4350 réponses à ce sujet

[GavrielKay]

In Exile wrote...

But that does justify taking children away from their parents. Unless you think you can have roving mage schools in the boondocks or that parents will want/be able to move away with their kid so that their child can learn magic?

I agree with the notion of circles as boarding schools of a sort where you graduate and determine your own life from there.

In Exile wrote...

But you do agree with his method; you justified the killing of Elthina, no? All that you said was that if innocents died it would be deplorable... but if was just the Grand Cleric and other ordained of the Chantry, it sounded as if you were
suggesting what Anders did was justified.

If Anders had snuck into Elthina's quarters in the middle of the night and assassinated her, I'd have thought her a deserving victim.  For reasons I've posted already.  I don't really even feel bad for the other Mothers and Sisters in the Chantry, but that's probably more because I have a personal issue with religion endorsing hatred.  I do feel bad for the guy running the imaginary flower shop next door to the Chantry who got incinerated though.

In Exile wrote...

The second is to be talented. Life is really littered with people that were too slow, stupid or ugly to ever achieve more than mediocrity.

That bit actually made me giggle.  It's true enough.  But you should still have enough talented folks who'll take jobs as maleficar hunters.

In Exile wrote...

Yeah... let's not look at broken gameplay.  : P

OK, so Hawke & co. are a bad example of the general abilities of the people of Thedas.  However, my assumption (which you can call naive if you wish) is that a system which doesn't imprison and torment mages will generate fewer maleficar.  This means that even the relatively few Hawkes and Wardens ought to be able to help the Templars keep things safe.

In Exile wrote...

Absolutely. But that doesn't justify murder. I'm not saying that the mages shouldn't be free; I support their freedom.  I just think that freedom shouldn't come at the expense of the non-mage majority and not through outright terrorism.

I certainly agree that the populace shouldn't be decimated by terrorism. 

But...  (and this is a point I've argued before)

Just because it would make people feel safer to know the mages are all locked up under guard doesn't mean their right to feel safe trumps the mages right to live their lives.  The populace has a right to expect mages who hurt people to be punished, but not to expect 25 year old Harrowed mages to be sitting around in a prison trying not to go insane.

[KnightofPhoenix]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Grace was insane. And possessed since you fight an abomination of her in that fight.

She should have been tranquilized the moment she was captured.

But Meredith is apparently too busy doing that to dissenters and not actual dangerous mages.

[Silfren]

In Exile wrote...

But that does justify taking children away from their parents. Unless you think you can have roving mage schools in the boondocks or that parents will want/be able to move away with their kid so that their child can learn magic?

I am pointing out that some of the practices of the Circle are not in themselves abominable given what it means to be a mage. Beyond that, I think it's unreasonable to expect your common person to know in detail of the abuses the templars are working very hard to cover up.

Well, part of the objection to the Circle's existing practice is that it doesn't merely take children away.  It takes children away against the parents' will, and--and this is crucial bit--does not allow them to ever be a family again.  It's not just that the Chantry has it as a law that children have to go away to a Circle: the Chantry makes it legal for templars to raid a home and drag a child away from their parents.  Anders was taken away in chains.  Seriously.  As a young boy, when the templars came for him, he was led away in chains while his mother wept, IIRC.  That is not acceptable.  Moreover, the law does not hold that a child can return to their family after they've mastered their abilities.  They're cut off from their family for life.  

People--and I'm in this camp--who say that they're not opposed to children being taken away for training (and who then get subjected to snide comments of "you mean like they currently are in the Circles?") aren't trying to "have the Circle but call it another name" as at least one person has rolled their eyes and claimed.  We're saying that there's nothing wrong with requiring mage children to go to school for training, but that a much better way would be for the Circles to be like boarding schools.  The mage has to go, and they have to prove that they've mastered control of their abilities, learned to resist demonic temptation, and have trained in self-defense against blood magic domination, etc.  But once that training is over, they're free to go home, or wherever they wish.  Also, don't rip the child away from their parents and clap them in chains like they're criminals, maybe?  Don't deny their parents the right to visit them and communicate with them? 

Yes, it's true that some parents would have to face their children being taken a LOOONG ways away.  Not exactly a fun prospect, but a far better system than jerking the child away forever and not only disallowing the parents contact with their child ever again, but not even telling them where the child is going?  And of course the added benefit of the child being free to go home once training is over, would probably mitigate a lot of that pain.  Then again, since it would be the law of the land that children are required to be taken to Circles for training, even if that means being taken far away, there's an argument to be had for requiring a fund to be created to permit mage children and/or their families the ability to travel.

[GavrielKay]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

She should have been tranquilized the moment she was captured.

But Meredith is apparently too busy doing that to dissenters and not actual dangerous mages.

So funny and so true!

[In Exile]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Grace was insane. And possessed since you fight an abomination of her in that fight.

Yes, but many other mages weren't. Or at least, didn't seem to be based on what (for example) Kieran says if he's still with the templars. So it's not so clear that what Grace did was a bloodmage rebellion.

[TEWR]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Grace was insane. And possessed since you fight an abomination of her in that fight.

She should have been tranquilized the moment she was captured.

But Meredith is apparently too busy doing that to dissenters and not actual dangerous mages.

Sadly she was never once a dangerous mage until that mission. Why we couldn't suggest she take a ship to Ferelden instead of living in the woods for 2-3 years is beyond me. Why we couldn't break her out of the Gallows if we helped her once is beyond me. Why she wasn't one of the mages that the Mage Resistance helped escape is beyond me. Oh wait no it isn't, that's the type of stuff that would've made sense.

Instead, we find her in Act 3, ready to kill the hostage they took, and when Thrask tries to stop her, she kills him. She kills the one of the very scant few Templars we meet in all of Kirkwall that treats mages as they should be treated.

and we just let her. Hawke, you have a murder knife. Use the damn thing. Or did you trade it for a feather?

 In Exile wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Grace was insane. And possessed since you fight an abomination of her in that fight.

Yes, but many other mages weren't. Or at least, didn't seem to be based on what (for example) Kieran says if he's still with the templars. So it's not so clear that what Grace did was a bloodmage rebellion.

I never said it was a blood mage rebellion.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 06 mai 2011 - 01:04 .

[non-post]

Orsino?  His position held by far the least power of any of them.  He couldn't do much to protect the Circle, he was afraid to leave the Gallows himself because even he would be charged with blood magic on no more evidence than having gone out to grab a bite to eat at the wrong time.

In fact it's quite possible he was protecting the mages TOO much.  One theory that's been tossed around a bit on why he didn't turn in Quentin is because he knew Meredith would use it as ammunition to come down even harder on all the innocent mages in the Circle.  I think he has some merit too.  All we know for certain is that Orsino gave him books on necromancy.  Necromancy itself isn't blood magic, it's in the spirit school.  We don't know he knew Quentin was abducting and killing women at the time.  Most of all, Orsino just strikes me as a dedicated leader because of his actions during the Qunari invasion if Bethany is in the Circle.  He was more than willing to let the Qunari take him to save Bethany.  His codex also backs up that he's in an unenviable position of having very little actual power and trying to do the best he can for the mages with it.

Yes, you learn that when you side with the Templars, Orsino confesses.

I may have been a little harsh on ol' Orsino, he did make a good speach at the start of Act 3. Both him and Elthina could have been fleshed out better.

Orsino's shining moment was the qunari invasion distraction. Elthina's was telling Meredith to go home like a good girl.

[Xilizhra]

I'd also like to point out that if you sent Feynriel to live with the Dalish, there is a confrontation between Templars and Dalish Hunters. Here, the Dalish say the Templars took one of their child hunters and tortured him for information on Feynriel's whereabouts.

When does this appear? I must have missed it.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Wait, wait, wait... So because Elthina knew some wrongs was happening in the Circle, it is okay to kill all inhabitants of the Chantry? Really? Pro-mage dudes actually using that kind of argument? REALLY?
So since Orsino also knew about blood magic within (and outside) the Circle, it is okay to kill all inhabitants of the Circle.
It is your own logic....

[TEWR]

Xilizhra wrote...

I'd also like to point out that if you sent Feynriel to live with the Dalish, there is a confrontation between Templars and Dalish Hunters. Here, the Dalish say the Templars took one of their child hunters and tortured him for information on Feynriel's whereabouts.

When does this appear? I must have missed it.

Send Feynriel to live with the Dalish in Act 1

In Act 2 travel to Sundermount, you'll see the Templars and Dalish.

Click on the Dalish and a cutscene ensues.

find out that the Templars tortured an innocent da'len (child) hunter for information on Feynriel and that the Templar in charge there couldn't care less about elves.

Then the decision is up to you. Side with the Dalish or try to convince the Templars to leave peacefully. Me? I've always let them leave peacefully because the hunter says it was what's best. But the more I see that scene the more I want to slaughter the Kirkwall Templars who abuse their position.

Maker, I'm turning into Anders.

[Rifneno]

GavrielKay wrote...

If Anders had snuck into Elthina's quarters in the middle of the night and assassinated her, I'd have thought her a deserving victim.  For reasons I've posted already.  I don't really even feel bad for the other Mothers and Sisters in the Chantry, but that's probably more because I have a personal issue with religion endorsing hatred.  I do feel bad for the guy running the imaginary flower shop next door to the Chantry who got incinerated though.

I agree completely.  The real victims are those that didn't have anything to do with the Chantry.  The lower ranking priests...  I'm not going to say they had it coming but I'm not going to lose any sleep over it either.

I certainly agree that the populace shouldn't be decimated by terrorism.  

But...  (and this is a point I've argued before)

Just because it would make people feel safer to know the mages are all locked up under guard doesn't mean their right to feel safe trumps the mages right to live their lives.  The populace has a right to expect mages who hurt people to be punished, but not to expect 25 year old Harrowed mages to be sitting around in a prison trying not to go insane.

Again, all true.  When you think about how many innocent and good mages have been victimized by the Chantry's system over a thousand years...  The answer to the problem isn't to punish people for a crime they might commit, it's to allay those fears and to not give them reason to commit the crime in the first place.

Silfren wrote...

Well, part of the objection to the Circle's existing practice is that it doesn't merely take children away.  It takes children away against the parents' will, and--and this is crucial bit--does not allow them to ever be a family again.  It's not just that the Chantry has it as a law that children have to go away to a Circle: the Chantry makes it legal for templars to raid a home and drag a child away from their parents.  Anders was taken away in chains.  Seriously.  As a young boy, when the templars came for him, he was led away in chains while his mother wept, IIRC.  That is not acceptable.  Moreover, the law does not hold that a child can return to their family after they've mastered their abilities.  They're cut off from their family for life.

Exactly this.  Jowan is another good example, but on the opposite end.  His mother believed the Chantry's filth.  When he started showing magical ability, she became...  I believe the politically correct term is "very emotionally abusive".  She would only refer to him as "that thing" and wanted nothing to do with him.  Good God.  Is it any wonder he wound up screwed up?

They almost guarantee mage children be emotionally damaged one way or another, then they have the gall to act surprised when stuff like Kirkwall happens.  One of Elthina's best lines, "The Chantry is not a domineering father, she is a gentle mother."  Is that supposed to be a joke, you withered old harpy?

People--and I'm in this camp--who say that they're not opposed to children being taken away for training (and who then get subjected to snide comments of "you mean like they currently are in the Circles?") aren't trying to "have the Circle but call it another name" as at least one person has rolled their eyes and claimed.  We're saying that there's nothing wrong with requiring mage children to go to school for training, but that a much better way would be for the Circles to be like boarding schools.  The mage has to go, and they have to prove that they've mastered control of their abilities, learned to resist demonic temptation, and have trained in self-defense against blood magic domination, etc.  But once that training is over, they're free to go home, or wherever they wish.  Also, don't rip the child away from their parents and clap them in chains like they're criminals, maybe?  Don't deny their parents the right to visit them and communicate with them?

Indeed.  Despite what many of the pro-templar crowd says, the great majority of the pro-mage posters agree that mages need training and policing.  I think I've seen one person endorse total, unlimited freedom with no group watching over them.  The problem isn't the concept of a Circle, it's letting heavy-handed zealots run it with no one watching the watchers.  The Chantry, like every religious organization, should not have some grand military force.  It never ends well.  If the peaceful sisters want to keep doing their widows and orphans stuff, that's great.  But the Chantry's sword arm has to be amputated.

[Ryzaki]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Wait, wait, wait... So because Elthina knew some wrongs was happening in the Circle, it is okay to kill all inhabitants of the Chantry? Really? Pro-mage dudes actually using that kind of argument? REALLY?
So since Orsino also knew about blood magic within (and outside) the Circle, it is okay to kill all inhabitants of the Circle.
It is your own logic....

...I hope you don't mind me stealing this for my canon. 

[In Exile]

GavrielKay wrote...
I agree with the notion of circles as boarding schools of a sort where you graduate and determine your own life from there.

That's a different debate. Right now, all I wanted to point out was that the mere fact that the Circles do take children away isn't per se immoral; it's what happens after.

At any rate, I don't fully agree since I think there is just practically more to being a mage in Thedas than that kind of self-determining freedom. But I think the Circle as an academic institution for the study of magic (and for example the training of healers & creation of magical goods) is a step in the right direction.

If Anders had snuck into Elthina's quarters in the middle of the night and assassinated her, I'd have thought her a deserving victim.  For reasons I've posted already.  I don't really even feel bad for the other Mothers and Sisters in the Chantry, but that's probably more because I have a personal issue with religion endorsing hatred.  I do feel bad for the guy running the imaginary flower shop next door to the Chantry who got incinerated though.

So you do think Anders was justified in killing them. I disagree; I do not see the Templars and the Chantry as equivalent, and the fact that Anders killed the Grand Cleric for the expressed purpose of starting a war makes it inexcusable.

Did the Grand Cleric fail the mages? Absolutely. Should she be liable for this, criminally? I think so. But does that warrant cold-blooded murder? More generally, does that warrant the kind of powerkeg start to a war that Anders wanted? No.

If Anders murdered Meredith, that would be one thing. If he killed every templar in a barracks, that would be another thing. But he allowed the real criminals to escape, egged them on to murder his people, all so that he would have a rallying cry for his crusade.

If the Grand Cleric is guilty of anything, it's turning a blind eye to local abuse. That's wrong, but it isn't worth murder. Especially not what it became.

That bit actually made me giggle.  It's true enough.  But you should still have enough talented folks who'll take jobs as maleficar hunters.

What if the maleficars are just as good?

OK, so Hawke & co. are a bad example of the general abilities of the people of Thedas.  However, my assumption (which you can call naive if you wish) is that a system which doesn't imprison and torment mages will generate fewer maleficar.  This means that even the relatively few Hawkes and Wardens ought to be able to help the Templars keep things safe.

I think maleficar is a nonsence concept. That covers everything from apostates like Malcom Hawke to Uldred and his blood mages or Decimus. If you remove the concept, you can start to try mages for real crimes; not just for wanting to be free.

Realistically, I think that an independent Circle (insofar as it can govern itself) with increased freedom for mages everywhere along with an extra-national anti-maleficar group that isn't based on religion and is tasked as a counter-balanced to mages is the way to go.

I certainly agree that the populace shouldn't be decimated by terrorism. 

But...  (and this is a point I've argued before)

Just because it would make people feel safer to know the mages are all locked up under guard doesn't mean their right to feel safe trumps the mages right to live their lives.  The populace has a right to expect mages who hurt people to be punished, but not to expect 25 year old Harrowed mages to be sitting around in a prison trying not to go insane.

But at the same time, the population does have a right to be safe. There needs to be a compromise that allows both sides the most freedom possible.

I agree with you, but my issue is with the argume that this exploitative system and the majority who benefits from it justfy the terrorism of Anders, or the death of these bystanders.

[EmperorSahlertz]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Grace was insane. And possessed since you fight an abomination of her in that fight.

She should have been tranquilized the moment she was captured.

But Meredith is apparently too busy doing that to dissenters and not actual dangerous mages.

Meredith never tranquilized any dissenters. That was all Alrik's doing. Actually Meredith was rather lenient towards all the dissenters for the most part of the game. She tolerated the incooperative nature of the Kirkwall Circle for far longer than one would expect of a so-called "bat-**** crazy nutcase turned insane" Knight-Commander.

The one thing Meredith did, was crack down on the Circle and restricting the areas the mages could move, but that was because the Circle was refusing to let her investigate the tower for Blood Magic. So she was trying to squeze the blood mages out. Albeit at the cost of the normal mages.

[Xilizhra]

Maker, I'm turning into Anders.

Not such a bad thing.

[GavrielKay]

Rifneno wrote...

One of Elthina's best lines, "The Chantry is not a domineering father, she is a gentle mother."  Is that supposed to be a joke, you withered old harpy?

...

But the Chantry's sword arm has to be amputated.

These bits made me laugh out loud.  I love it.  So true.

[In Exile]

Silfren wrote...
Well, part of the objection to the Circle's existing practice is that it doesn't merely take children away.  It takes children away against the parents' will, and--and this is crucial bit--does not allow them to ever be a family again.  It's not just that the Chantry has it as a law that children have to go away to a Circle: the Chantry makes it legal for templars to raid a home and drag a child away from their parents.  Anders was taken away in chains.  Seriously.  As a young boy, when the templars came for him, he was led away in chains while his mother wept, IIRC.  That is not acceptable.  Moreover, the law does not hold that a child can return to their family after they've mastered their abilities.  They're cut off from their family for life. 

That's just a debate over the failed methods of the Chantry - we can all agree that how the templars behave is immoral. But that does not address whether or not the core approach - separating mage children from their families for the purpose of training for their inescapable life as mages is right or wrong.

People--and I'm in this camp--who say that they're not opposed to children being taken away for training (and who then get subjected to snide comments of "you mean like they currently are in the Circles?") aren't trying to "have the Circle but call it another name" as at least one person has rolled their eyes and claimed.  We're saying that there's nothing wrong with requiring mage children to go to school for training, but that a much better way would be for the Circles to be like boarding schools. 

That ignores the reality of what a mage is. You can't pretend as if a capable young mage is not somehow greater than your average capable non-mage, and that this young mage does not have the capacity to alter reality in a way that is unfathomable for anyone else.

The mage has to go, and they have to prove that they've mastered control of their abilities, learned to resist demonic temptation, and have trained in self-defense against blood magic domination, etc.  But once that training is over, they're free to go home, or wherever they wish.  Also, don't rip the child away from their parents and clap them in chains like they're criminals, maybe?  Don't deny their parents the right to visit them and communicate with them?  

It goes without saying that the methods of the templars are unjustified.

But the issue is, again, much more complicated than that. The core issue here is the imbalance of power. A mage is just something greater than a non-mage. There is nothing that changes that reality.

The Circle as it exists is oppressive; but it exists not to opress mages but to counter-balance their power in some way. I agree with you that there must and does exist a better way, but there can't be any compromise until we find a way to offer non-mages security in a reasonable fashion.

It's not that mages should inordinately bear this burden; but we have to recognize the basic reality of imbalance in Thedas before addressing freedom and just treatment of mages and non-mages alike.

Yes, it's true that some parents would have to face their children being taken a LOOONG ways away.  Not exactly a fun prospect, but a far better system than jerking the child away forever and not only disallowing the parents contact with their child ever again, but not even telling them where the child is going? 

One thing that's being ignored would be whether the parents actually want the child in this environment. A Maker-fearing Chantry follower might feel cursed and may well be tempted to kill the child to hide their shame. As much as templars commit abuses, they have some lattitude to do so partly because there are people who believe treating mages in this way is justified.

The issue is more complicated that just an oppressed minority.

And of course the added benefit of the child being free to go home once training is over, would probably mitigate a lot of that pain.  Then again, since it would be the law of the land that children are required to be taken to Circles for training, even if that means being taken far away, there's an argument to be had for requiring a fund to be created to permit mage children and/or their families the ability to travel.

And where would this money come from? What if the mage opts for tranquility (I believe Owain did this). Why do you think the person who would go home is a child, and not an adult? Do you think there shouldn't be something as the Harrowing?

You're glossing over a lot. While I agree with you in principle, I believe there is just more to the system than you're addressing right now.

[Xilizhra]

The Harrowing... there needs to be some means of saving the mage performing it if they fail, instead of just killing the abomination.

[Silfren]

Sylvianus wrote...


Eltina don't want to deal with anything like that. Eltina do not want to hear about it. Yes she knows everything, but she doesn't act. I do not see corruption, not to act.

If she didn't want to hear about it or deal with it, that's too bad.  IT. IS. HER. JOB.  She doesn't get to just not do her job because she doesn't wanna.  Again, that's just another argument to say she needed to step her butt down.  

Please explain to me how it is not a sign of corruption to refuse to do what it is your job to do.  

Again, if it's because she's old and tired, then she needs to step down.  She has no excuse for remaining in her position as the Grand Cleric if she's too old and tired to actually act as the Grand Cleric.  If she was so old that she had lost the ability to comprehend her need to step down, then someone else had a responsibility to have her removed.  I don't buy that notion anyway, nothing in game suggests that Elthina has lost her wits to the point of being unable to realize it's time to retire.  And if she had been that far gone, I don't believe that someone would not step in to replace her.  I seriously doubt people--even people who loved her--would just let the Grand Cleric deterioriate into such an advanced state of senility or dementia before the public eye rather than allow her to retire with some dignity.

I did not even know it was the role of high priestess to care for the improvement of living conditions of the Magi .. hm

She's the Grand Cleric.  That makes her Knight-Commander Meredith's immediate superior.  Meredith is required by Chantry law to answer to Elthina.  That also means that as their Knight-Commander's superior, Elthina is also the Templars superior.

The Chantry is the body that creates the laws of the Circle and the Templars are the military arm of the Chantry.  When Templars are breaking the Chantry's laws, the Chantry has the authority--and the responsibility--to correct them.  So yes, when the Knight-Commander is permitting her templars to break Chantry law, it is the Chantry's duty to step in.  In Kirkwall, that obligation falls on Elthina's shoulders.

And for Petrice, she left the qunari killed her to appease the situation with the Arishock and to avenge the death of the son of Viscount. She knows very well that Petrice has gone too far. She abandoned her, besides, I was shocked, I do not like qunari.

Hawke confronted Elthina about Petrice before that occurred.  Elthina knew in advance that Petrice was causing trouble, and she did not take action.  Just more "the Maker will fix it when he's ready to."  By that point, Elthina doesn't simply know that Petrice has gone too far--it is her total inaction that has allowed Petrice to go that far.

Anders has not killed her because he thought she was guilty, but the symbol she represented. He killed her because he kwnow that she will do nothing for mages. Not becauses of fantasies of corruption. It is you who invent fantasies to justify something that is not justifiable...

I'd say from what we're shown in game that Anders killed her both because of the symbol she represented, and because of her refusal to take action.  In Dissent, he himself suggests that maybe he should try talking to her because he's considering that she might be more reasonable than he'd thought.  But every attempt to talk to Elthina just proves that he was right all along.  And no, you have been shown time and again that our charges of corruption in the Grand Cleric are not at all based on "invented fantasies."  You just choose to ignore what we keep pointing out to you because to acknowledge it would invalidate all of your claims.

And yes, given how you exaggerate on her character, as you exaggerate on the genocide issue, your view is biased, and when it gets too much I listen a lot less.

See above.  We've referenced actual in-game dialogues from the lips of Elthina herself, not to mention codices about her character, and the obligations of her position as Grand Cleric.  You're the one who needs it to just be our fantasy, because otherwise your arguments are destroyed. 

It's almost  it would appear that she is as crazy as Meredtih

Elthina appears to be in full control of her faculties.  If she were actually suffering from age-related senility or dementia, she at least would have a valid excuse, and be a great deal more sympathetic.

[GavrielKay]

In Exile wrote...

So you do think Anders was justified in killing them. I disagree; I do not see the Templars and the Chantry as equivalent, and the fact that Anders killed the Grand Cleric for the expressed purpose of starting a war makes it inexcusable.

We'll have to disagree then I suppose.  And I don't see the Chantry and Templars as equivalent.  That would actually excuse more of Elthina's actions.  In fact I think the Chantry is presented as in control of the Templars which puts much more responsibility on Elthina and makes her failure that much more egregious.

What if the maleficars are just as good?

They would have to be gods to be better than the collective forces that could be assembled against them.  Anyone that powerful would break out of a circle as they stand now anyway.

I think maleficar is a nonsence concept.

If you don't like the term that's fine.  I was looking for something well known and eaiser to type than "mages who have gone bad and started to hurt people."  I include those mages who are abominations, blood mages or like to stab people with spoons.  The basic idea was that it be a mage who's actually committed a crime against someone.

[Silfren]

Xilizhra wrote...

I'd also like to point out that if you sent Feynriel to live with the Dalish, there is a confrontation between Templars and Dalish Hunters. Here, the Dalish say the Templars took one of their child hunters and tortured him for information on Feynriel's whereabouts.

When does this appear? I must have missed it.

You have to have sent Feyrniel to the Dalish, and then visit the Dalish camp before you do the quest Night Terrors.

[Xilizhra]

Ah, there's the problem. I've done Night Terrors quite early in my playthroughs so far.

[In Exile]

GavrielKay wrote...
We'll have to disagree then I suppose.  And I don't see the Chantry and Templars as equivalent.  That would actually excuse more of Elthina's actions.  In fact I think the Chantry is presented as in control of the Templars which puts much more responsibility on Elthina and makes her failure that much more egregious.

The Chantry commands the templars, but the templars are autonomous.

Meredith does not sent Elthina reports saying "14 mages were beaten today, 4 were sodomized, and 1 was made to eat his own excrement." Alrik does not word his "templar solution" request as "I srsly want to sexually exploit all the female mages." Karras does not wear a t-shirt saying "I abused 4 mages in the past week."

Elthina shuts her eyes tight and ignores the rumours that she hears about Meredith. But the Chantry do not even have a policy of their Grand Clerics running their day-to-day treatment of mages by as a manager would oversee employees.

Should she have done more? Absolutely. Is she guilty of inaction, and did that perpetuate the abuses of the templars? Yes and yes. But that is a far cry from her being directly responsible for the abuses perpetrated by Karras, Meredith and Alrik.

They would have to be gods to be better than the collective forces that could be assembled against them.  Anyone that powerful would break out of a circle as they stand now anyway.

What collective forces? How would these forces exist? Who would fund them? Who would train them? How would they fight against blood magic? What would prevent the maleficar (with no phylactery and no laws against mages) from dominating the superiors running that organization to declare the maleficar innocent?

If you don't like the term that's fine.  I was looking for something well known and eaiser to type than "mages who have gone bad and started to hurt people."  I include those mages who are abominations, blood mages or like to stab people with spoons.  The basic idea was that it be a mage who's actually committed a crime against someone.

Right. I agree. I just mean that we shouldn't fall into the Chantry's terminology for mages. There are criminals and some happen to be mages... but I don't think that mages should be guilty of crimes in virtue of acting like mages, and the concept of maleficar essentially represents that.

[TEWR]

[quote]Silfren wrote...

[quote]Sylvianus wrote...


Eltina don't want to deal with anything like that. Eltina do not want to hear about it. Yes she knows everything, but she doesn't act. I do not see corruption, not to act.

[/quote]

If she didn't want to hear about it or deal with it, that's too bad.  IT. IS. HER. JOB.  She doesn't get to just not do her job because she doesn't wanna.  Again, that's just another argument to say she needed to step her butt down.  

Please explain to me how it is not a sign of corruption to refuse to do what it is your job to do.  

Again, if it's because she's old and tired, then she needs to step down.  She has no excuse for remaining in her position as the Grand Cleric if she's too old and tired to actually act as the Grand Cleric.  If she was so old that she had lost the ability to comprehend her need to step down, then someone else had a responsibility to have her removed.  I don't buy that notion anyway, nothing in game suggests that Elthina has lost her wits to the point of being unable to realize it's time to retire.  And if she had been that far gone, I don't believe that someone would not step in to replace her.  I seriously doubt people--even people who loved her--would just let the Grand Cleric deterioriate into such an advanced state of senility or dementia before the public eye rather than allow her to retire with some dignity.

[/quote]

I can think of another person who didn't do their job because they didn't want to. Magistrate Vanard. You're told to capture a prisoner that has escaped from prison, and the prisoner turns out to be Vanard's son Kelder. Kelder had murdered I think fifteen elven women and he wasn't sent to the hangman's noose for those crimes.

Because who cares about some knife-ears, right? Who cares about justice right? As long as Vanard keeps his job that's what matters.

Though I will admit I would be hard-pressed myself to see my son executed for those crimes. He's my blood. Still, Vanard didn't strike me as the guy who cared about his son more than he did his job.

[quote]

[quote]
I did not even know it was the role of high priestess to care for the improvement of living conditions of the Magi .. hm [/quote]

She's the Grand Cleric.  That makes her Knight-Commander Meredith's immediate superior.  Meredith is required by Chantry law to answer to Elthina.  That also means that as their Knight-Commander's superior, Elthina is also the Templars superior.

The Chantry is the body that creates the laws of the Circle and the Templars are the military arm of the Chantry.  When Templars are breaking the Chantry's laws, the Chantry has the authority--and the responsibility--to correct them.  So yes, when the Knight-Commander is permitting her templars to break Chantry law, it is the Chantry's duty to step in.  In Kirkwall, that obligation falls on Elthina's shoulders.

[/quote]

agreed.

[quote]
[quote]And for Petrice, she left the qunari killed her to appease the situation with the Arishock and to avenge the death of the son of Viscount. She knows very well that Petrice has gone too far. She abandoned her, besides, I was shocked, I do not like qunari.
[/quote]
Hawke confronted Elthina about Petrice before that occurred.  Elthina knew in advance that Petrice was causing trouble, and she did not take action.  Just more "the Maker will fix it when he's ready to."  By that point, Elthina doesn't simply know that Petrice has gone too far--it is her total inaction that has allowed Petrice to go that far.
[/quote]

Elthina didn't react to the Qunari's killing of Petrice. I think she didn't care about Petrice at that point. I'm glad she didn't react.

[quote]
[quote]Anders has not killed her because he thought she was guilty, but the symbol she represented. He killed her because he kwnow that she will do nothing for mages. Not becauses of fantasies of corruption. It is you who invent fantasies to justify something that is not justifiable...

[/quote]

I'd say from what we're shown in game that Anders killed her both because of the symbol she represented, and because of her refusal to take action.  In Dissent, he himself suggests that maybe he should try talking to her because he's considering that she might be more reasonable than he'd thought.  But every attempt to talk to Elthina just proves that he was right all along.  And no, you have been shown time and again that our charges of corruption in the Grand Cleric are not at all based on "invented fantasies."  You just choose to ignore what we keep pointing out to you because to acknowledge it would invalidate all of your claims.
[/quote]
It is definitely a combination of her being a symbol and her inaction.

[quote]
[quote]And yes, given how you exaggerate on her character, as you exaggerate on the genocide issue, your view is biased, and when it gets too much I listen a lot less.
[/quote]
See above.  We've referenced actual in-game dialogues from the lips of Elthina herself, not to mention codices about her character, and the obligations of her position as Grand Cleric.  You're the one who needs it to just be our fantasy, because otherwise your arguments are destroyed. 
[/quote]

Sylvianius, you can ignore the dialogue from the game all you want. That doesn't change the facts.

[quote]
[quote]It's almost  it would appear that she is as crazy as Meredtih
[/quote]
Elthina appears to be in full control of her faculties.  If she were actually suffering from age-related senility or dementia, she at least would have a valid excuse, and be a great deal more sympathetic.
[/quote]

Again, I agree with this.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 06 mai 2011 - 01:49 .

[hoorayforicecream]

Is there ever any proof that Meredith tranquilizes mages that act out? Karl is the only one I can remember, but that's one mage in six years.