133 réponses à ce sujet

[Benchmark]

Schattenkeil wrote...

No, but I would sacrifice myself to unleash a demon onto my enemies. This may cause colleteral damage, depending on how far the demon gets, but that's circumstancial. The templars taken down by the demon will not kill one of my own anymore, and some more will be distracted getting the demon under control.

Then let me give you another example.

You have a bomb in you that you can set off at any time. It is a very powerful bomb. I know this and I trust you not to ever use it. One day on vacation you come back to your hotel room to find a thief. He draws a knife and backs you into a corner, fully intent on killing you. You decide to "take him with you" and blow up the hotel.

I get to pull 70 innocent bodies of vacationing families out of the rubble. I get to comfort their loved ones by telling them you were "backed in a corner" and "under stress". I get to live with the guilt of letting you run around and trusting you to never set off that bomb.

Welcome to Templar/Mage relationships 101.

[sphinxess]

Benchmark wrote...

Schattenkeil wrote...

No, but I would sacrifice myself to unleash a demon onto my enemies. This may cause colleteral damage, depending on how far the demon gets, but that's circumstancial. The templars taken down by the demon will not kill one of my own anymore, and some more will be distracted getting the demon under control.

Then let me give you another example.

You have a bomb in you that you can set off at any time. It is a very powerful bomb. I know this and I trust you not to ever use it. One day on vacation you come back to your hotel room to find a thief. He draws a knife and backs you into a corner, fully intent on killing you. You decide to "take him with you" and blow up the hotel.

I get to pull 70 innocent bodies of vacationing families out of the rubble. I get to comfort their loved ones by telling them you were "backed in a corner" and "under stress". I get to live with the guilt of letting you run around and trusting you to never set off that bomb.

Welcome to Templar/Mage relationships 101.

You live in a society where thieves are allowed to kill your "kind" because you don't follow everyone elses religion. The thieves are heroes for hunting your "kind" down no matter if you ever commit a crime. A bit more grey now?

[Ryzaki]

...mages aren't killed for not believing in the maker so I have no clue where that analogy is going.

Ontopic: no I wouldn't willingly let my body be deformed by a demon. I'd try to run and if I couldn't run I'd fight back as myself. Either way I'm gonna die. I might as well die in my own body.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 17 avril 2011 - 07:23 .

[Benchmark]

sphinxess wrote...

Benchmark wrote...

Schattenkeil wrote...

No, but I would sacrifice myself to unleash a demon onto my enemies. This may cause colleteral damage, depending on how far the demon gets, but that's circumstancial. The templars taken down by the demon will not kill one of my own anymore, and some more will be distracted getting the demon under control.

Then let me give you another example.

You have a bomb in you that you can set off at any time. It is a very powerful bomb. I know this and I trust you not to ever use it. One day on vacation you come back to your hotel room to find a thief. He draws a knife and backs you into a corner, fully intent on killing you. You decide to "take him with you" and blow up the hotel.

I get to pull 70 innocent bodies of vacationing families out of the rubble. I get to comfort their loved ones by telling them you were "backed in a corner" and "under stress". I get to live with the guilt of letting you run around and trusting you to never set off that bomb.

Welcome to Templar/Mage relationships 101.

You live in a society where thieves are allowed to kill your "kind" because you don't follow everyone elses religion. The thieves are heroes for hunting your "kind" down no matter if you ever commit a crime. A bit more grey now?

No, it's not.

I don't care who the thief is, and I don't care about your life or the thieves life. Those are 2 lives. I care about the 70 innocent lives that are lost when you lose control of your moral compass. If the thief kills you, that's 1 life lost. If you manage to kill the thief without blowing up, that's 1 life lost. If you decide to blow up, thats 70 lives lost.

My point is that if you are at all willing to ever, under any circumstance, blow up that bomb. You don't have the strength of character to have that bomb.

[Benchmark]

Ryzaki wrote...

...mages aren't killed for not believing in the maker so I have no clue where that analogy is going.

Ontopic: no I wouldn't willingly let my body be deformed by a demon. I'd try to run and if I couldn't run I'd fight back as myself. Either way I'm gonna die. I might as well die in my own body.

Ryzaki, I would trust you with a magebomb.

[Schattenkeil]

The problem with your examples is, that they simply don't work. It's a different situation. My intent is not to take anyone down with me just because, but because they're the enemy, and they are threatening not only but also my people. Every templar who survives will kill further mages. Whether or not the demon kills more people depends on whether the templars manage to contain it. However, it's extremely unlikely it manages to kill 70 people before it's stopped. And there is a fair chance that it will save people you care about.

You're obviously pretty stuck in defeinitions. Someone defined something as evil, and that were the thought stops. You pick something else you would consider evil as well. So you pick funy examples that don't even remotely relate to the situation we're actually discussing, but that doesn't work.

I think the word "101" is fitting to your logic. Binary.

If I was to pick a comparison it would be a jew in a**** concentration camp right before the war end s and the ****s decide to clear it out. You're cornered, but there is a bottle of vodka next to you which you could throw into a fire which would send their headquarters ablaze. However, nearby houses of more or less unrelated people might be damaged along with it and they might die in the flames as well.

Modifié par Schattenkeil, 17 avril 2011 - 07:35 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Benchmark wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

...mages aren't killed for not believing in the maker so I have no clue where that analogy is going.

Ontopic: no I wouldn't willingly let my body be deformed by a demon. I'd try to run and if I couldn't run I'd fight back as myself. Either way I'm gonna die. I might as well die in my own body.

Ryzaki, I would trust you with a magebomb.

Since the proof of his conviction is a easy chair behind a monitor, I wouldn't, really. Just like I wouldn't absolutely trust someone who's never been under pressure to not crack under pressure.

[Ryzaki]

Schattenkeil wrote...

The problem with your examples is, that they simply don't work. It's a different situation. My intent is not to take anyone down with me just because, but because they're the enemy, and they are threatening not only but also my people. Every templar who survives will kill further mages. Whether or not the demon kills more people depends on whether the templars manage to contain it. However, it's extremely unlikely it manages to kill 70 people before it's stopped. And there is a fair chance that it will save people you care about.

You're obviously pretty stuck in defeinitions. Someone defined something as evil, and that were the thought stops. You pick something else you would consider evil as well. So you pick funy examples that don't even remotely relate to the situation we're actually discussing, but that doesn't work.

Problem with that is not only enemies end up hurt. Even those that are trying to help you can end up being attacked. (Heck siding with the mages led to many such situations where I sat there thinking why the hell am I helping these people just for them to attack me? )

You have a chance of killing as many people you care about as saving them.

I'm not sure it's being called evil as much as dangerous. And that's exactly what it is. It's extremely dangerous to yourself, your enemies, and your allies. They (abominations) attack indiscriminately.

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Since the proof of his conviction is a
easy chair behind a monitor, I wouldn't, really. Just like I wouldn't
absolutely trust someone who's never been under pressure to not crack
under pressure.

It's her.

Though I hope you aren't assuming I've never been under pressure.  

And I wouldn't trust myself with the bomb either. But if there is anything I am it's vain. I would decline the average demon for sheer aesthetic reasons if nothing else. Not to mention the transformation looks...painful and unpleasant.

Seriously though if Emile de Launcet can resist I'm pretty sure I can.

Orsino was crooked from the start, the girl was hysterical (didn't help that we know nothing about her), we see plenty of mages running in fear and not turning into abominations (we also see plenty turning *into* abominations). 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 17 avril 2011 - 07:48 .

[sonoko]

Benchmark wrote...

No, it's not.

I don't care who the thief is, and I don't care about your life or the thieves life. Those are 2 lives. I care about the 70 innocent lives that are lost when you lose control of your moral compass. If the thief kills you, that's 1 life lost. If you manage to kill the thief without blowing up, that's 1 life lost. If you decide to blow up, thats 70 lives lost.

My point is that if you are at all willing to ever, under any circumstance, blow up that bomb. You don't have the strength of character to have that bomb.

Your analogy is incorrect.

Replace a thief with a maniac who is trying not to steal something but to forsibly lobotomize or kill you and after finishing with you he will continue to find and torture another victims. So may be the explosion of this hypothetical bomb will save more lifes in the future?

[Ryzaki]

The templars don't torture the mages during the rite. It's a waste of time and would do more harm than good. Not to mention unnecessary.

The rite is an extermination. Nothing more nothing less.

[sphinxess]

Benchmark wrote...

sphinxess wrote...

Benchmark wrote...

Schattenkeil wrote...

No, but I would sacrifice myself to unleash a demon onto my enemies. This may cause colleteral damage, depending on how far the demon gets, but that's circumstancial. The templars taken down by the demon will not kill one of my own anymore, and some more will be distracted getting the demon under control.

Then let me give you another example.

You have a bomb in you that you can set off at any time. It is a very powerful bomb. I know this and I trust you not to ever use it. One day on vacation you come back to your hotel room to find a thief. He draws a knife and backs you into a corner, fully intent on killing you. You decide to "take him with you" and blow up the hotel.

I get to pull 70 innocent bodies of vacationing families out of the rubble. I get to comfort their loved ones by telling them you were "backed in a corner" and "under stress". I get to live with the guilt of letting you run around and trusting you to never set off that bomb.

Welcome to Templar/Mage relationships 101.

You live in a society where thieves are allowed to kill your "kind" because you don't follow everyone elses religion. The thieves are heroes for hunting your "kind" down no matter if you ever commit a crime. A bit more grey now?

No, it's not.

I don't care who the thief is, and I don't care about your life or the thieves life. Those are 2 lives. I care about the 70 innocent lives that are lost when you lose control of your moral compass. If the thief kills you, that's 1 life lost. If you manage to kill the thief without blowing up, that's 1 life lost. If you decide to blow up, thats 70 lives lost.

My point is that if you are at all willing to ever, under any circumstance, blow up that bomb. You don't have the strength of character to have that bomb.

Fact is  "suicide by possession" ia used against Templars that are planning to do a lot worse to the mage than just take back to the circle. Templars that are allowed to do this unchecked cause the problem cause they will sooner or later run into a mage that is willing to try to eliminate them.

[Ryzaki]

sphinxess wrote...
Fact is  "suicide by possession" ia used against Templars that are planning to do a lot worse to the mage than just take back to the circle. Templars that are allowed to do this unchecked cause the problem cause they will sooner or later run into a mage that is willing to try to eliminate them.

When? 

The only time I see someone turning into an abomination is when they're about to be killed, someone forced it in them, or the girl who was about to have her hands cut off by the slavers.

The one girl in the closest situation to the one you're talking about merely falls to the ground in fear begging for her life. She doesn't transform.

Mages in the circle are rountinely abused by templars and they don't transform. 

Alain doesn't transform. Grace doesn't she just becomes a bloodmage but she's a bit of a psycho. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 17 avril 2011 - 08:07 .

[Benchmark]

sonoko wrote...

Benchmark wrote...

No, it's not.

I don't care who the thief is, and I don't care about your life or the thieves life. Those are 2 lives. I care about the 70 innocent lives that are lost when you lose control of your moral compass. If the thief kills you, that's 1 life lost. If you manage to kill the thief without blowing up, that's 1 life lost. If you decide to blow up, thats 70 lives lost.

My point is that if you are at all willing to ever, under any circumstance, blow up that bomb. You don't have the strength of character to have that bomb.

Your analogy is incorrect.

Replace a thief with a maniac who is trying not to steal something but to forsibly lobotomize or kill you and after finishing with you he will continue to find and torture another victims. So may be the explosion of this hypothetical bomb will save more lifes in the future?

Negative.

The average Templar would be more like Sanitorium or Rehab guard. Some of them go bad, some of them are good. Some of them enjoy pushing around their wards, some of them wonder if it is the right thing. They still depend on the job and have responsibilities to follow the orders given to them. If the Doctor says "Lobotomize that patient", they pretty much have to trust the Doctor's call.

[Benchmark]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Benchmark wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

...mages aren't killed for not believing in the maker so I have no clue where that analogy is going.

Ontopic: no I wouldn't willingly let my body be deformed by a demon. I'd try to run and if I couldn't run I'd fight back as myself. Either way I'm gonna die. I might as well die in my own body.

Ryzaki, I would trust you with a magebomb.

Since the proof of his conviction is a easy chair behind a monitor, I wouldn't, really. Just like I wouldn't absolutely trust someone who's never been under pressure to not crack under pressure.

Totally true. You would have to monitor them forever. Especially since the mage bomb could actually turn into an abomination that takes control of a small city state, using the population to fuel sacrificial rights to enhance its power through blood magic. That was the plan of Tahrone when she started implanting people with demons.

[Schattenkeil]

Ryzaki wrote...


Problem with that is not only enemies end up hurt. Even those that are trying to help you can end up being attacked. (Heck siding with the mages led to many such situations where I sat there thinking why the hell am I helping these people just for them to attack me? )

You have a chance of killing as many people you care about as saving them.

That's possible, but not very likely. The templars will definitely try to contain demons before they continue killing mages. That anyone else would engage in the fight was - well, it was an extremely unlikely turn of events that could not have been expected.

[Ryzaki]

Schattenkeil wrote...
That's possible, but not very likely. The templars will definitely try to contain demons before they continue killing mages. That anyone else would engage in the fight was - well, it was an extremely unlikely turn of events that could not have been expected.

So...Hawke didn't plainly announce he/she was going to help the mages if you side with them?  

There's no chance at all that other mages would be nearby (and indeed they were extremely close to where she was even if she didn't see them) and she would attack them as well?

It wasn't extremely unlikely. She wasn't in the middle of a forest. She wasn't in some isolated bubble. She was in the middle of lowtown where innocent civilians live. She endangered their lives, the mages that was fighting lives, and (if siding with the mages) the people who were trying to save them lives. 

How could she not expect turning into a rampaging beast would end up hurting fellow mages and anyone on either side of the conflict that happened to be nearby? If she was there so would other mages. She didn't exist in a vaccum. (and isn't an apostate so she wouldn't be allowed out of the gallows on her ownanyway). 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 17 avril 2011 - 08:25 .

[Benchmark]

Schattenkeil wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...


Problem with that is not only enemies end up hurt. Even those that are trying to help you can end up being attacked. (Heck siding with the mages led to many such situations where I sat there thinking why the hell am I helping these people just for them to attack me? )

You have a chance of killing as many people you care about as saving them.

That's possible, but not very likely. The templars will definitely try to contain demons before they continue killing mages. That anyone else would engage in the fight was - well, it was an extremely unlikely turn of events that could not have been expected.

That's extremely hypocritical of your imaginary mage.

"I feel safe turning myself into a raging demonic possession because I know that the Templars will die by the dozens to stop me from killing any people I care about. And after all, I want to kill those Templars. That are dying to protect my family."

Awrooo (scooby dooby doo)

Modifié par Benchmark, 17 avril 2011 - 08:23 .

[Schattenkeil]

@Ryzaki
There was definitely no one else on the street and I was just coming around the corner. That anyone else may have assisted seemed unlikely. Especially considering that unlike the templars mages are not necessarily combatants.

@Benchmark
The purpose of the templars is to wipe out your family, whatever distracts them is welcome. That is the exact opposite protecting your family. Claiming otherwise is hypocracy.
They are dying because they chose to fight you. This is a war like situation and the death of an enemy is desireable, not matter what exactly caused their death. Certainly it's even more desireable to take enemies prisoner, but the mage was certainly not in the position to do that.

[Ryzaki]

Schattenkeil wrote...

@Ryzaki
There was definitely no one else on the street and I was just coming around the corner. That anyone else may have assisted seemed unlikely. Especially considering that unlike the templars mages are not necessarily combatants.

.

How about you go down the street and see all those mages defending thsemelves against the slaughter of templars hm? Let's see how well they do against an abomination and being swarmed by templars from the other side. That is within walking distance. 

And why wouldn't mages being combatants? They're fighting the templars for their survival! What do you think they're gonna do with an abomination that snarls at them? (Not to mention this is the the lone group of mages that *don't* turn into a bunch of abominations or become bloodmages in the templar ending). They're gonna defend themselves. 

Abominations attack indiscriminately it would attack those mages. They don't recognize friend or foe, combatant or noncombatant. It doesn't work that way. They rampage. They attack anything nearby. (Which tends to be poor Hawke). You don't become an aomination to "help" the situation. They don't help. It's no different than letting a rabid dog loose in a room of friends and foes. You're not helping. The rabid dog might take down a few templars but it also might rip a few of your old friends throats out. And your friend now has to deal with both a rabid dog *and* templars. 

Well done. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 17 avril 2011 - 08:44 .

[Benchmark]

Schattenkeil wrote...

@Ryzaki
There was definitely no one else on the street and I was just coming around the corner. That anyone else may have assisted seemed unlikely. Especially considering that unlike the templars mages are not necessarily combatants.

@Benchmark
The purpose of the templars is to wipe out your family, whatever distracts them is welcome. That is the exact opposite protecting your family. Claiming otherwise is hypocracy.
They are dying because they chose to fight you. This is a war like situation and the death of an enemy is desireable, not matter what exactly caused their death. Certainly it's even more desireable to take enemies prisoner, but the mage was certainly not in the position to do that.

The other mages aren't the family I am talking about. Though I would bet that the Templars, seeing an abomination attacking a cowering apprentice child, would throw themselves at the abomination until it was dead. If the RoA was still in effect, they probably would have to kill the child next. Not the greatest ending, and I bet they would live with the horror of both.

Regardless the family I talked about was all the non-mage and non-templar citizens walking the streets when your abomination comes bursting out of the Circle. Your sisters, brothers, mother, father, aunts, and etc that may live in the village close to you. The Templars would definitely be dying for them. That is their job.

[Medhia Nox]

I would have been "fighting" long before Ander's little stunt. I would have been fighting with words, and with conscientious objection. Non-violent, non-cooperation since the moment I succeeded in my Harrowing.

I would have been an Aequatarian to be sure - because there are many things I would not disagree with in this world. Mages must be watched and the Templars are a good way to keep them in check. Mages are dangerous - and mages are not "born equal" to the populace. They cannot be afforded the freedoms of men deprived of the ability to fight back on equal ground.

I am staunchly against blood magic, demon summoning, necromancy and any form of abomination. Even Wynne should have allowed herself to die. However, her situation is slightly different and I might learn to think differently of her, and accept her possession - but it would never change my opinion on abominations.

So - when Anders did his little stunt, I would have likely been forced to turn against my Circle if they insisted on joining the rebellion. First, I would simply walk away from the Circle. Mages are not "my people" - as a minority in real life, I can state confidently that I don't have "a people" solely due to genetic rarity.

If I were not allowed to leave the Circle, I would likely accept imprisonment. If imprisonment was not an option, I would use magical force against my fellow mages.

If I were allowed to leave the Circle, I would do so. I would assist the governments of Thedas if allowed - as either a healer, or in combating rogue mages - or I would accept imprisonment. If death was the only option - I would be forced to become an apostate, but I would also likely leave the area. Find a home in some foreign land and restrict my magic greatly.

I do not admire the violent revolutionary - and my "life" is not more important than my "soul" (not interested in arguing the existence of a soul). Its corruption, especially in a world like Thedas, would be a far greater "sin" than death ever would.

So - yeah, ultimately, I'd probably end up serving some nation of Thedas fighting against the new Resolutionist mages.

====

Concerning the original idea about the "Rite of Annulement".

I would likely try to escape using the least amount of force necessary. 

I would rather die than result to demon summoning, blood magic, etc.

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 17 avril 2011 - 09:03 .

[Benchmark]

Medhia Nox wrote...

I would have been "fighting" long before Ander's little stunt. I would have been fighting with words, and with conscientious objection. Non-violent, non-cooperation since the moment I succeeded in my Harrowing.

I would have been an Aequatarian to be sure - because there are many things I would not disagree with in this world. Mages must be watched and the Templars are a good way to keep them in check. Mages are dangerous - and mages are not "born equal" to the populace. They cannot be afforded the freedoms of men deprived of the ability to fight back on equal ground.

I am staunchly against blood magic, demon summoning, necromancy and any form of abomination. Even Wynne should have allowed herself to die. However, her situation is slightly different and I might learn to think differently of her, and accept her possession - but it would never change my opinion on abominations.

So - when Anders did his little stunt, I would have likely been forced to turn against my Circle if they insisted on joining the rebellion. First, I would simply walk away from the Circle. Mages are not "my people" - as a minority in real life, I can state confidently that I don't have "a people" solely due to genetic rarity.

If I were not allowed to leave the Circle, I would likely accept imprisonment. If imprisonment was not an option, I would use magical force against my fellow mages.

If I were allowed to leave the Circle, I would do so. I would assist the governments of Thedas if allowed - as either a healer, or in combating rogue mages - or I would accept imprisonment. If death was the only option - I would be forced to become an apostate, but I would also likely leave the area. Find a home in some foreign land and restrict my magic greatly.

I do not admire the violent revolutionary - and my "life" is not more important than my "soul" (not interested in arguing the existence of a soul). Its corruption, especially in a world like Thedas, would be a far greater "sin" than death ever would.

So - yeah, ultimately, I'd probably end up serving some nation of Thedas fighting against the new Resolutionist mages.

====

Concerning the original idea about the "Rite of Annulement".

I would likely try to escape using the least amount of force necessary. 

I would rather die than result to demon summoning, blood magic, etc.

Fing well put Sir.
Fing well put.

[mopotter]

nekhbet wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Well yes, using bloodmagic and calling demons didn't help any mage in Kirkwall. At best it gave the templars the excuses they needed to tighten their grip. Kinda makes you wonder how mages are supposed more intelligent than the common person.

No, it certainly didn't make their situation better. But that's not the first thing to think about when fighting for survival. Panic is a funny thing.

This is a large part of what did fustrate me in the game.  Yes, I would also fight and probably die, but I hope I would use magic and not demons.  I wouldn't have minded some of them turning to demons for help, but all of them?  That was a bit much.    

[Ryzaki]

mopotter wrote...

nekhbet wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Well yes, using bloodmagic and calling demons didn't help any mage in Kirkwall. At best it gave the templars the excuses they needed to tighten their grip. Kinda makes you wonder how mages are supposed more intelligent than the common person.

No, it certainly didn't make their situation better. But that's not the first thing to think about when fighting for survival. Panic is a funny thing.

This is a large part of what did fustrate me in the game.  Yes, I would also fight and probably die, but I hope I would use magic and not demons.  I wouldn't have minded some of them turning to demons for help, but all of them?  That was a bit much.    

Thankfully allof them don't. The only mages I felt bad about cutting down was that small group of mages right before you leave lowtown. None of them turn to bloodmages/demons (at least not on normal). And I had to cut them down. I wish they had surrendered.

[JabbaDaHutt30]

there's a problem if you threaten open violence against someone and use their reaction as justification for your methods.