66 réponses à ce sujet

[Shadowrun1177]

Andronic0s wrote...

You are not looking at the big picture.

Lets assume a mage becomes King in thedas, what advantage does he has over a regular king? None his powers of perception, ability to reason, empathy etc are the same regardless of magical power. So the world is not missing anything in this way.

Now assume said Mage-King is possesed by a demon of pride, and assume the demon is succesfull in remaining hidden, so we have a pride demon in command of a kingdom, he could start a war with a negihbour and none would be the wiser as long as there is an excuse, or decide to go "Free" the mages in his kingdom and then turn them into abominations to help him further his cause of earthly domination, etc 

There is nothing to gain by giving the mages political power and everything to lose, a mage can still help the common man by setting up healing centres, create magical items to aid struggling communities etc.

I'm not seeing "the big picture", I could say the same thing as you. Again your basically saying the same thing as the Chantry which is all a bunch of big "if's" and there is no way to know for sure it would happen. Anyone be they mundane or mage can abuse power, yes I think mages should be trained and taught to control their Maker given gift, but to strip them of their families and what that may come with, and humanity again this is my opinion cause most mundanes seem to see mages as monsters or crused at the very least thanks to the Chantry.

Also I could counter that a mage who has been properly trained to resist demons could be a great and just ruler. To assume just cause someone is a mage they are unfit to rule is wrong. 

Modifié par Shadowrun1177, 04 avril 2011 - 12:08 .

[WhiteKnyght]

I think all of Thedas is better off being "Chantry free", not just the mages.

[NvVanity]

Right here goes my proposal.

1) How do the mages replace the financial subsidies of the Chantry
system?   Right now, mages are fed, housed, clothed, and trained at
Church expense with pretty limited duties.  Where does the money come
from without the Chantry?

The Formarri are currently the "merchants" of the Circle system. An expansion of that system around the nation the Circle is in could provide the needed currency. By selling potions to customers in need, providing healing services for a price and assuming that a Chantry free Circle won't abduct children who show magic powers, tutors could be paid for by nobles and wealthy residents who would prefer not having to send their child away. Of course necessary inspection of who would be the tutor would be undertaken to avoid letting a blood mage teach somebody like Jowan.

2) Who provides physical protection for the mages, which the templars are supposed to do?

I suppose some form of "New Templar" order would be formed under Circle supervision. Their job would be to guard mages, hunt apostates and deal with any demons and abominations. Tevinter could probably provide the means to training Templars as they do have them.

3) Do they have a Harrowing?  Rites of Tranquility?  Who deals with renegades and abominations if not the Templars?

There would still be a Harrowing to ensure the Mage can resist demons. The Rite would stil exist for trouble makers as a severe punishment, one that isn't given casually like the Kirkwall Circle. As for renegade and abominations the "New Templar Order' as I suggested above would deal with it along with perhaps Mages who have experience with fighting demons and can probably assist without being possessed or switching sides.

4)
What is their relationship to the political powers now that the Church
doesn't protect them from the lords and kings?  Or are they the lords
and kings now?  What about the mage fearing peasantry?

Their relation to political powers would be a servile one. Ferelden, Orlais, Antiva, etc would need Mages in the army to help fight other nations or darkspawn or Qunari.  They would be expected to obey the law of the land and if not those in power have the right to punish the member of the Circle who broke the law or the Circle could handle judgement themselves.

Mage fearing peasantry would be tolerated. Attempts could be made to convince them of the good intentions of the Circle. If the peasants react violently perhaps the Circle could take an isolationist stance on villages that have a strong dislike of them.

5) How do they find the neophyte mages?  How are they recruited for training?

Same way as before. The parents or someone reports them to the Circle. An emissary would be sent to meet with the parents and talk about the child's future. The child could either go to the Circle for training or if the parents can afford it the child could be tutored at home. If the parents are rather adamant about not wanting their child to go but can't afford it a deal could possibly be made. Such as a farmer could supply bread to the Circle to pay off the debt of having a mage tutor his or her child.

6)
Who governs the mages?   If First Enchanter, what can the mages do if
that First Enchanter turns out to be Danarius instead of Irving?   Who
can you appeal to without the Chantry overseeing the Templars
(theoretically)?

There would be a supreme council governing the Magi. If the First Enchanter is abusing their power then outside assistance or the Senior Enchanters may arrest the First Enchanter. To appeal the supreme council would be written to which would be made up of various Senior Enchanters from each Circle with the many fraternities having a voice in the council for fairness.

Thats my basic idea for it. If you have any questions or criticisms of it feel free to point them out and i'll do my best to answer.

[Talladarr]

IanPolaris wrote...

Honestly, I think the heads of state take over all/most of the functions you mention since the proper regulation and education of mages is very clearly in the public interest. As for funds, voluntary tranquil could do a lot, and magic can do a lot of things on a commercial basis (such as healing that are difficult to impossible to do otherwise which should offset much of the cost.

As for Templars, the Chantry monopoly on Templar Training needs to end, and a combine Mage-Knighthood (Mage Hunters) needs to be established (again likely by the crown) to regulate and enforce magical law. Such members would likely include BOTH mages and (ex)-Templars or at least warriors with Templar training. Branches of this order would include a branch for the registration (using phylacteries) and education (in bording schools at first phasing it out as the public learned to accept magic as the Maker's Gift) and enforcement branche (to hunt down abominations, magical criminals,and illegal/unsanctioned magic including unsanctioned bloodmagic). Many magica members in the highly elite enforcement branch likely *would* be bloodmages themselves (and carefully selected and watched) explicitly to control dangerous but useful/powerful bloodmagic.

Finally ths order would provide needed magical support for the King's army.

Anyhoo, just my take.

-Polaris

I agree in principal, for the most part, but the hunting down of "illegal" mages would be abolished. As long as the mages are well trained and can control their magic they should be free to do as they wish(within the laws of course).Apostates as they are now shouldn't matter because they'd be exercising their rites of freedom. The only cases where they should be force ably kept there should be when they are un-trained or under suspicion of illegal blood magic. Phylacteries should be used ONLY when a KNOWN ILLEGAL blood Mage is being hunted.

[Vormaerin]

NvVanity wrote...

Right here goes my proposal.


Thats my basic idea for it. If you have any questions or criticisms of it feel free to point them out and i'll do my best to answer.

Fairly reasonable, but it doesn't address the issue of how the rest of the world would react.   An expansion of the Formarri would necessarily hurt the income of existing craftsmen and the lords who derive income from them.   Are the arls and banns, whose lives seem to revolve around beating each other up and keeping the king from getting too uppity, really be comfortable with a fortress of mages with their own military living nearby?

I think the biggest problem is the idea of wizards staying with their families.  Arl Connor is clearly at a great advantage over the other lords, because he's got magic and they don't.   Consider a noble family like the Hawke-Amells.  You don't think that having the father and and two of three children being powerful wizards would upset the balance of power in a political struggle?   Even if the Amells 'won' by non magical means, surely the lords they beat would scream "evil magics!" at the drop of a hat.

Even if Anders' self serving tripe about not knowing any wizards who want to rule the world was true, how do you keep the wizards from getting totally entangled in politics by blood or coin?   And if those with magical power at their disposal consistently rise to the top, how does that differ from an actual mage coup?

Modifié par Vormaerin, 04 avril 2011 - 12:50 .

[Andronic0s]

Shadowrun1177 wrote...


I'm not seeing "the big picture", I could say the same thing as you. Again your basically saying the same thing as the Chantry which is all a bunch of big "if's" and there is no way to know for sure it would happen. Anyone be they mundane or mage can abuse power, yes I think mages should be trained and taught to control their Maker given gift, but to strip them of their families and what that may come with, and humanity again this is my opinion cause most mundanes seem to see mages as monsters or crused at the very least thanks to the Chantry.

Also I could counter that a mage who has been properly trained to resist demons could be a great and just ruler. To assume just cause someone is a mage they are unfit to rule is wrong. 

I agree with most of what you say but you seem to ignore the fact that higly competent and experienced mages have very easily turned to blood magic/demonic possesion when pressed (Orsino, 99.9% of the Kirkwall circle, Merrill) would a mage in power not do the same when his position is treathened? Presumably this is the cause of the troubles in tevinter, the chantry there functions exactly like what you describe (according to Fenris on one of his dialogues) and it was unable to stop the Magisters from devolving to the use of blood magic again. 

You seem to asume mages are regular humans, but the fact is that they are not, the rights of man exist under the fundation that we are all created equal, but in the world of thedas some are not equal (I'm not saying they are not humans or that they are not without rights, just that they are different) 

[Plaintiff]

Andronic0s wrote...

Shadowrun1177 wrote...


I'm not seeing "the big picture", I could say the same thing as you. Again your basically saying the same thing as the Chantry which is all a bunch of big "if's" and there is no way to know for sure it would happen. Anyone be they mundane or mage can abuse power, yes I think mages should be trained and taught to control their Maker given gift, but to strip them of their families and what that may come with, and humanity again this is my opinion cause most mundanes seem to see mages as monsters or crused at the very least thanks to the Chantry.

Also I could counter that a mage who has been properly trained to resist demons could be a great and just ruler. To assume just cause someone is a mage they are unfit to rule is wrong. 

I agree with most of what you say but you seem to ignore the fact that higly competent and experienced mages have very easily turned to blood magic/demonic possesion when pressed (Orsino, 99.9% of the Kirkwall circle, Merrill) would a mage in power not do the same when his position is treathened? Presumably this is the cause of the troubles in tevinter, the chantry there functions exactly like what you describe (according to Fenris on one of his dialogues) and it was unable to stop the Magisters from devolving to the use of blood magic again. 

You seem to asume mages are regular humans, but the fact is that they are not, the rights of man exist under the fundation that we are all created equal, but in the world of thedas some are not equal (I'm not saying they are not humans or that they are not without rights, just that they are different) 

Human's aren't created equal anyway. Some are taller, stronger, smarter, more attractive than others. We all have certain talents, advantages and disadvantages. Magic is just another talent., and it has potential for abuse same as any other.

[Shadowrun1177]

Andronic0s wrote...

I agree with most of what you say but you seem to ignore the fact that higly competent and experienced mages have very easily turned to blood magic/demonic possesion when pressed (Orsino, 99.9% of the Kirkwall circle, Merrill) would a mage in power not do the same when his position is treathened? Presumably this is the cause of the troubles in tevinter, the chantry there functions exactly like what you describe (according to Fenris on one of his dialogues) and it was unable to stop the Magisters from devolving to the use of blood magic again. 

You seem to asume mages are regular humans, but the fact is that they are not, the rights of man exist under the fundation that we are all created equal, but in the world of thedas some are not equal (I'm not saying they are not humans or that they are not without rights, just that they are different) 

Then why doesn't the Chantry force itself on the Warden's. The First Warden could easily be a mage as well as a mundane person as far as we know. Wouldn't a mage First Warden who leads all the Wardens in Thedas be as vulnerable to demons as your average circle or apostate mage, heck even more so when you think that Wardens allow blood magic and demon summoning under their anything it takes to win policy. I don't know who the First Warden is exactly and I'm not sure if Bioware has ever said or if a mage is even forbidden from being the First Warden.

If the First Warden can be a mage or mundane and that group seems to do alright under said leadership if it's a mage then why not give the benefit of the doubt to other mages who are say trained under a revised non-prison Circle. Again I don't know exactly who the First Warden is or even if the Wardens forbid a mage from being First Warden which I doubt, when one is chosen or how ever a new First Warden comes to lead.

 

[Andronic0s]

Well I just found out that the Wardens tried to turn over Anders for becoming an "abomination" when he joined with Justice, so it seems the Wardens are not willing to risk harbouring abominations.
Who knows perhaps a deal was cut between a very desperate chantry and the wardens during a blight so that they tolerate warden blood mages but draw the line at actual possesions, it is not stated anywhere so we can not know for sure, though it seems to indicate the Wardens are given a lenient hand because their are needed to fight a greater theat

As for Plaintiff comment, humans might not be clones but they all have the same potential, mages operate on a different powerscale than John Doe

Modifié par Andronic0s, 04 avril 2011 - 02:28 .

[Vormaerin]

Its commented that there are very few mage Gray Wardens. IIRC, its a selling point when Anders tries to get Stroud to accept Bethany as a GW. Also, its pretty obvious the Chantry isn't at all keen about apostates in the Wardens, given how they grouse about Anders in awakenings.

[NvVanity]

Vormaerin wrote...

NvVanity wrote...

Right here goes my proposal.


Thats my basic idea for it. If you have any questions or criticisms of it feel free to point them out and i'll do my best to answer.

Fairly reasonable, but it doesn't address the issue of how the rest of the world would react.   An expansion of the Formarri would necessarily hurt the income of existing craftsmen and the lords who derive income from them.   Are the arls and banns, whose lives seem to revolve around beating each other up and keeping the king from getting too uppity, really be comfortable with a fortress of mages with their own military living nearby?

I think the biggest problem is the idea of wizards staying with their families.  Arl Connor is clearly at a great advantage over the other lords, because he's got magic and they don't.   Consider a noble family like the Hawke-Amells.  You don't think that having the father and and two of three children being powerful wizards would upset the balance of power in a political struggle?   Even if the Amells 'won' by non magical means, surely the lords they beat would scream "evil magics!" at the drop of a hat.

Even if Anders' self serving tripe about not knowing any wizards who want to rule the world was true, how do you keep the wizards from getting totally entangled in politics by blood or coin?   And if those with magical power at their disposal consistently rise to the top, how does that differ from an actual mage coup?

There's multiple ways that could be handled. Either the noble mage children can't be allowed to succeed their parent for that position or if they are the Circle has a Grey Warden like neutrality stance when it comes to politics only coming in when the entire nation is in danger.

Plus a mage Arl or Bann would give negative attention to them from anti-mage peasants. It could go both ways the only way to really tell what happens is whatever the writing staff goes with.

[Mnemnosyne]

One of the key factors in my view of any non-chantry controlled Circles would be the responsible teaching of all types of magic, and ceasing to spread blatantly false fearmongering about a particular school of magic.  Specifically blood magic.

Using unwilling sacrifices to fuel your magic would most likely be illegal (this basically falls under the same laws as any other form of assault on a person) and using magic to control another's mind would be equally illegal, but blood magic in itself - using blood instead of mana to fuel spells, using the various blood magic combat spells, and so on - would all be normal and accepted forms of magical study.

The only section of magic that seems to carry inherent risks is demon summoning - an overambitious mage can accidentally tear the veil with demon summoning and wind up with a situation like Warden's Keep, so any magic that has the potential to tear the veil would be heavily regulated - could only be practiced in specific, relatively remote locations, with an ample amount of oversight to make sure a mage doesn't get too overambitious.

[Camenae]

No system is going to be perfect. One is always going to be able to poke holes in any alternative system that anyone can come up with. If one just sits around waiting for the perfect system to come around, one would never get anything done.

People have a lot of good ideas here that no doubt will have flaws once implemented. That always happens. But if things are better than under the old system, then the new system would be a success. However, I'm not saying a successful system never need to be improved upon...

But if one just sits there and says, oh well, THAT won't work...Well, sometimes inaction is the best thing to do, but a lot of times, it isn't.

[LadyBri]

I think the Chantry, like any organized religion, is something that just causes unnecessary problems for everyone. I like the idea of the templars, because even as a mage supporter I can agree that having a unit to help with corrupt mages is a good idea. But, maybe they can answer to local governments and not the Chantry.

The Chantry criminalizes mages for simply being born, which is unfair and lead to so much trouble. Mages are punished for something they can't help before they even get a chance to potentially choose evil. There has to be a better way, and I think that first step would involve removing the Chantry from the equation. Between mages, and the treatment of elves throughout history, the Chantry has a lot to answer for and they are responsible for most of the prejudice, discrimination, and overall tensions in Thedas.

[Vormaerin]

Camenae wrote...

But if one just sits there and says, oh well, THAT won't work...Well, sometimes inaction is the best thing to do, but a lot of times, it isn't.

Lots of things will work.  I'm not saying there isn't an alternative to the Chantry control.  That's obviously silly.  But I think a lot of the "Chantry control is bad" people are making light of the difficulties involved in the alternatives.   Since we primarily see the Circles from the eyes of anti Circle people like Morrigan and Anders (people tend to discount Wynne's views for some reason) and Kirkwall was so obviously dysfunctional, the default thinking seems to be "anything is better than the Church."   I bet a certain amount of real world religious antipathy factors in, too.

I started this thread because in other arguments people kept saying  "OMG, its'll just better because there is no chantry".   I think that's total BS.   Perhaps its because I play a lot of Ars Magica, which is an RPG where balancing the lives of mages vs the issues of peasants, lords, and priests are an important factor, I just don't accept the idea that just getting rid of the Chantry solves all the problems.

Human beings are corrupt.  Religious organizations don't have any stranglehold on corruption.   Saying the King of Fereldan is the guarantor of the Circle doesn't mean that suddenly mages are free citizens with happy lives. 

Many people try to say that the 'live free or die' types like Anders will suddenly be content with a Circle existance if only there were no Templars.   I think they'd run away anyway.  If you stop them, how exactly is that system less oppressive than the current one?  If you don't stop them, how are you avoiding a magical free for all with every lord hiring court wizards and competing in a magical arms race?  

I'm just tired of black and white scenarios that don't pass the smell test unless you have roses shoved up your nose.

[LobselVith8]

AshenEndemion wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

The Gallows is on an island. How are civilians going to reach the mages, who are locked inside a prison with armed guard? Are you arguing that the templars are incapable of protecting the mages?

Oh sure, a good majority of Templars will.  But all it takes is one Templar who dispises what Anders did, and agrees that all mages should pay.  It only took one mage to blow up the Chantry.  It will only take one Templar to turn his back.

And regardless of what the mages do to defend themselves, or how the civiilians get in, if a mage kills a civilian, it will only enrage the general population further, prompting more attacks and more deaths, until the Circle is Annulled, or the city is destroyed.  The former would happen long before the latter.  Annuling the circle immediately following Anders' action prevents all those future deaths within Kirkwall.

So it's preferrable to commit genocide against innocent people instead of protecting them?

AshenEndemion wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Why is it bull? Meredith called for the Rite of Annulment. She says "As Knight-Commander of Kirkwall, I hereby invoke the Rite of Annulment. Every mage in the Circle is to be executed - immediately!" It's only due to the direct involvement of Knight-Captain Cullen that three mages are even spared.

Because a fourth is garaunteed if Hawke is a mage (or Bethany survived to this point).  A fifth if Merril is on good terms with Hawke.  They do not die because of Cullen's involvment.  That mages survived because of a Templars involvement does not automatically mean that only those specific mages survived period.  I would argue that because a single templar had a change of heart about the order(Knight Captain Cullen, no less), it could be that more templars had a change of heart about the order, and also allowed mages to survive.

I don't address Bethany or Merrill because they depend on what Hawke does - they're not guarenteed to survive in all circumstances. In regards to the actual mages outside of Hawke's inner circle, only three are spared because of Cullen's involvement, and you're suggesting that templars would actively disobey orders to spare mages from getting killed. Survivors are only mentioned in the mage ending:

From the Mage ending: "Word of the slaughter spread quickly. The Champion's name became a rallying cry, a reminder that the mighty templars could be defied. He had defended the mages against a brutal injustice, and many lived to tell the tale. The Circles rose up and set the world on fire."

From the Templar ending: "Word of the slaughter spread quickly. The Champion's name became a rallying cry for all mages, a reminder of their brutal oppression. He had shown not only what the templars were willing to do, but that they could be defied.  The Circles rose up and set the world on fire."

AshenEndemion wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

You could argue that, but since the Kirkwall Circle is only standing Circle Tower in the Free Marches (with the burning of the Starkhaven Circle Tower), I don't see why that would be the case.

This implies that every mage from Starkhaven went to Kirkwall.  They could have gone to Nevarra or escaped to Tivinter.  It also implies that there were child mages in Starkhaven, which would be unprovable (if we base it on "didn't see it, didn't happen").

Since we know there are children in the Ferelden Circle, what makes you think there are no children in the only Circle in the Free Marches?

[earl of the north]

I'd retain the circle system with some changes....increased autonomy for the first enchanter, increased number of smaller circles per kingdom (specialising in healing, crafting etc) and the establishment of circle communities (based around the circles) where the families of circle mages could be established in like minded communities.......oh and no circles based on hellmouths.

I'd retain the Templars but reform them into three parts (based on the Kotor Jedi)...

Templar Guardians: Charged with guarding and protecting the various Circle of Magi, I'd allow kinship bonds (recruit heavily from non-mages related to the circle mages) and encourage this group to act in effect as a community police force maintaining order (no blood magic etc) and ensuring that this group would be seen as friendly by the mage population rather than prison warders.

Templar Inquistion: Charged with hunting rogue mages/abominations and investigating rumours of blood mage cults, dragon cults etc.

Basically a group for the real hard liners who handle the necessary 'wet work' when mages go bad or become dangerous to the wider community.

Templar Judicials: Mixed force of trusted mages and Templar trained warriors/rogues who would provide oversite for the circles, guardians and inquistion ensuring the rules were kept by all.....sort of like the ME spectres except working in squads instead of individuals.

Edit: Mages wouldn't be totally free, they would have to be trained by the circles as children (although their families would be allowed to maintain contact) and once graduated they would have to either live in one of the circle communties, join an official organisation or noble household.

Edit: I forgot the circle council....nine members with three mages, three templar (one from each group) & three chantry.

Modifié par earl of the north, 04 avril 2011 - 10:53 .