1072 réponses à ce sujet

[TJPags]

IanPolaris wrote...

TJPags wrote...

This is a fantasy world.  It has its own laws, its own rules, and, from what I see, nowhere in those rules is there a concept that people in general, or mages in particular, have any type of "basic human rights".

Maybe they should, and I'm not saying they shouldn't.  But arguing that they do, and that those rights are being violated, seems incredibly out of place in this particular world.

That's fine up to a point.  Writers in fantasy have (and will continue to I'm sure) use fantasy analogs to discuss moral issues where the moral PoV of the reader will be dissimiliar to the moral conventional wisdom in the world.  However, that is generally done to make a point.  It is naive to say the least to assume that a player who lives in a modern 21st century world will NOT use 21st centural morals applied to the fantasy game he or she is playing.  Given that, it should come as no suprise at almost everyone (at least this is what I was told based on the internet feedback) in DAO picked mages.  The answer is not to belittle the players for having a 'soft' 21st century attitude of enitlement (and DG did use almost precisely those words) and beat the player over the head with "Mages betray you and do evil blood magic all over, hurr, hurr, which is a fair summary of Act III in DA2).  That doesn't change one iota that fact that Meridith is ordering the slaughter of an entire group of people for what they did even when it is clear they are innocent of the crime that triggered the event!

What did the Devs expect?

-Polaris

Or, people can accept the world the writers have created - in this case, one in which people apparently do not accept the concept of "basic human rights"

What you're trying to do is impose your beliefs on the world of Thedas.  And while I can certainly appreciate your beliefs - I honestly don't think you and I are that different, in that regard - I can't accept those beliefs as imposed on this world.

It's not the 21st Century, its not western culture, its 9:30 (or whatever) Dragon on Thedas.

[IanPolaris]

Nashiktal wrote...

I have to say Ian, that rogue with the poison was a unique situation. The Qunari are not seen much outside the north, and even then I doubt they leave their poison barrels around willy nilly like Arishok did. (Which he explains why he did)

That rogue was in a right place right time situation to do the damage she did. A mage doesn't need  a place or time to massacre a city.

Really?  I wasn't talking about that scene actually but it does illustrate my point nicely.  There was NO magic involved and yet dozens of people were horribly killed and an entire district was destroyed.  In theory this is something that ANYONE could do, so we should lock away everyone.  That is the same logic.

-Polris

[Camenae]

earl of the north wrote...

In the DA world...

Casteless Dwarfs are born with no rights and are considered less than animals by the other Dwarfs.
City Elves are born as second class citizens.
Tevinter slaves are born with no rights (or are enslaved).
Qunari are assigned their role in life and must conform to the will of the Qun.
Mages are born with powers that are both a gift (magical powers) and a curse (threat of possession throughout their lives)

Those are just the facts of the DA world, according to the people who actually invented the DA world and I would like the opportunity to change those facts through future DA games

I agree.

And this is also the reason I do not really understand the argument that mages should have the same rights as "everybody else."  Because for the DA world, someone having "everybody else's" rights would make me go, "what rights?"   

[Tainan7509]

Laws are broken. Human create Laws and so they are broken.
Laws are not perfect. Human create laws and so they are not perfect.

[AshenEndymion]

LobselVith8 wrote...

AshenEndemion wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

The guilty party (Anders) confessed.

My god.  You are absolutely right.  Anders confessed, so there is no possible way anyone could have helped him.  To think that someone could have helped him is clearly beyond the scope of reason, because Anders confessed to doing it.

Not-guilty of a crime is not the same as innocent of a crime....

There is someone who could have helped him. That person's name is Hawke.

And if Hawke chooses not to help (or even if he chooses to help him), Anders sought help from no one else?  Anders says no.  Belief in his statement does not mean it's true.  Only that it's possible he's telling the truth.

Lack of proof of guilt(ie Not Guilty) =/= innocence.

Modifié par AshenEndemion, 09 avril 2011 - 06:53 .

[Nashiktal]

Something I can definitely agree on is the change in attitude the Templars need. The mages need a place of sanctuary and nurture, a place where they can be properly taught to control their powers, to learn the dangers of ALL the magic. They need to be properly taught about what blood magic does, as to not breed that forbidden fruit curiosity.

When a mage is taken by an abomination there should be mourning for the mage, as well as all those who were killed by the demon.

Alas this war between the mages and templars are unlikely to breed any good will with anyone.

[AngryFrozenWater]

AshenEndemion wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

AshenEndemion wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

The mages were innocent of the crime Anders committed.

Are they?  You have proof they had no involvment?  Not-guilty is not the same as innocent....

The guilty party (Anders) confessed.

My god.  You are absolutely right.  Anders confessed, so there is no possible way anyone could have helped him.  To think that someone could have helped him is clearly beyond the scope of reason, because Anders confessed to doing it.

Not-guilty of a crime is not the same as innocent of a crime....

Hawke helped him by distracting the grand cleric. And she was a rogue.

Edit: That means all rogues are dangerous and should be locked up. Anyone did the same as a warrior? The number of people needed to be locked up is rapidly increasing.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 09 avril 2011 - 06:57 .

[IanPolaris]

TJPags wrote...

Or, people can accept the world the writers have created - in this case, one in which people apparently do not accept the concept of "basic human rights"

That is fine as long as the Devs understand that the game is played by people who DO accept the concept of human rights and use that tension as a dramatic foil.  There are far too many examples (good and bad) in fiction to count.

What you're trying to do is impose your beliefs on the world of Thedas.  And while I can certainly appreciate your beliefs - I honestly don't think you and I are that different, in that regard - I can't accept those beliefs as imposed on this world.

It's not the 21st Century, its not western culture, its 9:30 (or whatever) Dragon on Thedas.

What I am trying to say is you can not expect people to play the game and not have a Western Moral attitude and then belittle them for playing the game with that attitude (or not understand why).  That's where the line gets crossed.  It's one thing for an author to write about an authoritarian system (esp as a moral foil).  It's quite another when he (apparently) starts to believe what he writes in that regard.

That's my real point such as it is.

-Polaris

[The Angry One]

IanPolaris wrote...

That is fine as long as the Devs understand that the game is played by people who DO accept the concept of human rights and use that tension as a dramatic foil.  There are far too many examples (good and bad) in fiction to count.

And?
That doesn't mean that the game world has to follow these concepts.

[Paeyne]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Paeyne wrote...

I am sorry Polaris but this is extremely dismissive.

One wonders why you post on boards at all if you dismiss a person's opinion so readily.

Your statement also implies that because people are equally innocent they are equally dangerous which is patently untrue.

An exploding kitten and a regular kitten may be equally innocent but they are by no means equally dangerous.

But the discussion is a continuation to what was said on page 11. Some people take issue with the idea that Gaider responded to a comment that mages were innocent of the crime Anders committed and confessed to by saying that mages are only innocent of being mages of the Circle and can explode.

Much of the conversation has evolved since then, concerning the rights of mages and the Templar system.

[IanPolaris]

AshenEndemion wrote...

Lack of proof of guilt(ie Not Guilty) =/= innocence.

Not Guilty is not Guilty Though.  At no time does Meridith even hint that she believes the circle was involved or that either Anders or Orisino are lying.  She's like  a spoiled little girl who now finally gets to indulge in her most ardent desire:  Slaughter all mages.  Justice is the furthest thing from her mind and you see it clearly in the scene.

-Polaris

[AshenEndymion]

IanPolaris wrote...

AshenEndemion wrote...

Lack of proof of guilt(ie Not Guilty) =/= innocence.

Not Guilty is not Guilty Though.

You're right.  OJ didn't kill his wife....

[IanPolaris]

The Angry One wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

That is fine as long as the Devs understand that the game is played by people who DO accept the concept of human rights and use that tension as a dramatic foil.  There are far too many examples (good and bad) in fiction to count.

And?
That doesn't mean that the game world has to follow these concepts.

Perhaps not, but it also doesn't mean that the Devs should belittle or even by suprised by those people who do when they play in that world.

-Polaris

[TJPags]

IanPolaris wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Or, people can accept the world the writers have created - in this case, one in which people apparently do not accept the concept of "basic human rights"

That is fine as long as the Devs understand that the game is played by people who DO accept the concept of human rights and use that tension as a dramatic foil.  There are far too many examples (good and bad) in fiction to count.

What you're trying to do is impose your beliefs on the world of Thedas.  And while I can certainly appreciate your beliefs - I honestly don't think you and I are that different, in that regard - I can't accept those beliefs as imposed on this world.

It's not the 21st Century, its not western culture, its 9:30 (or whatever) Dragon on Thedas.

What I am trying to say is you can not expect people to play the game and not have a Western Moral attitude and then belittle them for playing the game with that attitude (or not understand why).  That's where the line gets crossed.  It's one thing for an author to write about an authoritarian system (esp as a moral foil).  It's quite another when he (apparently) starts to believe what he writes in that regard.

That's my real point such as it is.

-Polaris

Well, that's fine and all.

But making arguments such as "mages are being deprived of basic rights" is meaningless in the DA world.  You can certainly say that you feel how they are treated is wrong, but you can't go on to say that its wrong because their basic rights are violated, when in this world, there is no such thing.

[IanPolaris]

AshenEndemion wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

AshenEndemion wrote...

Lack of proof of guilt(ie Not Guilty) =/= innocence.

Not Guilty is not Guilty Though.

You're right.  OJ didn't kill his wife....

According to the law he did not.  He had his day in court and was found not-guilty.  I don't believe the verdict was correct either, but it is what it is.  Otherwise you descend into vigalante justice.

-Polaris

[Nashiktal]

Tainan7509 wrote...

Laws are broken. Human create Laws and so they are broken.
Laws are not perfect. Human create laws and so they are not perfect.

I do not agree with this, at least not entirely. The Qunari have their own culture, in which they are perfectly happy in following. (Barring the usual exceptions of "the grass is greener on the other side" like with the mercenary Qunari, and Saemus.)

If you were born in the Qunari lands, or in the dwarven lands, you would see these occurances as right, and proper. Thats just the way things are. Its just their culture.

Perhaps in some country far away, video games are thought of as a terrible practice and should be eliminated. So they come over to your home and start preaching to you to stop because it is "wrong." Should you change because it is wrong? You probably wouldn't, because your culture, the way you live, says that playing videogames is perfectly acceptable.

[IanPolaris]

TJPags wrote...

Well, that's fine and all.

But making arguments such as "mages are being deprived of basic rights" is meaningless in the DA world.  You can certainly say that you feel how they are treated is wrong, but you can't go on to say that its wrong because their basic rights are violated, when in this world, there is no such thing.

Read Hume and Locke.  People have intrinsic rights as human beings.  The world or govt type can't give or take away such rights.  If you are humans than you have certain intrinsic rights.  If you accept mages as human beings then they have the right not to be punished for what they are any more than any oher human being (or elf, dwaf, Quanri, etc in Thedas).  That's what natural or human rights mean be it in the US, Zimbabwe, or Thedas.

-Polaris

[stobie]

The real world doesn't have to deal with babies that, by the age of 4, can set someone on fire by pointing a finger, so those references have some pretty obvious limitations. (I'm thinking of Young Wynne setting a boy on fire - though she did sound justified enough.) Since very young children are taken to the chantry, magic must be evident early. So this game is dealing with a 'what if' that can't be fully equated with our systems. However, how you treat people is the same, and how you make your own decisions is the same. Otherwise, it would be a pretty dull game. Laws are ultimately circumstantial & evolving.

[AshenEndymion]

IanPolaris wrote...

AshenEndemion wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

AshenEndemion wrote...

Lack of proof of guilt(ie Not Guilty) =/= innocence.

Not Guilty is not Guilty Though.

You're right.  OJ didn't kill his wife....

According to the law he did not.  He had his day in court and was found not-guilty.  I don't believe the verdict was correct either, but it is what it is.  Otherwise you descend into vigalante justice.

-Polaris

And this is the problem...

Because the Right of Annulment was legal, it was determined that the mages ARE guilty.  The Right of Annulment, in essence, is a guilty verdict that the Circle is so corrupted it is beyond saving.

[Nashiktal]

IanPolaris wrote...

AshenEndemion wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

AshenEndemion wrote...

Lack of proof of guilt(ie Not Guilty) =/= innocence.

Not Guilty is not Guilty Though.

You're right.  OJ didn't kill his wife....

According to the law he did not.  He had his day in court and was found not-guilty.  I don't believe the verdict was correct either, but it is what it is.  Otherwise you descend into vigalante justice.

-Polaris

Isn't that what the templar is doing though? Following the laws of their day?

[The Angry One]

IanPolaris wrote...

Perhaps not, but it also doesn't mean that the Devs should belittle or even by suprised by those people who do when they play in that world.

-Polaris

And where has Gaider said he's surprised by this?
Hell, the writers have said that they assumed most people would side with the mages (the way the game portrays 99% of mages as fiends notwithstanding) so they're obviously aware about how real life society values freedom.

At the same time, saying that all mages are not entirely innocent in the world of Thedas is a simple fact.
Innocence implies harmlessness. They are NOT harmless and they can't be left on their own, without guidance they'll fall to demons. You can debate that the kind of guidance the Chantry imposes is wrong but in the world as written SOME guidance is needed.

[AshenEndymion]

IanPolaris wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Well, that's fine and all.

But making arguments such as "mages are being deprived of basic rights" is meaningless in the DA world.  You can certainly say that you feel how they are treated is wrong, but you can't go on to say that its wrong because their basic rights are violated, when in this world, there is no such thing.

Read Hume and Locke.  People have intrinsic rights as human beings.  The world or govt type can't give or take away such rights.  If you are humans than you have certain intrinsic rights.  If you accept mages as human beings then they have the right not to be punished for what they are any more than any oher human being (or elf, dwaf, Quanri, etc in Thedas).  That's what natural or human rights mean be it in the US, Zimbabwe, or Thedas.

-Polaris

I don't recall Hume and Locke being people in Thedas... Are they in a codex somewhere?

If they don't exist in the world, you cannot claim their ideas hold any value in the world.  Because their ideas never existed there.

[TJPags]

IanPolaris wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Well, that's fine and all.

But making arguments such as "mages are being deprived of basic rights" is meaningless in the DA world.  You can certainly say that you feel how they are treated is wrong, but you can't go on to say that its wrong because their basic rights are violated, when in this world, there is no such thing.

Read Hume and Locke.  People have intrinsic rights as human beings.  The world or govt type can't give or take away such rights.  If you are humans than you have certain intrinsic rights.  If you accept mages as human beings then they have the right not to be punished for what they are any more than any oher human being (or elf, dwaf, Quanri, etc in Thedas).  That's what natural or human rights mean be it in the US, Zimbabwe, or Thedas.

-Polaris

But they don't exist in Thedas, that concept doesn't exist in Thedas, you can't impose it on Thedas.  It's simply not true for that world.  This is not the US, or Zimbabwe - it is Thedas, and those rules don't exist here.

[IanPolaris]

AshenEndemion wrote...
And this is the problem...

Because the Right of Annulment was legal, it was determined that the mages ARE guilty.  The Right of Annulment, in essence, is a guilty verdict that the Circle is so corrupted it is beyond saving.

No.  The mages were not guilty.  Even Cullen objects to the use of the Right in this case.  However, what Meridith did was (apparently) legal albeit just barely especially since she already asked the Divine for a ruling.  It think it's very clear (no matter what the Divine thinks about magic) that the Divine would have many sharp, smoking hot, and very pointed discucussions with Meridith about the abuse of her authority.....had Meridith lived.

That's the probem.  The fact that such power legally fell into the hands of a clear fruitloop with NO oversight and NO determination (or even attempt) of true guilt just makes the Chantry (and Templars) look even worse.

-Polaris

[AshenEndymion]

IanPolaris wrote...

AshenEndemion wrote...
And this is the problem...

Because the Right of Annulment was legal, it was determined that the mages ARE guilty.  The Right of Annulment, in essence, is a guilty verdict that the Circle is so corrupted it is beyond saving.

No.  The mages were not guilty.  Even Cullen objects to the use of the Right in this case.  However, what Meridith did was (apparently) legal albeit just barely especially since she already asked the Divine for a ruling.  It think it's very clear (no matter what the Divine thinks about magic) that the Divine would have many sharp, smoking hot, and very pointed discucussions with Meridith about the abuse of her authority.....had Meridith lived.

That's the probem.  The fact that such power legally fell into the hands of a clear fruitloop with NO oversight and NO determination (or even attempt) of true guilt just makes the Chantry (and Templars) look even worse.

-Polaris

Cullen thinks the punishment is extreme.  Not the finding of guilt.

Whether one thinks the mages are truly guilty is a matter for the player.  If your Hawke agrees, he tends to side with the Templars.  If not, he tends to side with the mages.

Guilt or innocence in midieval times was rather one-sided and "unjust."  You honestly think that there were appeals when someone was found guilty of a crime that carried the punishment of death back then?  That's why countries changed to the way they are today.  But you must remember that this world is NOT Thedas.  And the rules of this world do NOT apply.

Modifié par AshenEndemion, 09 avril 2011 - 07:15 .