Many characters are grey instead of black and white. While blood magic is a deviding line, it doesn't make people evil. Allain used it to free your sister, as the only method, but he has resisted the power that is within blood magic. And he was not made tranquil either. Fenryiel did his best to resist and in my play throughs he managed to resist the temptations. Anders never turned to blood magic, he despised it (even though he was an abomination), while Merril was a blood mage, but despised abominations. Orsino actually hired you to hunt down blood mages. The blood mages tried to talk their boss out of fight and eventualy gave themselves up, one can argue it was Meredith's response that made Grace become that sour .
A tool in itself is not dangerous. It depends on the hand you place it into that makes it dangerous or harmless. While you can decide not to give salamanders and explosives to Sandal, you can decide not to give poison to people like Petrice, you can not decide not to give magic to mages. It is like people being born with cars attached to them without a driver's licence. The preset of the whole world is, that magic is dangerous and comes without choice. People need to find a solution to it. "History" tried a few things and so far none of them worked.
Do you like how Mages are shown in DA2?
Débuté par
X2-Elijah
, mars 22 2011 12:27
Retour en haut
#52
Posté 22 mars 2011 - 07:55
nuclearpengu1nn
-
- Members
- 1 648 messages
im happy with the fact that AoE spells like Tempest don't take a long time to be casted and mages can melee enemies with their staff i hate the fact that mages dumped on, on the armor side we only get robes and the champions armor which we only get by the last Act unlike in origins we get those robes like Reaper's Robes that doesn't entirely look bad
#53
Posté 22 mars 2011 - 08:05
TheAwesomologist
-
- Members
- 839 messages
And just like Hawke has to explain to Fenris, not all mages, even Tevinter mages, are evil abominations. Just because they have the potential to be doesn't mean they are evil.The Angry One wrote...
TheAwesomologist wrote...
I don't mind how Mages are portrayed in DA 2. There are plenty of examples of "good"mages, ie ones that don't turn into abominations. Hawke Mage, Bethany, and Merrill don't turn into monsters. There's the half-elf kid you rescue whom, as far as we know, doesn't turn batshiat crazy, as well as Dane (or Dan or whatever, he uses blood magic but isn't an abomination.
Feynriel is at risk of becoming an abomination or insane if you don't rescue him, and even then he runs off to Tevinter and apprentices to a Magister which doesn't exactly bode well.
If I walk outside I might get hit by a bus. Doesn't mean I need to destroy all busses to prevent this.
#54
Posté 22 mars 2011 - 08:51
Punahedan
-
- Members
- 421 messages
Location, location, location.
That's what it all boils down to. Mages will not be treated the same way everywhere. In qunari lands, they are tools. In Rivain, handy village seers, almost fortune-teller-esque. Among the Dalish, wise leaders that can traverse two worlds. In Ferelden, it's probably the closest they'll get to being treated like "normal" people. In Tevinter, you are supreme. In Kirkwall and a lot of the Free Marches, you're a dangerous potential nuke.
The setting in which mage children grow up in Kirkwall is oppressive. That's why you have acts of desperation. In Kirkwall, that arm of the Templars - and this does not apply to the Chantry in the rest of the world - essentially raise mages in an environment where their lives are irrelevant because of their powers. And yes, mages are dangerous when driven to a point. So is any oppressed person reduced to animal instincts and shady deals. But Anders says he's seen that suicide is probably a more common death than possession.
Mages in Kirkwall are told, "These are all the sins you're doing simply by existing." But mages didn't choose to be born that way. In Ferelden, the atmosphere seems to be "make do with what you have." The event in the Circle there seemed to be an anomoly, the influence of one or two massive idiots. It's clearly a much more... mentally cultivated environment outside of that. I know my mage Warden was fine, Wynne was fine, the kid you get for Witch Hunt was fine. In an environment where blood magic is acceptable, like in Tevinter, most people are going to turn to it. In an environment like Kirkwall, mages are so pressed down upon that there's really nothing left to lose. Their abilities and lives are validated by the demons that want to use them, so they seem much more reasonable than Meredith and her Templars.
Kirkwall has a history of oppression, so it's no surprise this is what happens to mages. It's a problem that pervades a lot of Circles, but it was particularly serious here. Ultimately, Anders was a willing scapegoat for the conflict. He intended to fall on the "mage's" side and support their freedom, but really, there is no "mage's" side. Mages are dangerous, but not any more than anyone else when it's just the mage. They are in greater danger of becoming weapons than others. Especially if magic falls on someone who's just naturally weak-willed. There's a lot of power, and also a lot more responsbility for them. But that doesn't mean their lives should be undervalued for that, or that their existence turned into a sin because of that.
Rather than "Stop existing", I personally think mages would be better off in a more Fereldan sort of setting: "Here are your abilities, here are the dangers, here's what you can do to help others and minimize danger to yourself." I don't think they should be left to manage themselves, but no one in any sort of position of power should be left to manage themselves. But cloistering them up like that isn't the answer. Animals get a better deal than Kirkwall and qunari mages do.
I personally think the best compromise would be pairing a mage and a Templar to root out blood mages and abominations. I think Circles are a good place to teach mage children to control their abilities and stave off demons - but they should still be able to talk to their families and see the outside world. If they want to stay and become more proficient at magic or do research, good! If not, they should be free to put what they have to use elsewhere - as healers, perhaps, or part of an army, or whatever, or do something more with their lives.
...Don't even get me started on the distinction I make between an abomination and a mage possessed by a benevolent spirit. ;o; I'm so glad BW chose to deal with this topic in DA2, I loooooooove this debate because it doesn't have a right answer, ever.
That's what it all boils down to. Mages will not be treated the same way everywhere. In qunari lands, they are tools. In Rivain, handy village seers, almost fortune-teller-esque. Among the Dalish, wise leaders that can traverse two worlds. In Ferelden, it's probably the closest they'll get to being treated like "normal" people. In Tevinter, you are supreme. In Kirkwall and a lot of the Free Marches, you're a dangerous potential nuke.
The setting in which mage children grow up in Kirkwall is oppressive. That's why you have acts of desperation. In Kirkwall, that arm of the Templars - and this does not apply to the Chantry in the rest of the world - essentially raise mages in an environment where their lives are irrelevant because of their powers. And yes, mages are dangerous when driven to a point. So is any oppressed person reduced to animal instincts and shady deals. But Anders says he's seen that suicide is probably a more common death than possession.
Mages in Kirkwall are told, "These are all the sins you're doing simply by existing." But mages didn't choose to be born that way. In Ferelden, the atmosphere seems to be "make do with what you have." The event in the Circle there seemed to be an anomoly, the influence of one or two massive idiots. It's clearly a much more... mentally cultivated environment outside of that. I know my mage Warden was fine, Wynne was fine, the kid you get for Witch Hunt was fine. In an environment where blood magic is acceptable, like in Tevinter, most people are going to turn to it. In an environment like Kirkwall, mages are so pressed down upon that there's really nothing left to lose. Their abilities and lives are validated by the demons that want to use them, so they seem much more reasonable than Meredith and her Templars.
Kirkwall has a history of oppression, so it's no surprise this is what happens to mages. It's a problem that pervades a lot of Circles, but it was particularly serious here. Ultimately, Anders was a willing scapegoat for the conflict. He intended to fall on the "mage's" side and support their freedom, but really, there is no "mage's" side. Mages are dangerous, but not any more than anyone else when it's just the mage. They are in greater danger of becoming weapons than others. Especially if magic falls on someone who's just naturally weak-willed. There's a lot of power, and also a lot more responsbility for them. But that doesn't mean their lives should be undervalued for that, or that their existence turned into a sin because of that.
Rather than "Stop existing", I personally think mages would be better off in a more Fereldan sort of setting: "Here are your abilities, here are the dangers, here's what you can do to help others and minimize danger to yourself." I don't think they should be left to manage themselves, but no one in any sort of position of power should be left to manage themselves. But cloistering them up like that isn't the answer. Animals get a better deal than Kirkwall and qunari mages do.
I personally think the best compromise would be pairing a mage and a Templar to root out blood mages and abominations. I think Circles are a good place to teach mage children to control their abilities and stave off demons - but they should still be able to talk to their families and see the outside world. If they want to stay and become more proficient at magic or do research, good! If not, they should be free to put what they have to use elsewhere - as healers, perhaps, or part of an army, or whatever, or do something more with their lives.
...Don't even get me started on the distinction I make between an abomination and a mage possessed by a benevolent spirit. ;o; I'm so glad BW chose to deal with this topic in DA2, I loooooooove this debate because it doesn't have a right answer, ever.
#55
Posté 22 mars 2011 - 08:54
Foolsfolly
-
- Members
- 4 770 messages
Mages went from the oppressed group you felt sorry for to the monsters that the civilized world does not need hanging around.
I don't like it. It was like they thought more people would agree with the Templars in DA:O but most people didn't. So to show that the Templar's aren't evil they totally went and made every mage but Bethany evil.
Even your other two companion mages are a blood mage and abomination.
But no. I would have preferred coming across at least a few good mages in the game. Instead no good deed to a mage goes unpunished.
I don't like it. It was like they thought more people would agree with the Templars in DA:O but most people didn't. So to show that the Templar's aren't evil they totally went and made every mage but Bethany evil.
Even your other two companion mages are a blood mage and abomination.
But no. I would have preferred coming across at least a few good mages in the game. Instead no good deed to a mage goes unpunished.
#56
Posté 22 mars 2011 - 08:55
lazuli
-
- Members
- 3 995 messages
"Times are tough. Better use Blood Magic and completely cast aside everything I've been trying to accomplish!"
No, I don't like how mages are portrayed. Bethany is the only one who doesn't come off as a complete idiot.
No, I don't like how mages are portrayed. Bethany is the only one who doesn't come off as a complete idiot.
#57
Posté 22 mars 2011 - 10:43
Legbiter
-
- Members
- 2 242 messages
Magic is very dangerous in DA world yes. I like it, in DA:O they were too much like harmless emo goths or something.
#58
Posté 23 mars 2011 - 02:35
screamin_jesus
-
- Members
- 159 messages
There was WAY too many blood mages. In endgame when you side with the mages, half the enemies are still BLOOD MAGES AND ABOMINATIONS, I mean wtf?
#59
Posté 23 mars 2011 - 02:37
The Angry One
-
- Members
- 22 246 messages
TheAwesomologist wrote...
And just like Hawke has to explain to Fenris, not all mages, even Tevinter mages, are evil abominations. Just because they have the potential to be doesn't mean they are evil.The Angry One wrote...
TheAwesomologist wrote...
I don't mind how Mages are portrayed in DA 2. There are plenty of examples of "good"mages, ie ones that don't turn into abominations. Hawke Mage, Bethany, and Merrill don't turn into monsters. There's the half-elf kid you rescue whom, as far as we know, doesn't turn batshiat crazy, as well as Dane (or Dan or whatever, he uses blood magic but isn't an abomination.
Feynriel is at risk of becoming an abomination or insane if you don't rescue him, and even then he runs off to Tevinter and apprentices to a Magister which doesn't exactly bode well.
If I walk outside I might get hit by a bus. Doesn't mean I need to destroy all busses to prevent this.
In this case you have a boy with the latent power to control dreams go train in the country where Magisters once went into dreams to KILL PEOPLE.
If that doesn't throw up red flags I don't know what does. :happy:
#60
Posté 23 mars 2011 - 02:44
KnightofPhoenix
-
- Members
- 21 527 messages
Am I the only one who thought that assassination via dreams is uber badass? Like inception, only fatal.
Wish they'd allow us to be a real blood mage who would do these kind of things.
Wish they'd allow us to be a real blood mage who would do these kind of things.
#61
Posté 23 mars 2011 - 02:44
Danjaru
-
- Members
- 378 messages
I think it was handled very badly.
All mages were bad, besides Bethany, Feydriel and Emile. Overall I was kind of buying the "oppression is creating the monsters they fear" thing. The tougher the Templars were the more desperate the mages became which created this situation. But after killing countless apostates, having Grace (if you saved her) try and kill your family and even Orsino turning out to be a blood mage, I got kind of annoyed.
I think if they made both Mages and Templars sympathedic instead of making them both despicable the end choice would've been a bit harder. In the end I was kind of happy that I ended up killing both sides no matter what my choice was.
All mages were bad, besides Bethany, Feydriel and Emile. Overall I was kind of buying the "oppression is creating the monsters they fear" thing. The tougher the Templars were the more desperate the mages became which created this situation. But after killing countless apostates, having Grace (if you saved her) try and kill your family and even Orsino turning out to be a blood mage, I got kind of annoyed.
I think if they made both Mages and Templars sympathedic instead of making them both despicable the end choice would've been a bit harder. In the end I was kind of happy that I ended up killing both sides no matter what my choice was.
#62
Posté 23 mars 2011 - 03:46
kyles3
-
- Members
- 1 984 messages
Way too many blood mages. Kill enough of 'em and the concept isn't so scary anymore.
The game doesn't make it easy, but in the end I still side with the mages because I hate authority.
The game doesn't make it easy, but in the end I still side with the mages because I hate authority.
