4350 réponses à ce sujet

[NanoKitty]

Sylvianus wrote...

NanoKitty wrote...

 Quite honestly, I found the choice not hard to make....  My Hawke is a blood mage, but I consistently chose the "good" choices throughout the game.  Blood magic is not innately evil. (Though WHY does Anders keep railing on Merrill because of her blood magic, but never even mentions MY use of blood magic - even during a completed romance?  Really??)  
At the end, I sided with the mages -- freedom and agency are far more valuable than security.  I say, go ahead and arrest (or whatever) the mages who actually do bad stuff, but let the rest of them be free - it's wrong to imprison them (or worse) merely because they *might* do something bad.  Sure, some would turn to evil, but that's one of the costs of freedom.  It would not be chaos, despite what the templars claim.  For every evil mage, there would be 5 free mages ready to take him down.  There's no need for a circle at all.  Templars can then concentrate on hunting the truly evil mages.

It underestimated the dangerousness  ined of mages. Take the example of Connor and what he brought to Redcliffe. many terrible and unnecessary suffering.

 Without circle, without responsibility, without authority, the world will meet again under their power or their depredations voluntary or involuntary. Blood magic few can control it honestly, it often ends badly. Merrill's example is taken into account..

I'm against tyranny, better living conditions but not total freedom for Mages, it is a fantasy, because their power is a blessing as a curse.

Of course, didn't Connor bring that evil to Redcliffe because he hadn't received proper training, because his mother didn't want him taken to the circle?  If there was no circle, Connor could have received training from free mages. 
This whole Bioware-inspired argument reeks of parallels to gun control.  An armed society is a polite society.  If there are good free mages walking around, I bet crime (all crime, not just mage-crimes) would plummet.  I know my good blood-mage Hawke did her best to eliminate crime.  It's not a stretch to think others would as well.
Agency still is more valuable than most people give credit.

How come everyone keeps saying that without the circle, mages will have no responsibility??  The majority (vast, I'd say) would be good people, and would help control crime.  It's just like saying that we should register or force into a circle everyone who has a gun or martial arts training - because they have the potential of hurting others.  Hogwash.

Modifié par NanoKitty, 04 mai 2011 - 05:21 .

[GavrielKay]

Sylvianus wrote...

Take the example of Connor and what he brought to Redcliffe. many terrible and unnecessary suffering.

Yes, take the example of Connor.  Yet another atrocity caused by...  the circle and Chantry.  I hated Isolde's character, but the biggest reason that Connor was a danger is because she knew if she admitted he was a mage that he'd be taken away.  If the circles were as others have suggested - training centers or boarding schools - she would have happily signed him up and gotten him trained.

There's no evidence that a mage is more likely to go bad when left in a loving family environment.  Most people with a loving upbringing turn out to be good people.  Then you're just left to deal with the few who will always go bad whether they are mages or ordinary cutthroats.

Think about it - if people decided Hawke was a danger to society would you surrender to make them feel safer?  Or would you think that someone being afraid of you is an insufficient reason to give up your freedom when you haven't done anything wrong? 

Fear is contagious, insidious and altogether a bad reason to strip an entire group of their rights.

[nos_astra]

NanoKitty wrote...
Of course, didn't Connor bring that evil to Redcliffe because he hadn't received proper training, because his mother didn't want him taken to the circle? 

He had received training from Jowan. What got him possessed was the emotional distress caused by the poisoning of his father. Connor made a deal that would save his father's live.

Just look at Feynriel. The tower couldn't help him against the pull of demon temptation. Even Merethari didn't seem to know how to help him avoid possession and suggested killing him if necessary.

Uldred and his lot were fully trained mages.

[EmperorSahlertz]

There would also be bad mages walking around freely you know. And free amges turning into Abominations without Templars to contain the threat. Oh wonderous joys that would bring. Crimerate wouldn't be touched at all, for every mage who would turn all vigilante and fight for the law, there would be another mage who joined the criminals, for the money. So there isn't going to be a drop in crimerate.
Untimely deaths would however likely be on the rise.

[Xilizhra]

There's a difference between mages being entirely unwatched and a viciously bigoted religious organization doing the watching (and imprisoning).

[DKJaigen]

the circle is a good thing templars are not. and their is no reason why the templars should exist in the first place. except to make sure the chantry stays in power. do not kid yourself the sole reason for circles in their current form is for the chantry to stay in power not for the safety of the public

Modifié par DKJaigen, 04 mai 2011 - 05:30 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

GavrielKay wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...

Take the example of Connor and what he brought to Redcliffe. many terrible and unnecessary suffering.

Yes, take the example of Connor.  Yet another atrocity caused by...  the circle and Chantry.  I hated Isolde's character, but the biggest reason that Connor was a danger is because she knew if she admitted he was a mage that he'd be taken away.  If the circles were as others have suggested - training centers or boarding schools - she would have happily signed him up and gotten him trained.

There's no evidence that a mage is more likely to go bad when left in a loving family environment.  Most people with a loving upbringing turn out to be good people.  Then you're just left to deal with the few who will always go bad whether they are mages or ordinary cutthroats.

Think about it - if people decided Hawke was a danger to society would you surrender to make them feel safer?  Or would you think that someone being afraid of you is an insufficient reason to give up your freedom when you haven't done anything wrong? 

Fear is contagious, insidious and altogether a bad reason to strip an entire group of their rights.

Most people brought up in a loving enviroment, don't have demons constantly tempting them. The incident in Redcliffe was caused by one thing, and one thing only. Conner's love for his father.

[Sylvianus]

NanoKitty wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...

NanoKitty wrote...

 Quite honestly, I found the choice not hard to make....  My Hawke is a blood mage, but I consistently chose the "good" choices throughout the game.  Blood magic is not innately evil. (Though WHY does Anders keep railing on Merrill because of her blood magic, but never even mentions MY use of blood magic - even during a completed romance?  Really??)  
At the end, I sided with the mages -- freedom and agency are far more valuable than security.  I say, go ahead and arrest (or whatever) the mages who actually do bad stuff, but let the rest of them be free - it's wrong to imprison them (or worse) merely because they *might* do something bad.  Sure, some would turn to evil, but that's one of the costs of freedom.  It would not be chaos, despite what the templars claim.  For every evil mage, there would be 5 free mages ready to take him down.  There's no need for a circle at all.  Templars can then concentrate on hunting the truly evil mages.

It underestimated the dangerousness  ined of mages. Take the example of Connor and what he brought to Redcliffe. many terrible and unnecessary suffering.

 Without circle, without responsibility, without authority, the world will meet again under their power or their depredations voluntary or involuntary. Blood magic few can control it honestly, it often ends badly. Merrill's example is taken into account..

I'm against tyranny, better living conditions but not total freedom for Mages, it is a fantasy, because their power is a blessing as a curse.

Of course, didn't Connor bring that evil to Redcliffe because he hadn't received proper training, because his mother didn't want him taken to the circle?  If there was no circle, Connor could have received training from free mages. 
This whole Bioware-inspired argument reeks of parallels to gun control.  An armed society is a polite society.  If there are good free mages walking around, I bet crime (all crime, not just mage-crimes) would plummet.  I know my good blood-mage Hawke did her best to eliminate crime.  It's not a stretch to think others would as well.
Agency still is more valuable than most people give credit.

How come everyone keeps saying that without the circle, mages will have no responsibility??  The majority (vast, I'd say) would be good people, and would help control crime.  It's just like saying that we should register or force into a circle everyone who has a gun or martial arts training - because they have the potential of hurting others.  Hogwash.

How mages can be responsible when their power may exceed them. They will take justice into their own ? A mage will kill a child mage possessed ? Will he really have the courage and the will ? Will they really lay the foundations of a strict and rigid society controlled on themselves? Very unlikely.

Mages would not become less criminals from the moment the most had seen their power exceed them. Many innocents became monsters, not because they wanted, but because they didn't control their power. We have seen all the time in DA2. Many would not become less criminal in total freedom because of their vulnerability to the demon's call. This is not a will as common criminals.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 04 mai 2011 - 05:35 .

[IanPolaris]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
It is tehre to train mages not to succumb, and to kill them when they do. The Templars' job is to kill both the Blood Mage and the Abomination. Now that there are no circles, expect Abominations to live a whole lot longer, and to be far more numerous.

Evidence for this might be nice.  Indeed from what I've seen the circle does little to nothing to keep people 'safe' from abominations.

-Polaris

[GavrielKay]

klarabella wrote...

Just look at Feynriel. The tower couldn't help him against the pull of demon temptation. Even Merethari didn't seem to know how to help him avoid possession and suggested killing him if necessary.

Uldred and his lot were fully trained mages.

Feynriel resisted the trap of the demons but didn't know how to free himself from the Fade.  Once you give him some understanding and support he fights his way free and seems to be a good person with a strong will to remain that way.

Uldred simply falls into the category of power hungry bastards who will do anything to get their way.  I don't think anyone has ever said that free mages would never ever go bad.  A system that respects mages and allows them to have normal lives should produce good mages to help in fighting the ones that go bad.

[Sylvianus]

He had received training from Jowan. What got him possessed was the emotional distress caused by the poisoning of his father. Connor made a deal that would save his father's live.

Most people brought up in a loving enviroment, don't have demons constantly tempting them. The incident in Redcliffe was caused by one thing, and one thing only. Conner's love for his father.

exactly.

Connor is only responsible as a magician who has not checked his powers due to emotion.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Xilizhra wrote...

There's a difference between mages being entirely unwatched and a viciously bigoted religious organization doing the watching (and imprisoning).

And with mages running willy nilly all over the continent, how would you keep tabs on them? And the Templars are bigoted how? They are right in their suspecions of magic. Magic is extraordinarily dangerous, why shouold the Templars ever let their guard down, when not even mages can allow to do so?

DKJaigen wrote...

the circle is a good thing templars are not. and their is no reason why the templars should exist in the first place. except to make sure the chantry stays in power. do not kid yourself the sole reason for circles in their current form is for the chantry to stay in power not for the safety of the public

Even the codex states the main reason for the Circles' creation as the threat of demons. The Templars are there to protect the common man, that is their only task. While the Chantry may use Templars for ulterior motives, the Templars have none of those.

[lrrose]

My "canon" Hawke is a mage who started out in favor of mage freedom, but started to support the templars after All That Remains. When speaking to Meredith in Act III (specifically when she accused him of being a blood mage's thrall when he told her that Orsino had no involvement with the conspiracy in Best Served Cold) he realized that she was delusional and protected the mages when she called for Annulment. It's not his fault if the mages of Thedas interpreted his defending them as a call to rebellion.

I think Sebastian summarizes the situation best when he asks "Why are we discussing when the monster that did this is right here?"  I also don't buy the argument that helping the templars is the best way to reduce casualties because the people of Kirkwall will demand justice.  The way I see it, the templars are supposed to protect the mages, whether the danger comes from magic, demons or lynch mobs.

Modifié par lrrose, 04 mai 2011 - 05:37 .

[Xilizhra]

It's interesting to note that Kirkwall, whose Circle is far more heavy-handed and tyrannical than Ferelden's, also has far more abominations and blood mages in it than Ferelden.

[NanoKitty]

And that's why free mages would have private boarding schools or training centers. The templars can still hunt the evil mages, and be involved in law enforcement.

[Xilizhra]

And with mages running willy nilly all over the continent, how would you keep tabs on them? And the Templars are bigoted how? They are right in their suspecions of magic. Magic is extraordinarily dangerous, why shouold the Templars ever let their guard down, when not even mages can allow to do so

The templars would exist, but as an independent organization attached to the Circles, and a secular one.

[Silfren]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The life expectancy of an Abomination would be exponentionally larger without a Circle system. Add to that the different power levels of Abominations and you may have somes who live for centuries without discovery.

Flemeth, anyone? 

[Sylvianus]

Yeah I agree Xilizhra. The Templars are also responsible for this extreme situation. That's why I say we must completely review the relations, improved life conditions and rights, but always in a responsible and safe device. Not total freedom.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 04 mai 2011 - 05:38 .

[nos_astra]

Silfren wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The life expectancy of an Abomination would be exponentionally larger without a Circle system. Add to that the different power levels of Abominations and you may have somes who live for centuries without discovery.

Flemeth, anyone? 

Morrigan reveals that Flemeth is not an abomination but something entirely different in Witch Hunt.

Modifié par klarabella, 04 mai 2011 - 05:38 .

[IanPolaris]

NanoKitty wrote...

And that's why free mages would have private boarding schools or training centers. The templars can still hunt the evil mages, and be involved in law enforcement.

Indeed.  No one (at least no one reasonable) isn't saying that magic isn't dangerous or that mages should be left to do as they like untrained.  I think most would and could agree that if you are a mage, then a certain degree of training is mandatory (if only for public safety).

Regulating magic and mages and making some training mandatory does NOT mean locking away all mages and treating them like lepers or worse.

-Polaris

[lrrose]

Silfren wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The life expectancy of an Abomination would be exponentionally larger without a Circle system. Add to that the different power levels of Abominations and you may have somes who live for centuries without discovery.

Flemeth, anyone? 

She's supposedly not an abomination.

[EmperorSahlertz]

IanPolaris wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
It is tehre to train mages not to succumb, and to kill them when they do. The Templars' job is to kill both the Blood Mage and the Abomination. Now that there are no circles, expect Abominations to live a whole lot longer, and to be far more numerous.

Evidence for this might be nice.  Indeed from what I've seen the circle does little to nothing to keep people 'safe' from abominations.

-Polaris

Did any abomination escape from Ferelden's Circle? No.
Are there numerous accounts of Templars hunting Abominations (and other magical threats) in the codex? Yes.
Is this proof? Yes.
Would you consider it such? No.

Why do you think Abominations are rare? Is it becasue they are so by nature, or becase that the Circle has actually served its purpose, and contain the Abominations. Of course, you wouldn't ever consider the fact that the Circle could actually have been succesful in its most important task.

[Sylvianus]

We saw Templars allied with the Mages. We have seen with Cullen and Trask, the Templars could change their point of view, they are not all bad and can become totally receptive and responsive to the condition of the Mages.

[NanoKitty]

IanPolaris wrote...

NanoKitty wrote...

And that's why free mages would have private boarding schools or training centers. The templars can still hunt the evil mages, and be involved in law enforcement.

Indeed.  No one (at least no one reasonable) isn't saying that magic isn't dangerous or that mages should be left to do as they like untrained.  I think most would and could agree that if you are a mage, then a certain degree of training is mandatory (if only for public safety).

Regulating magic and mages and making some training mandatory does NOT mean locking away all mages and treating them like lepers or worse.

-Polaris

Hear, hear. 

[Xilizhra]

Sylvianus wrote...

We saw Templars allied with the Mages. We have seen with Cullen and Trask, the Templars could change their point of view, they are not all bad and can become totally receptive and responsive to the condition of the Mages.

Well, Thrask. I don't trust Cullen.