39 réponses à ce sujet

[NKKKK]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

NKKKK wrote...
About as ridiculous as a religious origination mistreating it's different citizens, breaking apart their families and causing more problems than their help.

When the Circle is followed, mages are kept away from the non-magi... which works as intended. Mages aren't being killed by the public who hates and fears them, and mages aren't harming the public. Even when the occassional mage in the circle goes crazy and does damage, that damage is, again, restrained to within the circle.

When an unwatched abomination outside of the circle goes crazy, the damage can easily go up towards the triple digits even for an untrained mage: Conner being an obvious case. Since an abomination wouldn't let himself be watched or constrained at all, your system doesn't really change that.

But when even the gravest demonic/blood mage/abomination outbreaks occur in the Circle, the damage doesn't spill out. When the Circle of Ferelden was nearly entirely overwhelmed, the common people weren't affected. The people who could deal with it were closest at hand, and best prepared to deal with it. Abominations are far less dangerous when the primary locations of their appearance are the most prepared to deal with them.

And that, for the most part, the Circle does rather well. And, since abominations and rogue mages are the far greater problems than broken families and limitations of minority rights...

I see a lot of "this sucks harry potter hur hur" but I didn't see you post anything else that won't be "Tranquil them" "Kill them" "Or keep a similar brutal system",

And why should I? If your system is worse than the established system at meeting the needs that brought forth the established system, I don't need to propose an alternative to dismiss yours. The existing system is the superior alternative.

The problems that need to be resolved for greater freedom of the mages aren't Templar oversight or restrictive laws: it's the means to protect the commoners from the mages, whether those mages deliberately or inadverdantly endanger them. Only as the legitimate concerns of the super-majority are met can the Mages be given greater freedoms despite their immense powers.

Your system, on the face of it, might seem to be a nice place for the mages to live with, but it isn't just the mages who need to live with it. It's the rest of the population as well... and the rest of the population isn't simply going to be reassured when you systematically disable the apparatus to chase down dangerous mages, remove all tests that would actually validate the reliability of the mages, and then limit punishments of mages no matter what they do to the commoners.


The thing is, though, your system doesn't even meet the guarantees the mages need to be warded off from the bad magics: desparation. Yes, some mages will be desperate under the gaze of the Templars (though many more are not), but trial won't go away with the Circle. You leave mages to live normal lives, and you're going to have the stresses of normal lives. The same stresses that give birth to pushing crimes, angers, and frustrations of necessities that drive normal people to abuse what little power they have... and would likewise to push mages to abuse their much greater power even more easily.

Lust, greed, pride... these are things we all face, and most of us succumb to as normal people in the face of troubles. Mages who do so, however, don't simply become worse people: they become psychotic, active dangers to everyone around them until they are killed.

Freedom is not the antidote to putting mages at ease and beyond the reaches of the demons.

Not buying it. Once again, I don't see you giving an alternative. Your whole argument is in support of the circle, and these two games show the inepture of it, which in turn causes the unrest.

And that, for the most part, the Circle does rather well. And, since abominations and rogue mages are the far greater problems than broken families and limitations of minority rights...

One causes the other, and the other causes the other. You fail to see that.

Modifié par NKKKK, 20 mars 2011 - 09:07 .

[Dean_the_Young]

NKKKK wrote...

Not buying it. Once again, I don't see you giving an alternative. Your whole argument is in support of the circle, and these two games show the inepture of it, which in turn causes the unrest.

Whether you buy it or not is irrelevant. I don't need to give an alternative: I only need to show how your is not sustainable.

'Just change something' isn't an effective strategy. Changes have to be based on identifying

And that, for the most part, the Circle does rather well. And, since abominations and rogue mages are the far greater problems than broken families and limitations of minority rights...

One causes the other, and the other causes the other. You fail to see that.

I do see it. I also see that the Circle is not the only cause for mages who abuse their powers and/or become abominations. I also see that the Circle system has actually kept abominations scarce to the general public without resulting in a mageocracy. The temptations and causes for abuse are, at their heart, human, and won't go away with the Circle. The chaffing at the circle is a symptom of mages human nature, not a cause: if it weren't the Circle for keeping them away, it would be at the regulations limiting, or their rivals for opposing them, or at fate for screwing with them like all humans. The stresses of human life are not going to be ended by taking away a well-regulated Circle system: they will only increase.

[NKKKK]

So really, you're telling me, that if you're a mag,e or if you're child was a mage, you would be just glad to lose it and never be able to see it again?

Pragmatism can only get you far, until you're actually in the situation.

[GunMoth]

Agreed. I'm going to read wayyyy too far into this, but assuming that cognitive behavioral psychology applies to the relm of Thedas, this would work. Learning at a young age to control magic, while being in a positive and educational environment would benefit the mages and keep order. Eventually mages should be able to enter the outside world if meeting specific requirements and can enter different professions similar to the way a trade school teaches their students. You can continue working inside the circle, teaching younger generations, or you can be hired out to a clinic or specialize in alchemy.

However, the one thing the OP didn't address is the fact that many parents who are religious fanatics that find out their children are mages at young ages will abuse them and treat them as "sins of the maker". This can cause significant emotional scars. We also have to consider the clinically insane and serial killers (we see two examples of this in Dragon Age 2). Sessions on greif counseling and bargaining would be beneficial as well. Probably not keeping Phylacteries in the same center that each mage belongs to, just incase someone who DOES end up leaving goes on a psychotic rampage.

[GunMoth]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
The temptations and causes for abuse are, at their heart, human, and won't go away with the Circle. The chaffing at the circle is a symptom of mages human nature, not a cause: if it weren't the Circle for keeping them away, it would be at the regulations limiting, or their rivals for opposing them, or at fate for screwing with them like all humans.

Wowowowowowow. 

1) Its actually been found that our most common ancestors are bonobos (pygmy chimps), who are driven by sex, not violence (normal chimps).

2) The 'lust' for power is a cultural one based on survival and status. Having a high social status secures our chances for finding a formidable mate and supporting our offspring. It's inherent, but it isn't something that can be understod and tackled. If a country were to change their ideaology and make learning centers a positive and nurturing environment, we DO see change. Look at countries like Sweden and Switzerland. Their crime rates are extremely low compared to North America because of the way they treat criminals and integrate them back into society successfully. Prison is oppressive and doesn't actually educate people on how to aquire the means to become successfull. 

3) The veil in Kirkwall is thin compared to most areas (according to some DA2 codexes) meaning that there is a way to know how thin a veil is. They could confine mages to a place with a stronger veil to the fade and place their circles in those locations. It seems that places with a negative atmosphere or a lot of death causes the veil to tear. 


Blahblahblah Socio-political educational debate GOO GO GO. 

[NKKKK]

I'd like to point out that we're dealing in a fantasy setting. So I hope no one starts flaming each other here.

[LobselVith8]

[quote]NKKKK wrote...

I'd like to point out that we're dealing in a fantasy setting. So I hope no one starts flaming each other here.[/quote]

I don't see any reason we can't discuss this with civility.


[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

When the Circle is followed, mages are kept away from the non-magi... which works as intended. Mages aren't being killed by the public who hates and fears them, and mages aren't harming the public. Even when the occassional mage in the circle goes crazy and does damage, that damage is, again, restrained to within the circle. [/quote]

Raising people under a religion that tells people mages are "cursed" and responsible for the Blight probably doesn't help. And I don't recall the abomination fest that was the Circle of Ferelden doing much to prevent the existance of abominations, especially when the Hero of Ferelden was the one who stopped Uldred's army from being unleashed on Ferelden.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

When an unwatched abomination outside of the circle goes crazy, the damage can easily go up towards the triple digits even for an untrained mage: Conner being an obvious case. Since an abomination wouldn't let himself be watched or constrained at all, your system doesn't really change that. [/quote]

That's why mages should be trained in the proper use of their powers. Connor's failing was that his pious mother wanted him to be trained not to be a mage, and the boy had no idea that the "bad lady" was actually a demon. A system that didn't demonize mages probably would have avoided this, since Isolde never would have turned to Loghain for help if this was the case.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

But when even the gravest demonic/blood mage/abomination outbreaks occur in the Circle, the damage doesn't spill out. When the Circle of Ferelden was nearly entirely overwhelmed, the common people weren't affected. The people who could deal with it were closest at hand, and best prepared to deal with it. Abominations are far less dangerous when the primary locations of their appearance are the most prepared to deal with them. [/quote]

Except we witness the mages who were so twisted during their time in the Kirkwall Circle that, when they did manage to escape, they were insane and needed to be put down by Hawke. The damage certainly spilled out as a result of the Chantry controlled Circle.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

And that, for the most part, the Circle does rather well. And, since abominations and rogue mages are the far greater problems than broken families and limitations of minority rights... [/quote]

Except for the fact that it's bringing the world to the brink of war...

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

And why should I? If your system is worse than the established system at meeting the needs that brought forth the established system, I don't need to propose an alternative to dismiss yours. The existing system is the superior alternative. [/quote]

If it's the superior alternative, why did the Circles break free from the Chantry at the end of DA2? Why is the Order of Templars no longer following orders? Why is the world on the brink of war? I think there are some serious and undeniable problems with the current system in place that need to be addressed.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

The problems that need to be resolved for greater freedom of the mages aren't Templar oversight or restrictive laws: it's the means to protect the commoners from the mages, whether those mages deliberately or inadverdantly endanger them. Only as the legitimate concerns of the super-majority are met can the Mages be given greater freedoms despite their immense powers. [/quote]

The problem with this line of thought is that mages are people, and people don't live living under oppression. Sonner or later, they will fight for their freedom, and I'm not certain how well things are going to turn out when mages see mundanes as oppressive as the former slaves under Andraste and Shartan who fought for their freedom from the Tevinter Imperium. At the end of DA2, mages already broke free from the Chantry, and the Chantry is "in pieces."

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

Your system, on the face of it, might seem to be a nice place for the mages to live with, but it isn't just the mages who need to live with it. It's the rest of the population as well... and the rest of the population isn't simply going to be reassured when you systematically disable the apparatus to chase down dangerous mages, remove all tests that would actually validate the reliability of the mages, and then limit punishments of mages no matter what they do to the commoners. [/quote]

The population might not have such a problem with mages if they weren't indocturinated to see them as cursed and revile them for something the Tevinters allegedly did...

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

The thing is, though, your system doesn't even meet the guarantees the mages need to be warded off from the bad magics: desparation. Yes, some mages will be desperate under the gaze of the Templars (though many more are not), but trial won't go away with the Circle. You leave mages to live normal lives, and you're going to have the stresses of normal lives. The same stresses that give birth to pushing crimes, angers, and frustrations of necessities that drive normal people to abuse what little power they have... and would likewise to push mages to abuse their much greater power even more easily. [/quote]

We already know there are free mages in other parts of the world than the Andrastian societies, though, so the Chantry and templar model isn't absolute. Free mages didn't destroy the town of Haven inj 900 years, neither the Chasind tribes nor the Dalish clans were lost for having free mages among the people, and we know that the people of Rivain refuse to be parted from their seers.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

Lust, greed, pride... these are things we all face, and most of us succumb to as normal people in the face of troubles. Mages who do so, however, don't simply become worse people: they become psychotic, active dangers to everyone around them until they are killed. [/quote]

Mages can also become psychotic if they're pushed over the edge, like the mages Hawke encountered who were twisted because of their time in the Kirkwall Circle when they were sane beforehand.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

Freedom is not the antidote to putting mages at ease and beyond the reaches of the demons.[/quote]

Forcing mages to live in an oppressive system certainly isn't, from what we've seen in DA:O and DA2.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 21 mars 2011 - 12:23 .

[NKKKK]

Good post, my skills of rhetoric are inferior to yours.

[Koffeegirl]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Koffeegirl wrote...

Also, Harrowings could be used..... but, some apostates like Hawke resist without them. I think this should be considred carefully and pros and cons weighed accordingly.

The Harrowings aren't something that boost an ability to resist demons, but rather prove that the person already possesses a reliably strong mind. Apostates who would resist demon possession would already pass the Harrowing.

It's a certification process to let authorities know someone is safe, not a booster shot of any sort. The entire point of mage schooling is to teach and prepare prospective mages to resist the dangers: if they can't prove they can, the education has no demonstrated value.

Yes, I think your misunderstood my post. I was saying that the Harrowing isn't needed to resist demons, as apostates like Hawke and Bethany are of strong mind. However, they still could be used as a way to assure the public that the mages can resist demons. Like I said the pros and ocns would need to be weighed carefully.

[DKJaigen]

Carmen_Willow wrote...

NKKKK wrote...

Templars no longer respond to the Chantry, but to the public sector (the crown, the city, the country etc.). As such, their own liberty is much more relaxed and this is still assuming Templars really do need Lyrium and it isn't a chantry lie. If they in fact really do need lyrium for these abilities, then it would be the government who controls it, not the Chantry.....

One thing I would add is that Mages cannot hold any sort of office or political position.  They cannot be nobles and inherit titles.  That way lies Tevinter, and I don't think anyone wants that....

The tevinter imperium is signs of a social problem not a magical problem. it is a ****hole when magisters didnt rule and it is a ****hole when magisters do rule it.

Modifié par DKJaigen, 21 mars 2011 - 10:21 .

[nicolom]

So mages turning to blood magic is the result of Templar rule? In that case, I suppose crime would cease to exist if law enforcement was disbanded?

[Rockpopple]

Interesting discussion here.

All I can say is there is a need for the Circle. Meredith's ways were just too extreme. The Circle cannot be a prison made to keep Mages away from society. Education is the key.

The argument repeatedly made is that you can't treat all Mages like they've all turned to Blood Magic or are Abominations. You can't treat them like they've all committed crimes. You do that, and chances are they WILL turn to crime, they WILL lose it. That causes worse problems than random Abominations in villages, as Kirkwall demonstrated.

The Chantry needs to do a better job in accepting Mages as part of society, and to teach non-magi about Mages, rather than fear-monger about them. The Circle should be treated as an educational institution - one that you can't leave until you've graduated, but one that focuses on teaching Magi to resist demons, not punishes them for being born the way they are.

And there still needs to be a Harrowing. There's no other way to prove you're strong enough to resist demons. Beth did it and she went through it okay. Of course, passing the Harrowing by no means proves you can continually resist demon possession.

So there needs to be more Templars, but they should act as a peace-keeping and police force, not some special army with the sole task of rounding and beating up Magi. Yes, of course their main focus is to take out dangerous Apostates and Abominations and protect the civs, but otherwise the name "Templar" shouldn't strike fear into the heart of every mage-blood family.

There is a middle-ground. Meredith wasn't willing to see it. She was clearly paranoid because of the idol. Anders, on the other hand, was waaaay too far in the other direction. He didn't even see a need for the Circle. He was literally dead wrong.

[DKJaigen]

The Chantry needs to do a better job in accepting Mages as part of society, and to teach non-magi about Mages, rather than fear-monger about them. The Circle should be treated as an educational institution - one that you can't leave until you've graduated, but one that focuses on teaching Magi to resist demons, not punishes them for being born the way they are.

That will never happen. Because accepting mages will greatly reduce the chanty's  own power. The current chantry keep the normal population docile and submissive by claiming that they alone can protect them from magic and the tevinter imperium.

if mages where integrated into society the fear for mages would cease to exist and the chantry cannot rally the population with imaginary fears.

[Rockpopple]

That's part of a revoltion that needs to happen, then. 1 - the Chantry, 2 - The Circle and 3 - The Templar Order.

It can happen. In medieval days we had institutions very similar to all three of these, but they've been either removed or replaced. No solution is perfect, we live in an imperfect world and so do the denizens of Thedas, but there's always BETTER solutions.

[Nathan Redgrave]

Keeping mages in a Circle of Magi is indeed a prudent thing to do. Barring the mage's family from visiting them, on the other hand, is freaking stupid. In fact, allowing family visitation on a regular basis would go far to curb the number of people who escape to live with their families. Mages should also be allowed to live relatively free lives, being allowed to come and go from the Circle, once they've passed their Harrowings and shown enough dedication to the ideals of the Circle. Mages face more than enough temptation from the Fade that compounding it with temptation in the real world is just stupid. Locking them away and denying them the opportunity to really live, or outright oppressing them, is thus entirely the wrong way to go about it.

In this sense the Circle would operate more as an obligatory boarding school than a prison. It's a fine line to skirt, but it's simple human nature to rebel when you perceive that you're being oppressed. Hence the higher concentration of apostates and malificarum in the Kirkwall vicinity--more oppression than in other areas, equals more rebellion than in other areas. Reforming the Circle to be less oppressive would, in theory, make the mage community as a whole less rebellious, and thus, less dangerous.

In other words, had Grace not gone batcrap bonkers, Thrask's faction would probably have been the best thing to happen to Kirkwall since the Imperium lost their hold on it.