against and nothing to gain from making deals with demons except to lose their freedom and be hunted down they won't do it.

Any entirely reasonable solution that I'm sure some templar shill will dislike on principle. 

[Dean_the_Young]

TexasToast712 wrote...


Its a major plot hole as they really dont have a chance. There are 14 Circles in Thedas and each one has what? about 200 to 300 mages a Circle while the countries of Thedas outnumber them 4 to 1. Its a plot hole.

That doesn't make it a plot hole, only a doomed (but fearsomely costly) rebellion.