1927 réponses à ce sujet

[IanPolaris]

Elusive Melody wrote...

I think I've mentioned this somewhere else before, but Anders reminds me a lot of John Brown [American History], and there is a lot of debate on whether John Brown is justified in the things he did to free the slaves. Hero or villain? Who knows.

The difference is that John Brown did not incite a Civil War....not even his raid on Harper's Ferry did that.  It contributed to what would become the Civil War but did not cause it.  Ander's act was the proximate and immediate cause of the war....but psychologically, I see the similiarities.

Even after Ander's acts, if Meridith doesn't call for an ILLEGAL Rite of Annulment, there still could have been peace, but Anders knew his KC Meridith's all too well....better quite honesty than perhaps anyone else in the game, Hawke included.

Meridith never had any intendtion of seeking justice for her "good friend" Elthina.  She just wanted any excuse to kill all mages,and Anders unlike everyone else understood that.

-Polaris

[Darth Krytie]

IanPolaris wrote...

Elusive Melody wrote...

I think I've mentioned this somewhere else before, but Anders reminds me a lot of John Brown [American History], and there is a lot of debate on whether John Brown is justified in the things he did to free the slaves. Hero or villain? Who knows.

The difference is that John Brown did not incite a Civil War....not even his raid on Harper's Ferry did that.  It contributed to what would become the Civil War but did not cause it.  Ander's act was the proximate and immediate cause of the war....but psychologically, I see the similiarities.

Even after Ander's acts, if Meridith doesn't call for an ILLEGAL Rite of Annulment, there still could have been peace, but Anders knew his KC Meridith's all too well....better quite honesty than perhaps anyone else in the game, Hawke included.

Meridith never had any intendtion of seeking justice for her "good friend" Elthina.  She just wanted any excuse to kill all mages,and Anders unlike everyone else understood that.

-Polaris

It's quite clear, to me at least, that she would have called for the Rite for another reason if Anders hadn't acted in the manner he did.

[David Gaider]

IanPolaris wrote...
if Meridith doesn't call for an ILLEGAL Rite of Annulment, there still could have been peace

Sorry-- how is Meredith's invocation illegal, exactly?

[LobselVith8]

Vormaerin wrote...

But don't know what the new rules regime will be like.   I doubt it will be "go whereever you want, do whatever you like".   It might be more tolerable to be ordered around by Danarius than it is by Greagoire, but that's not automatically the case.

I'm not arguing for anarchy here, nor am I advocating for a slaver like Danarius. I'm thinking more along the lines of someone like First Enchanter Irving, who thanked the Warden for freeing them from "their shackles" when he asked for the Magi boon instead of a title or riches. I'm looking at the scenerio as the Circles maintaining their sovereignty instead of the Andrastian nations falling into anarchy.

[Vormaerin]

ddv.rsa wrote...

But would governing themselves be enough for the mages at this point? Now that it's come to open war, I can see them being satisfied with nothing less than the same rights anyone else has.

Which is what, exactly?  The rights of an Orlesian freeman?  The rights of a Tevinter Magister?  Of an Antivan townsman?  The rights of the King of Fereldan?

[Camenae]

I have a question for you, Mr. Gaider, if you please. Can you tell me if it's supposed to be the "Right" of Annulment or the "Rite" of Annulment? I've seen people use it both ways and interchangeably, but I really want to know for sure, because for me the nuance makes a big difference.

[Darth Krytie]

David Gaider wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...
if Meridith doesn't call for an ILLEGAL Rite of Annulment, there still could have been peace

Sorry-- how is Meredith's invocation illegal, exactly?

I'm fairly certain it's due to an assumption that only the Grand Cleric can invoke it.

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

IanPolaris wrote...

It's our emotions that define how and why we makes our choices.  Without emotions we have no more freewill than a programmed computer.  I have always said this and the game play and lore seems to bear me out on this.

I'm not convinced that the RoT functions exactly like this, or that Tranquil are as driveless as you think. There is a Tranquil in DA:O for instance who is hiding from the abominations in Broken Circle, hiding without instruction I might add, and IIRC he asks the PC to keep his/her voice down as he has no desire to die.

That's not the action of a mindless drone that only does what its told, but a creature that wants to keep living (or at least doesn't want to die). A computer wouldn't care if you took a sledgehammer to it.

BTW, Lob as made the argument that all mages are slaves.  I have not.  I restrict the slavery argument to tranquil.

Humm. I was positive it was you. I apologise for my statement in that case; I was clearly wrong.

[LobselVith8]

David Gaider wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...
if Meridith doesn't call for an ILLEGAL Rite of Annulment, there still could have been peace

Sorry-- how is Meredith's invocation illegal, exactly?

I think Ian was looking at it from the scenerio of a former Grey Warden making an attack against the Kirkwall Chantry to Meredith ordering for the the Circle of Kirkwall to be annulled and doing nothing about the former Grey Warden standing in front of her.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 03 avril 2011 - 06:52 .

[ddv.rsa]

David Gaider wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...
if Meridith doesn't call for an ILLEGAL Rite of Annulment, there still could have been peace

Sorry-- how is Meredith's invocation illegal, exactly?

Essentially, there is the argument that since she isn't the Grand Cleric, she doesn't have the right to order annulment.

[Vormaerin]

LobselVith8 wrote...

I'm not arguing for anarchy here, nor am I advocating for a slaver like Danarius. I'm thinking more along the lines of someone like First Enchanter Irving, who thanked the Warden for freeing them from "their shackles" when he asked for the Magi boon instead of a title or riches. I'm looking at the scenerio as the Circles maintaining their sovereignty instead of the Andrastian nations falling into anarchy.

Right, but the point is that Irving and Greagoire already had a Circle working in pretty good order.   If the Circle system is execrable because the KC might end up being Meredith, how is it better if the First Enchanter might end up Danarius? 

[IanPolaris]

ddv.rsa wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

ddv.rsa wrote...

You mean remain confined to their towers, but under their own control? 

I was thinking along the terms of the Magi boon, where the ruler of Ferelden said that the mages have earned the right to govern themselves, and would be given the Tower, except for the remaining twelve Circles (since both the Circle at Starkhaven and Kirkwall appear to be lost).

But would governing themselves be enough for the mages at this point? Now that it's come to open war, I can see them being satisfied with nothing less than the same rights anyone else has.

Both sides need to come to a happy medium.  The Templars/Chantry need to understand that mages can't be treated as "dangerous weapons" but must be treated as living breathing human beings with real feelings with the right (and responsibility!) of bein judged by what they do with the Maker's gift instead of being condemned for what they are (and the acts of an evil empire long gone).

Likewise the mages need to understand (and I think deep down most do) that magic without regulation is dangrous to everyone (mages included especially) and with special gifts have to come special concessions.  Once such is likely to be phylacterys and registration for all those with magical talent....along with mandatory (and approved) training.

In any event the Chantry can not be permited to monopolize both magic and the ability to counter magic any longer.

I think all this will happen (and I think Fereldan will set the example).  It won't happen before a lot of blood is spilled along the way, however.

-Polaris

[Mnemnosyne]

IanPolaris wrote...

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

I'm sorry but that doesn't fly.  You can not remove a person's emotions and therefor their desire to be free (or even potential desire to be free) and then say that they are free not to obey.  Tranquil must obey unless told explicitly by higher authority not to because the emotional context that permits freewill is removed.  Calling tranquil free is a bitter joke.  They are as free to disobey as your IPod....and that makes them slaves.

-Polaris

How the hell you equate removing magic powers and the capacity for emotion to removing free will is beyond me.

But you've been arguing about this since long before DA2. <_< I'm amazed you've finally conceded mages aren't slaves.

Gold star to Gaider.

It's our emotions that define how and why we makes our choices.  Without emotions we have no more freewill than a programmed computer.  I have always said this and the game play and lore seems to bear me out on this.

BTW, Lob as made the argument that all mages are slaves.  I have not.  I restrict the slavery argument to tranquil.

-Polaris

I don't really concur that free will requires emotions.  However, the process of becoming tranquil seems to take more than just emotions - it seems to stifle any creativity or original thought, so a tranquil mage seems unlikely to ever question their situation in the first place.  Unless someone comes along and specifically asks, 'do you really want to be here?  Are there other places you would be more productive, comfortable, etc?' they seem unlikely to ever think of those questions themselves.  So even if they are capable of making those decisions, they may never occur to the tranquil mage.

They clearly have preferences and can experience discomfort, as Owain says 'I would prefer not to die' for instance, and one of the other tranquil in the Circle tower comments 'that was an uncomfortable experience' or something close.  So they do seem capable of preferring to leave if the situation is appropriate.

The problem then is that they are likely never told that they should choose what they prefer to be doing.  A tranquil mage would probably excel at any crafting task as well as many administrative tasks, so they could certainly find a way to make themselves useful, productive, and successful outside of the Circle.  It would merely require them to be presented with the option, and to prefer to do something other than work at the Circle.

[David Gaider]

IanPolaris wrote...
I'm sorry but that doesn't fly.  You can not remove a person's emotions and therefor their desire to be free (or even potential desire to be free) and then say that they are free not to obey.  Tranquil must obey unless told explicitly by higher authority not to because the emotional context that permits freewill is removed.  Calling tranquil free is a bitter joke.  They are as free to disobey as your IPod....and that makes them slaves.

If you wish. You're the one who claimed they were forced to stay-- I'm simply telling you they're not. They're free to go, and some in fact do if there's a logical place for them elsewhere (which is rare). They're certainly not blind to the fact that the world would not welcome them. I'm also not sure how you equate the loss of emotion with the loss of free will. If the Tranquil saw a reason not to follow an order, they would do so. They are not automotons.

Modifié par David Gaider, 03 avril 2011 - 06:55 .

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

Darth Krytie wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...
if Meridith doesn't call for an ILLEGAL Rite of Annulment, there still could have been peace

Sorry-- how is Meredith's invocation illegal, exactly?

I'm fairly certain it's due to an assumption that only the Grand Cleric can invoke it.

Correct.

From the Rite of Annulment Codex Entry:

Divine Galatea, responding to the catastrophe in Nevarra and hoping to prevent further incidents, granted all the Grand Clerics of the Chantry the power to purge a Circle entirely if they rule it irredeemable. This Rite of Annulment has been performed 17 times in the last 700 years.

In Meredith's case the Grand Cleric for Kirkwall had just been murdered. Still, Cullen didn't seem to think it was her place to invoke the Rite without someone higher authorising it.

[Lucy Glitter]

I just had to respond to this when I read it.

IanPolaris wrote...
So frankly, I find this response rather pathethic at best.

-Polaris

HI. SORRY. I DON'T BELIEVE YOU HAVE MET DAVID GAIDER. THE LEAD WRITER AND CREATOR OF THE DRAGON AGE UNIVERSE.

PRETTY SURE WHAT HE SAYS GOES 'CAUSE YOUKNOW. HE MADE IT UP. WITH HIS BAND OF BADASS WRITERS AND STUFF.

[IanPolaris]

David Gaider wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...
if Meridith doesn't call for an ILLEGAL Rite of Annulment, there still could have been peace

Sorry-- how is Meredith's invocation illegal, exactly?

Meridith is not a member of the Chantry Clergy and certainly not the Grand Cleric.  She had no more right to declare a Right of Annulment than KCGregoire did (under far more dire conditions).  She was obligated to seek permission from Divine Justina in absence of a local Grand Cleric, 

If Templars are permitted to engage in Rites of Annulment as they see fite without oversight, then there is no limit to the Templar power at all (including coercing mages to help the Templars take over the Chantry).

-Polaris

Modifié par IanPolaris, 03 avril 2011 - 06:55 .

[ddv.rsa]

IanPolaris wrote...

Both sides need to come to a happy medium.  The Templars/Chantry need to understand that mages can't be treated as "dangerous weapons" but must be treated as living breathing human beings with real feelings with the right (and responsibility!) of bein judged by what they do with the Maker's gift instead of being condemned for what they are (and the acts of an evil empire long gone).

Likewise the mages need to understand (and I think deep down most do) that magic without regulation is dangrous to everyone (mages included especially) and with special gifts have to come special concessions.  Once such is likely to be phylacterys and registration for all those with magical talent....along with mandatory (and approved) training.

In any event the Chantry can not be permited to monopolize both magic and the ability to counter magic any longer.

I think all this will happen (and I think Fereldan will set the example).  It won't happen before a lot of blood is spilled along the way, however.

-Polaris

An evil empire long gone? The Imperium is still alive and well.

[LobselVith8]

Vormaerin wrote...

Right, but the point is that Irving and Greagoire already had a Circle working in pretty good order.   If the Circle system is execrable because the KC might end up being Meredith, how is it better if the First Enchanter might end up Danarius? 

And how is allowing a religious institution that preaches that mages are cursed (a word we repeatedly hear in the Magi Origin and even from the Knight-Commander herself) better than mages governing themselves?

[KnightofPhoenix]

I have to say I am happy that David Gaider came in and refuted the "all mages are slaves" myth.

[David Gaider]

IanPolaris wrote...
Meridith is not a member of the Chantry Clergy and certainly not the Grand Cleric.  She had no more right to declare a Right of Annulment than KCGregoire did (under far more dire conditions).  She was obligated to seek permission from Divine Justina in absence of a local Grand Cleric,

And you decided this when, exactly?

A Knight-Commander is second-in-command next to the Grand Cleric. With Elthina's death, Meredith was legally in command of the Kirkwall Chantry-- such as it was, and certainly in the absence of any ranking Revered Mother or the Divine herself. Cullen's objection was not that her invocation of the Rite was illegal, it was that it was unjustified.

Modifié par David Gaider, 03 avril 2011 - 07:00 .

[Mnemnosyne]

Vormaerin wrote...

ddv.rsa wrote...

But would governing themselves be enough for the mages at this point? Now that it's come to open war, I can see them being satisfied with nothing less than the same rights anyone else has.

Which is what, exactly?  The rights of an Orlesian freeman?  The rights of a Tevinter Magister?  Of an Antivan townsman?  The rights of the King of Fereldan?

My answer would be: Yes, to all of those (except Tevinter Magister I suppose since that's a position specifically mage-related).  If a man is born an Orlesian freeman and also happens to have magic, then he has the rights of an Orlesian freeman.  If he's born an Antivan townsman, then he has the rights of an Antivan townsman.  And if he's the son of the King of Ferelden, then he has the rights of the Prince of Ferelden.

[Camenae]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I have to say I am happy that David Gaider came in and refuted the "all mages are slaves" myth.

+1.

[ddv.rsa]

Thanks for clearing that up!

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

Koyasha wrote...

I don't really concur that free will requires emotions.  However, the process of becoming tranquil seems to take more than just emotions - it seems to stifle any creativity or original thought, so a tranquil mage seems unlikely to ever question their situation in the first place.  Unless someone comes along and specifically asks, 'do you really want to be here?  Are there other places you would be more productive, comfortable, etc?' they seem unlikely to ever think of those questions themselves.  So even if they are capable of making those decisions, they may never occur to the tranquil mage.

I would like to question the claims that Tranquil can't/don't reflect on their position with this Codex entry: Journal of the Tranquil.

Also, without creativity I'm dubious that the Formari would have ever been able to discover how to create half the magical items/runes/mabari they do.