4350 réponses à ce sujet

[LobselVith8]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Redcliffe is the perfect example of what you want. Mages tutoring mages in the home of the apprentices in comfortable surroundings. Yet it goes horribly wrong.

So your example is Redcliffe, where a pious, Andrastian woman didn't want her son to be a mage, and hired an apprentice turned apostate to teach her, despite his complete lack of training in instructing children to harness their abilities? Seems to me that Arlessa Isolde acted as she did because of what the Chantry preaches about mages, so they are responsible for the social conditions of Andrastian societies where mages are treated with disdain. As for Jowan, he's not a proper instructor, and this is apparent because Connor lacked knowledge when he dealt with the Desire Demon. Given that Connor doesn't even know the Desire Demon is a demon and calls her a "bad lady" instead, I don't see how this supports your argument.

[LobselVith8]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Did or didn't Irving sign the papers?

Did or didn't the codex state Dumat taught blood magic to the Magister?

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

And since when did you start use Chantry dogma as proof? Seems this is a day of change. You, who before have been so quick to cry foul the moment "Chantry Scholar", "Revered Mother" or "Divine" was included as the author of the source. And now you use it to support your own view. I personally can't even find the codex entry specfically referring to Dumat teaching Blood Magic.

Aren't you the one who said that freeing the Circle would be "theft of Chantry property"? Also, the codex on the Old Gods states Dumat taught blood magic, so there's no consensus on the issue of who originally taught it.

[EmperorSahlertz]

LobselVith8 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Redcliffe is the perfect example of what you want. Mages tutoring mages in the home of the apprentices in comfortable surroundings. Yet it goes horribly wrong.

So your example is Redcliffe, where a pious, Andrastian woman didn't want her son to be a mage, and hired an apprentice turned apostate to teach her, despite his complete lack of training in instructing children to harness their abilities? Seems to me that Arlessa Isolde acted as she did because of what the Chantry preaches about mages, so they are responsible for the social conditions of Andrastian societies where mages are treated with disdain. As for Jowan, he's not a proper instructor, and this is apparent because Connor lacked knowledge when he dealt with the Desire Demon. Given that Connor doesn't even know the Desire Demon is a demon and calls her a "bad lady" instead, I don't see how this supports your argument.

Of course Isolde should have asked Jowan to see his credentials first.. Oh wait.. Isolde isn't a mage, how was she supposed to know Jowan wasn't trained? In a world with no cirlces (current Thedas), the parents ofa  mage child will now have to rely on their intuition when tehy hire a tutor for the mage child. How many more parents do you thik will end up hiring an untrained tutor?
And how do you know Jowan was an incomeptent tutor? Didn't you just defend him as a capable mage a page back? All of a sudden, now he is incompetent? Perhaps it is Conner who is an incompetent student.

[EmperorSahlertz]

LobselVith8 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Did or didn't Irving sign the papers?

Did or didn't the codex state Dumat taught blood magic to the Magister?

Ah yes. However, that is actual hearsay. SOmething you have been quite quick to dismiss the validity of an entire entry. So I'm just gonna do the same, courtesy of you Lob, and say that entry is invalid. However, there are many actualy scientific (as scientific as it gets in Thedas anyway) entries, stating Blood Magic is taught by Fade entities. Hell we even got an entry in DA2 stating the very first lesson of Blood Magic ever being taught.

LobselVith8 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

And since when did you start use Chantry dogma as proof? Seems this is a day of change. You, who before have been so quick to cry foul the moment "Chantry Scholar", "Revered Mother" or "Divine" was included as the author of the source. And now you use it to support your own view. I personally can't even find the codex entry specfically referring to Dumat teaching Blood Magic.

Aren't you the one who said that freeing the Circle would be "theft of Chantry property"? Also, the codex on the Old Gods states Dumat taught blood magic, so there's no consensus on the issue of who originally taught it.

I did say that. But since you won't ever be able to fathom that it was just a manner of speaking, we should probably leave it at that.

[LobselVith8]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Of course Isolde should have asked Jowan to see his credentials first.. Oh wait.. Isolde isn't a mage, how was she supposed to know Jowan wasn't trained?

In other words, this doesn't really support your argument because Jowan lacks training, and this scenerio wouldn't be applicable to one where trained mages would instruct pupils?

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

In a world with no cirlces (current Thedas), the parents ofa  mage child will now have to rely on their intuition when tehy hire a tutor for the mage child. How many more parents do you thik will end up hiring an untrained tutor?

The Chasind Wilders, the Avvar tribes, the Dalish, and even the morally bankrupt people of Haven don't send their mages to Circles, and have none in their own societies. The kingdom of Rivain doesn't send the seers or their witches to the Circle, and the tradition has lasted for over a milennia. Clearly, mages can be trained without the use of the Circle of Magi, as the protagonist Hawke and his sister Bethany were.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

And how do you know Jowan was an incomeptent tutor? Didn't you just defend him as a capable mage a page back? All of a sudden, now he is incompetent? Perhaps it is Conner who is an incompetent student.

Why are you comparing magical ability with training on how to instruct a student? They're not the same thing.

[LobselVith8]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Ah yes. However, that is actual hearsay. SOmething you have been quite quick to dismiss the validity of an entire entry. So I'm just gonna do the same, courtesy of you Lob, and say that entry is invalid. However, there are many actualy scientific (as scientific as it gets in Thedas anyway) entries, stating Blood Magic is taught by Fade entities. Hell we even got an entry in DA2 stating the very first lesson of Blood Magic ever being taught.

The intent wasn't to provide it's validity, it was to address that your claim that no lore states that demons didn't teach people was invalid. I already said there's no consensus on who originally taught blood magic, since it's discussed that it may have been the Old God Dumat, the Arlathan elves, or demons.

LobselVith8 wrote...

I did say that. But since you won't ever be able to fathom that it was just a manner of speaking, we should probably leave it at that.

You seem to have a strange way of trying to drop the issue of discussion when you seem to be trying to instigate an argument.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 10 mai 2011 - 08:59 .

[Silfren]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Had it not been Jowan, it would have been a maid. There are enough oppertunities to plant an assassin/spy within a Castle. Loghain says as much iirc.

ANd yet you blame the Circles for the entire incidence. You claim that it is their fault for planting the seed of fear within Isolde, and that it is their own fault that she didn't send Conner. First of all it is unreasonable to blame the Circle, becasue if they had known, they would have taken Conner, and wouldn't give a damn about Isolde's protests. Second of all, the fears of Isolde are her own. The Circle is not responsible for Isolde's own irrational fears, especially since she would be allowed to see Conner again.
It is simply wrong to blame the Circle for this incidence, since it had no direct influence on it. It has some indirect influences, sure. But to blame it for that, is just becasue you want to, and isn't based in reason or logic.

Redcliffe is the perfect example of what you want. Mages tutoring mages in the home of the apprentices in comfortable surroundings. Yet it goes horribly wrong.

No, I blame the way the Circle is run for the incident.  I've spelled it out several times.  You're just refusing to get it.  Let me try again.

In its present form at the time of Connor's possession, the Chantry requires that children be locked away in Circles against their parents will.  It is legal for the child to be forcibly taken from their parents, and henceforth parents are denied any legal right to see that child.  Moreover, a noble child forfeits their title and position.  It is within this environment that Isolde acted rashly in order to keep her child from being taken away from her.  I fail to see what "if they had known, they would have taken Connor, and wouldn't give a damn about Isolde's protests" is even meant by you to mean, since it's precisely my effing point.  Isolde's fears are in place because of established Chantry law.  It's not an irrational fear at all.  And that she might have been allowed to see Connor again is meta-gaming knowledge provided by the epilogue slide, and likely due to Arl Eamon's particular influence as a powerful arl.  We're given strong indicators otherwise that it's perfectly legal for the Chantry to deny parents any and all access to their children.  

If the Circle was an institution where Isolde could have sent Connor with no fear that she'd never see him again or that he'd forfeit rights to his father's name and title, it's rather likely that she would not have felt the need to keep his magical abilities secret.  I fail to see what's so hard to grasp about this, it just isn't that complicated.  Isolde's fear of losing her son is based directly on centuries of Chantry law.  

[Silfren]

[quote]Sylvianus wrote...
[quote]Rifneno wrote...


CQFD. It
does not even need to have discussions with them. Their contradictions
are hopeless.

You haven't even asked our ages.  Maybe
we're old and thus infallible, did you ever think of that?
[/quote]

Oh, i c wut u did there.

Modifié par Silfren, 10 mai 2011 - 09:25 .

[Deztyn]

Silfren wrote...

Deztyn wrote...

Finally, I think we see rather a lot of evidence in game suggesting that Elthina was willing to turn a blind eye to the abuses.  Endorsement does not have to be explicitly stated.

We have evidence of no such thing.

I'd planned on replying to you bit by bit, but this part right here just tells me there's no point.  We see time and again that Elthina is willing to disregard the suffering of mages in Kirkwall.  

"suffering of mages in Kirkwall" is not the same as "abuses"

Show me where Elthina turns a blind eye to abuse. Not your general hatred of the Circle and everything it does, actual abuse by the laws of the land. The rapes. The illegal tranquil. Were does Elthina acknowledge and turn a blind eye to this? Show me. Prove me wrong.

[Silfren]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

erilben wrote...

According to Lily, Irving is the one that signs it. "I saw the document on Greagoir's table. It authorized the Rite on Jowan, and Irving had signed it."

Oh snap!

erilben wrote...

Irving seems to be force into it though: "Greagoir says he has proof-- and eyewitness testimony-- that Jowan has been practicing blood magic. I cannot say more. Were it left to me, things might be different. But the Chantry... I'm sorry child. This Rite of Tranquility will happen." (There's a VO note-He's tired of the Chantry strong-arming the Circle around but he can do nothing about it.)

And once again, I was proven right. Thank you.

I'd thought it was inaccurate to say that Irving didn't sign the Rite of Tranquility for Jowan, but didn't say anything because I couldn't recall and didn't have a ready means at hand to find out.  But the point still stands that Irving didn't have much power in this situation.  Erilben's quote seems to bear this out, that Irving went along with things because he felt forced into doing so, which supports Lob's overall point, and seems to be the point Erilben's making as well.

[Sylvianus]

[quote]Silfren wrote...

[quote]Silvianus wrote...
[quote]Rifneno wrote...


CQFD. It
does not even need to have discussions with them. Their contradictions
are hopeless.[/quote]

You haven't even asked our ages.  Maybe
we're old and thus infallible, did you ever think of that?

Oh, i c
wut u did there.
[/quote]
You have
a
similar
view
to
that
of pro-Templar
. That's
what I
see.
Your opinion is
the most
extreme of
all those I saw,
with great contradictions,
with many flaws.
it's pointless
to talk to you.

Lobsell is the only one that has the consistency in
what he says.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 10 mai 2011 - 09:18 .

[Deztyn]

Lobs... I'm not going to do a line by line response to every post of mine you quoted.

Here's the important bits:

LobselVith8 wrote...

We only hear Andrastian mages referring to themselves as cursed, and even Andrastians themselves refer to magic as a curse (as Knight-Commanders Greagoir and Meredith do).

Which again, entirely ignores my point.

Mages are cursed.

They are cursed to be demon magnets.

Demons actively want to possess people and especially mages.

They will trick, coerce or outright control the minds of mages to achieve this.

Not all mages can resist.

This is not religious dogma.

This is a fact of magehood.

Knowing this, some are bound to think of themselves the same way Keili does.

No one said the situation wasn't bad for the casteless or the city elves. In fact, people have argued for supporting Bhelen as King because he gives the casteless freedoms and for Alistair as King because he places the Elder on the royal court, finally giving the city elves representation after centuries where they had none. However, this thread focuses on the plight of the mages.

"Firstly, we have seen not one shred of evidence that any other class of people in Thedas is subjected to similar treatment as mages, and given divine sanction to boot. " Part of the block of text I quoted and responded to. Silfren certainly seems to think that mages are special snowflakes and the injustices that face other people in Thedas should be ignored when talking about them.

And of course this from you: "Thedas on the whole doesn't seem to commit the Rite of Tranquility on civilians or ordering an genocide against entire populations of people simply for being who they are,"

You forgot to add "Unless they're City Elves."

The mages have some privleges that are afforded to them depending on the
respective Circle of Magi they are in, but they don't have rights..

How many times do I need to say that the Circles need some reforms overall, but none are as bad as Kirkwall? And yes, they do have some rights. That's why what Alrik is doing is illegal.

Modifié par Deztyn, 10 mai 2011 - 09:22 .

[Silfren]

[quote]Sylvianus wrote...

[quote]Silfren wrote...

[quote]Silvianus wrote...
[quote]Rifneno wrote...


CQFD. It
does not even need to have discussions with them. Their contradictions
are hopeless.[/quote]

You haven't even asked our ages.  Maybe
we're old and thus infallible, did you ever think of that?

Oh, i c
wut u did there.
[/quote]
You have a similar view to that of pro-Templar. That's what I see. Your opinion is the most extreme of all those I saw, with great contradictions, with many flaws.  it's pointless to talk to you.

Lobsell is the only one that has the consistency in what he says.

[/quote]

Not sure if you're replying to me or Rifneno, or both of us, but how have I been contradictory?  And your own argument is rather full of flaws.  Remember, you're the guy who thinks that not wanting to do your job is not a sign of corruption.

[Silfren]

Deztyn wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Deztyn wrote...

Finally, I think we see rather a lot of evidence in game suggesting that Elthina was willing to turn a blind eye to the abuses.  Endorsement does not have to be explicitly stated.

We have evidence of no such thing.

I'd planned on replying to you bit by bit, but this part right here just tells me there's no point.  We see time and again that Elthina is willing to disregard the suffering of mages in Kirkwall.  

"suffering of mages in Kirkwall" is not the same as "abuses"

Show me where Elthina turns a blind eye to abuse. Not your general hatred of the Circle and everything it does, actual abuse by the laws of the land. The rapes. The illegal tranquil. Were does Elthina acknowledge and turn a blind eye to this? Show me. Prove me wrong.

If Hawke can run around the Gallows and pick up on the abuse from just listening to people, I find it incredibly difficult to believe that the Grand Cleric couldn't have figured it out by the same means.  If she's that blind and deaf, then it's just more evidence that she's incompetent and needs to either step down or be removed.  Also, when Elthina states "I do not approve of the Knight Commander's methods," I take that to mean she's got a pretty good idea of how bad things are.  And if the Knight Commander's methods aren't illegal and/or don't constitute abuse, then why does Elthina not approve?

[Sylvianus]

[quote]Silfren wrote...

[quote]Sylvianus wrote...

[quote]Silfren wrote...

[quote]Silvianus wrote...
[quote]Rifneno wrote...


CQFD. It
does not even need to have discussions with them. Their contradictions
are hopeless.[/quote]

You haven't even asked your ages.  Maybe
we're old and thus infallible, did you ever think of that?

Oh, i c
wut u did there.
[/quote]
You have a similar view to that of pro-Templar. That's what I see. Your opinion is the most extreme of all those I saw, with great contradictions, with many flaws.  it's pointless to talk to you.

Lobsell is the only one that has the consistency in what he says.

[/quote]

Not sure if you're replying to me or Rifneno, or both of us, but how have I been contradictory?  And your own argument is rather full of flaws.  Remember, you're the guy who thinks that not wanting to do your job is not a sign of corruption.

[/quote]
Remember
i'm a bad guy
I'm not
talking
to children
Oh
yes,
I haven't even asked your ages
oops

kikoolol.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 10 mai 2011 - 09:28 .

[Beerfish]

Silfren wrote...

Redcliffe: An example of a child whose mother was so determined not to lose him to the Circle that she sought other means.  Would not have happened if she didn't have to worry about losing her son forever, or him not losing his title as heir to Redcliffe.  This is an argument in favor of having a system for training mages that does not involve tearing them away from their family.  

What?  You have here EXACTLY what you want.  A child, with his family, in a loving environment, with Mage training.  It 100% does not support what you suggest as the child, through no malice on his part still turned into a demon, with not involvment of the chantry or templars.  Mindboggling that out of all the incidents of mages gone wrong people still try and blame this one on the circle or the chantry.

Honnleath: I fail to see how this is an argument for or against the Circle, given the actual circumstances of that storyline.

Very easily, mage not in a circle, not being closely monitored, allowed to do what ever the heck he wants.....demon research.  And this is not some jerk apostate but a once trusted mage of the king.

Warden's Peak: The Wardens were in a desperate situation.  Not arguing whether Avernus was right or not, but still not seeing this as much of an argument for or against the Circle.

That excuse will always be used, desperate situation, AVernus was, so was Connor his dad was going to die, so was Orsino.  All of these situations whether malevolent or benevolent are because mages were desperate, it doesn't make it right.

Lake Calenhad: Easily argued to have been caused by the Circle's oppression to begin with, as the mages there wouldn't have been so eager to follow Uldred with his promises of being free from the Chantry if they had already been free. 

Once again a circle that buy most accounts was functiong well, had a majority of mages who accepted their lot and a bad apples cause total havok because they want to A) Act on behalf of all mages and Cannot control the dangers they meddle in.  is really the more important point, not the why but the result (which was a ton of innocent mabes being killed to go along with a bunch of templars and the resulting near call for annulment by Gregoire.


Kirkwall: The full extent of Orsino's involvement with Quentin is not clear.  But again you could easily argue that it is the oppressive nature of the Circle in general, and the especially brutal nature of Kirkwall in particular, that led to this.

The full extent is not clear except for the parts he totally admitted to including the cover up.  Blaming that kind of dangerous behaviour on the situation also doesn't wash because he goes bananas even if you have supported the mages through the whole game and stopped Meredith.  Now you can argue, he was driven to madness, that is fine, I have no problem with a person even saying that but it doesn't matter, these guys are walking time bombs that when they go nuts, for whatever reason it is a calamity.

Starkhaven: Decimus and Grace are indicated to have been criminally rogue, but it isn't exactly clear that they didn't turn out that way because of the oppressive nature of the Circle.  Even if it were true, and I quite agree that it is, that they were primarily interested in power for power's sake quite apart from their opinion on the Circle, even within this storyline you still have mages like Alain who were going along out of desperation and not having many other options available.

Guys like Alain and the templar dude Keran fall into line only after they have been caught and have no other choice.  Alain even indicates that the Starkhaven circle was much better than Kirkwall.  Think of how much damage Decimus and his crew could have done if not for the elite Hawke group?

Tarohne: She is the only example you've listed that actually does stand as evidence in favor of your argument.  None of the others are as straightforward in making your case as you think.

Agree, a lot of them are not straightforward but they are all sure not the fault of the Chantry or the templars which is the standard mantra.  And in the end it doesn't mater what their motives are.  All of those incidents prove that if mages are not tightly controlled very bad things can happen.  Massive damage when these incidents are up against tempalrs or guards or an elite Hawke or Warden team.  What do you think they could do roaming the country side against the average village.


That depends on your perspective.  I maintain that the institution of the Chantry has in large part created the very problem it claims to defend against.  Not in all cases, no.  But its practices are the perfect recipe for a self-fulfilling prophecy.  It looks for all the world like a racket set up to push mages into behaving badly in order to retro-justify their imprisonment.

Zero evidence and zero reason whey the chantry would do what you suggest.  Also for all the hate of the chantry, who is it that tries to help the poor, protect joe average citizen etc.  Like any large bureaucratic entity they fail in some important things, including their less than perfect handling of the templars and thus the mages but they are hardly the evil empire people make them out to be.

[Silfren]

Beerfish wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Redcliffe: An example of a child whose mother was so determined not to lose him to the Circle that she sought other means.  Would not have happened if she didn't have to worry about losing her son forever, or him not losing his title as heir to Redcliffe.  This is an argument in favor of having a system for training mages that does not involve tearing them away from their family.  

What?  You have here EXACTLY what you want.  A child, with his family, in a loving environment, with Mage training.  It 100% does not support what you suggest as the child, through no malice on his part still turned into a demon, with not involvment of the chantry or templars.  Mindboggling that out of all the incidents of mages gone wrong people still try and blame this one on the circle or the chantry.

Oh, for the love of Christ.  No, I don't.  What you have is a child who was half-ass trained in secret by a mage not fit to train him BECAUSE HIS MOTHER DIDN'T WANT THE BLOODY CIRCLE TO TAKE HIM AWAY FOREVER.  Were the Circles a place where he could have been sent to study without being permanently removed from his family, Isolde would not have felt the need to go to the drastic measures she did.  Likewise if she could have had access to properly trained mages who had been free to tutor the boy within his own home.  Cease and desist with trying to claim that what happened with Connor in Redcliffe was an example of what would happen under an ideal situation.  It was nothing of the sort.

I'm done wasting my time arguing with people who insist on this level of intellectual dishonesty.

Modifié par Silfren, 10 mai 2011 - 09:36 .

[Deztyn]

Silfren wrote...

Deztyn wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Deztyn wrote...

Finally, I think we see rather a lot of evidence in game suggesting that Elthina was willing to turn a blind eye to the abuses.  Endorsement does not have to be explicitly stated.

We have evidence of no such thing.

I'd planned on replying to you bit by bit, but this part right here just tells me there's no point.  We see time and again that Elthina is willing to disregard the suffering of mages in Kirkwall.  

"suffering of mages in Kirkwall" is not the same as "abuses"

Show me where Elthina turns a blind eye to abuse. Not your general hatred of the Circle and everything it does, actual abuse by the laws of the land. The rapes. The illegal tranquil. Were does Elthina acknowledge and turn a blind eye to this? Show me. Prove me wrong.

If Hawke can run around the Gallows and pick up on the abuse from just listening to people, I find it incredibly difficult to believe that the Grand Cleric couldn't have figured it out by the same means.  If she's that blind and deaf, then it's just more evidence that she's incompetent and needs to either step down or be removed.  Also, when Elthina states "I do not approve of the Knight Commander's methods," I take that to mean she's got a pretty good idea of how bad things are.  And if the Knight Commander's methods aren't illegal and/or don't constitute abuse, then why does Elthina not approve?

So in other words we have no evidence that Elthina knows anything about the rapes and illegal tranquil and is just turning a blind eye to it. You're assuming it because the game mechanics ensure that Hawke hears everything about everyone within .05 seconds of meeting them. (Unless it's for dramatic effect.)  Her disapproval could easily be a response to Meredith's generally oppressive (but legal) methods rather than the illegal actions of the Templars under her command.

[KnightofPhoenix]

If Elthina does not realize what is happening in the course of 7 years, while apparently everyone in Kirkwall does (hence the sympathy with mages), then Elthina should really, *really*, just retire and take a vacation.

Turning a blind eye to abuses, I could understand in terms of expedience and necessity. But not even knowing? That's worse.

[Rifneno]

[quote]Deztyn wrote...


Again. I was referring to mages fearing themselves and the very real threat of losing their minds to a demon. And a system that successfully replaces the Circles will require taking children away from their parents. Some parents are likely to not want that, even if it's not a permanent separation, and are probably even less likely to comply with an organization that doesn't have the spiritual authority of the Chantry and military authority of the Templars.
[/quote]

I still don't buy the "they HAVE to steal children!" stuff.

[quote]
The rape is illegal. The tranquiling for little to no reason is illegal. The locking people in little rooms with no light is after Meredith goes loony in what is already the worst of the Circles. Mages can get permission to marry. They can get permission to leave. Kirkwall shouldn't be the standard we use to judge everything a Circle is or could be. It's the ultimate worst case scenario on all sides of the conflict.
[/quote]

We don't know how long the tiny room with no light thing was going on.  And the law means little when no one bothers to enforce it.  Elthina knew Meredith was breaking both Chantry and civil law left and right and she did absolutely nothing.  So maybe it's just Elthina?  Nope.  We get Leliana, the only Chantry member that we know doesn't suck... and what does she do?  She blames the mages and threatens the city with a crusade.  WTF!

[quote]
Of course it's bad, but is it bad by the standards of Thedas? The commoner humans, the elves, the casteless, the grey wardens, they all live in a world of full of bad. I'd like things to be better all around, but if we reinvent the entire society from the ground up we're not talking about the world of Dragon Age anymore.
[/quote]

And?  It's okay to let horrific things happen if there's other horrific things happening?  Should we let drunk drivers off the hook because there's murderers out there?

[quote]
I have a problem talking about Meredith's character post-Boom. I can never decide how much crazy should be pinned on her shiny sword. She starts as a strict woman, who's paranoid but right. (There was a conspiracy. There were blood mages in the Gallows.) Ends up... well... look shiny sword!

Innocent certainly isn't a word I'd use to describe her. But I'm not willing to blame her for everything her subordinates do either.
[/quote]

Thrask says flat out that Karras is one of Meredith's clique.  Yes, I do blame her for his actions because given what a goddamn monster she is I flat out refuse to believe the two monsters bonded over their love of mint tea and not oppression and abuse.

There were blood mages even in Ferelden's "wonderful" Circle.  Quite a few of them from the looks of it.  Even the Chantry admits blood magic isn't inherently evil.  Regardless, a conspiracy doesn't retro-justify (thanks for that word, Silfren!) her atrocities.  There's a conspiracy BECAUSE she's a monster, not the other way around.

[quote]
Not completely isolated. No. But I was pointing out that most of the outright abuse we hear about in game is attributed to them. Equating all templars to those two is as bad as thinking all mages are Huan or Denarius. Templars aren't evil by default. Just like mages aren't. But there's guaranteed to be a few bastards among them simply because they're people.[/quote]

True most of the abuse we see is attributed to them, but how many named templars do we meet?

[quote]
We don't know what's included in that order. "Look at all this (manufactured) evidence of this woman dealing with demons, consorting with Resolutionists and sacrificing innocent kittens to false gods. We must take steps to limit the danger." Or just "Tranquil her now please so I can sex her up. Kthx." I suspect it's something like the first.
[/quote]

Doesn't make much difference really.  If his superiors don't bother to verify anything, they're still guilty.

[quote]
I never took away from the conversation that Cullen approves of the Tranquil Solution. The Solution is about making every last mage tranquil. Cullen never seems to support this. But he does make it clear he supports the existence and use of the Right of Tranquility.[/quote]

When asked if he supports it he avoids answering the question and says "there's an argument to be made for applying the use of tranquility more widely" and then indignantly adds, "but many mages have shown they view the ritual as no better then death; they want no controls on them at all."  Apparently not wanting to have your soul stolen is the same thing as not wanting any controls on them at all.

Seriously, I want to muderknife Cullen.

[quote]
Violent reform will be difficult in a culture that still revers Andraste and the Maker. With mages at the head of such a revolution a new Imperium is almost a given if they win.
[/quote]

People's morals on things like slavery are in very large part based on the society they were raised in.  These mages grew up in a society that condemns slavery and I'm fairly certain most of them will retain that standard.  Unless you mean simply that mages will end up ruling.  That's a possibility, if authorities fight tooth and nail to deny them their rights and they're forced to take their authority away.  That's MUCH better than the current system of Chantry rule though.  I view Chantry rule as only slightly better than the Imperium really.

[quote]
Well I know Alistair was free to leave whenever he wanted-- wait. No. He had to be conscripted by Duncan. Templars on a whole are locked in from the moment they take their vows and start taking Lyrium. Poor templars, victims of the Chantry.

And Ines the botanist didn't seem to be on a mission to save the world from darkspawn. Neither was Wilhem. Mages can and do get permission to leave the Circle and to be married. Wilhem even had kids.
And again. Some reforms were needed. But legally restricting a class of people who can blow things up with their minds or become abominations is not objectively evil.
[/quote]

Since a single isolated case is compelling proof, I'd like to note that after Best Served Cold, Keran can be found in Lowtown saying he's left the Order until Meredith is gone.

[quote]
Mages do have rights. And they're supposed to have a First Enchanter who can work with the Knight-Commander to see that their rights aren't being trampled on. Kirkwall fails as much do to Orsino's incompetence as it does from Meredith's.
[/quote]

You mean the guy who was afraid to leave the Gallows in Act 3 because he was afraid Meredith would use "you weren't here, so you must've been with them" as a reason to punish him with Thrask's rebels?  Somehow I doubt he had all that much power.


[quote]Silfren wrote...

Oh, i c wut u did there.
[/quote]

I don't see it.  I lost my glasses when I got up to get more prune juice.  Ran over 7 more kids on the way to pick it up, but it doesn't matter because I'm old and infallible.


On a related note, Emp is a geth trolling you guys to learn more about us.  True story.

[quote]
I'm done wasting my time arguing with people who insist on this level of intellectual dishonesty.[/quote]

Modifié par Rifneno, 10 mai 2011 - 09:49 .

[Silfren]

Deztyn wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Deztyn wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Deztyn wrote...

Finally, I think we see rather a lot of evidence in game suggesting that Elthina was willing to turn a blind eye to the abuses.  Endorsement does not have to be explicitly stated.

We have evidence of no such thing.

I'd planned on replying to you bit by bit, but this part right here just tells me there's no point.  We see time and again that Elthina is willing to disregard the suffering of mages in Kirkwall.  

"suffering of mages in Kirkwall" is not the same as "abuses"

Show me where Elthina turns a blind eye to abuse. Not your general hatred of the Circle and everything it does, actual abuse by the laws of the land. The rapes. The illegal tranquil. Were does Elthina acknowledge and turn a blind eye to this? Show me. Prove me wrong.

If Hawke can run around the Gallows and pick up on the abuse from just listening to people, I find it incredibly difficult to believe that the Grand Cleric couldn't have figured it out by the same means.  If she's that blind and deaf, then it's just more evidence that she's incompetent and needs to either step down or be removed.  Also, when Elthina states "I do not approve of the Knight Commander's methods," I take that to mean she's got a pretty good idea of how bad things are.  And if the Knight Commander's methods aren't illegal and/or don't constitute abuse, then why does Elthina not approve?

So in other words we have no evidence that Elthina knows anything about the rapes and illegal tranquil and is just turning a blind eye to it. You're assuming it because the game mechanics ensure that Hawke hears everything about everyone within .05 seconds of meeting them. (Unless it's for dramatic effect.)  Her disapproval could easily be a response to Meredith's generally oppressive (but legal) methods rather than the illegal actions of the Templars under her command.

If you want to dismiss it as nothing more than game mechanics, that's up to you.  I don't.  And even so, I still would find it very difficult to believe that the Grand Cleric could have utterly no clue about the things going on around her for the seven years we see. Either way, if she disapproves, why the hell doesn't she step in to do something?  Oh, wait, because getting the Knight Commander to be less oppressive equates to taking sides and that would be bad for Kirkwall.  Oh, and it's the Maker's job, too, rather than hers.

[Rifneno]

Silfren wrote...

If you want to dismiss it as nothing more than game mechanics, that's up to you.  I don't.  And even so, I still would find it very difficult to believe that the Grand Cleric could have utterly no clue about the things going on around her for the seven years we see. Either way, if she disapproves, why the hell doesn't she step in to do something?  Oh, wait, because getting the Knight Commander to be less oppressive equates to taking sides and that would be bad for Kirkwall.  Oh, and it's the Maker's job, too, rather than hers.

You know what would be great?  If on the Faith quest where she pleads with Hawke to go handle the seeker, sarcastic Hawke could tell her "but I cannot take sides!" and "if it is the Maker's will..." and all that crap she uses.

[Silfren]

Rifneno wrote...

Silfren wrote...

If you want to dismiss it as nothing more than game mechanics, that's up to you.  I don't.  And even so, I still would find it very difficult to believe that the Grand Cleric could have utterly no clue about the things going on around her for the seven years we see. Either way, if she disapproves, why the hell doesn't she step in to do something?  Oh, wait, because getting the Knight Commander to be less oppressive equates to taking sides and that would be bad for Kirkwall.  Oh, and it's the Maker's job, too, rather than hers.

You know what would be great?  If on the Faith quest where she pleads with Hawke to go handle the seeker, sarcastic Hawke could tell her "but I cannot take sides!" and "if it is the Maker's will..." and all that crap she uses.

Yup.  It'd be doubly worth it for the look of horror I'd get from Sebastian.

The quote that keeps floating around in my head is "The only thing necessary for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing."  Neutrality is not a laudable trait in the face of abuse.  You don't have to be actively involved in the abuse--if you're permitting it to go on through a steadfast refusal to do anything, you're just as guilty.

[Ryzaki]

Silfren wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

Silfren wrote...

If you want to dismiss it as nothing more than game mechanics, that's up to you.  I don't.  And even so, I still would find it very difficult to believe that the Grand Cleric could have utterly no clue about the things going on around her for the seven years we see. Either way, if she disapproves, why the hell doesn't she step in to do something?  Oh, wait, because getting the Knight Commander to be less oppressive equates to taking sides and that would be bad for Kirkwall.  Oh, and it's the Maker's job, too, rather than hers.

You know what would be great?  If on the Faith quest where she pleads with Hawke to go handle the seeker, sarcastic Hawke could tell her "but I cannot take sides!" and "if it is the Maker's will..." and all that crap she uses.

Yup.  It'd be doubly worth it for the look of horror I'd get from Sebastian.

The quote that keeps floating around in my head is "The only thing necessary for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing."  Neutrality is not a laudable trait in the face of abuse.  You don't have to be actively involved in the abuse--if you're permitting it to go on through a steadfast refusal to do anything, you're just as guilty.

As a neutral person I find that ridculous. 

Elthina is guilty because it was her job to make sure that abuse wasn't happening. 

To blame someone else though for another's actions? That's idiocy. 

[LobselVith8]

Deztyn wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

We only hear Andrastian mages referring to themselves as cursed, and even Andrastians themselves refer to magic as a curse (as Knight-Commanders Greagoir and Meredith do).

Which again, entirely ignores my point.

Mages are cursed.

Your opinion isn't shared by the other cultures that don't share the Andrastian's view on mages. The Dalish don't view mages as cursed and believe all their ancestors held magical ability during the time of Arlathan. Based on what we know, the Chasind and Avvar appear to hold the same attitudes towards the mages that the Dalish do. These cultures don't see mages as cursed.

Deztyn wrote...

They are cursed to be demon magnets.

Demons actively want to possess people and especially mages.

They will trick, coerce or outright control the minds of mages to achieve this.

Making an opinion and then stating facts after giving your opinion doesn't mean your opinion is factual. Not everyone adheres to the mindset that mages are cursed, and while mages need to be properly instructed to handle demons, it doesn't mean they are cursed. It's important to note that it's Andrastians who are the only people to refer to mages as cursed, while we know other cultures embrace magic.

Deztyn wrote...

Not all mages can resist.

This is not religious dogma.

This is a fact of magehood.

It's not a fact that mages are cursed, it's a point of view that's pushed by the Chantry of Andraste. Mages have power, and they need to learn to use their abilities responsibly, but that doesn't mean they are cursed. It's the Chantry's dogma that mages are cursed, which we hear from Andrastians again and again in Origins and DA2.

Deztyn wrote...

Knowing this, some are bound to think of themselves the same way Keili does.

Keili thinks that way because of what the Chantry teaches people about mages.

Deztyn wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

No one said the situation wasn't bad for the casteless or the city elves. In fact, people have argued for supporting Bhelen as King because he gives the casteless freedoms and for Alistair as King because he places the Elder on the royal court, finally giving the city elves representation after centuries where they had none. However, this thread focuses on the plight of the mages.

"Firstly, we have seen not one shred of evidence that any other class of people in Thedas is subjected to similar treatment as mages, and given divine sanction to boot. " Part of the block of text I quoted and responded to. Silfren certainly seems to think that mages are special snowflakes and the injustices that face other people in Thedas should be ignored when talking about them.

Silfren doesn't seem to be saying that at all. She (I'm presuming so based on the avatar) is simply addressing the mages are treated a specific way because they are mages - i.e. viewed as cursed because of religious docturine. However, Silfren isn't dismissing the inequalities faced by the casteless or the city elves when she specifically addresses that mages are forced to live in a dictatorship and are viewed as cursed by Andrastians. The way the mages are treated is specifically different than how the city elves or the casteless are treated, and the Chantry isn't trying to control the casteless, the city elves, or the impoverished people in the same manner that they are controlling the mages through their templars.

Deztyn wrote...

And of course this from you: "Thedas on the whole doesn't seem to commit the Rite of Tranquility on civilians or ordering an genocide against entire populations of people simply for being who they are,"

You forgot to add "Unless they're City Elves."

Technically, Arl Howe used the "death" of Vaughan to justify the purge of the Alienage, while Meredith ordered the Right of Annulment against the Circle of Kirkwall because of what a known apostate did. I think that purging the Alienage is monstrous, though, and fortunately Howe (and Vaughan) perish.

Deztyn wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

The mages have some privleges that are afforded to them depending on the respective Circle of Magi they are in, but they don't have rights..

How many times do I need to say that the Circles need some reforms overall, but none are as bad as Kirkwall? And yes, they do have some rights. That's why what Alrik is doing is illegal.

The Chantry controlled Circles are no more, because the mages emancipated themselves from the Chantry and the templars.