945 réponses à ce sujet

[Benchmark]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Lobs, maybe you didn't follow the discussions of Klarabella and In Exile that you decided to reply to with your David Gaider quote? You quoted Klarabella when you replied.

It certainly seemed like you were trying to undermine her position.

If you would like me to believe that your were not undermining her position, and were merely making a general comment about unrelated game mistakes, I will rescind all my anger at your post and apologize.

As long as we agree that Klarabella and In Exile have a right to use codex entries in their discussion.

[Benchmark]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Benchmark wrote...

This is what you say you were referencing. However you brought this David Gaider quote up specifically to discredit the codex entry that Klarabella was referencing.

Klarabella? I was addressing AlexXIV when he asked if there was any in-game mention of Knight-Commanders using the RoA.

LobselVith8 wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Btw. do we even have something like official in-game lore that states that the RoA was legal? I know DG popped in and said that it was, but is there like a codex entry or wiki entry or an in-game quote?

No, there isn't anything in canon that said Meredith's use of the Right of Annulment was legal, only WoG. There isn't even anything in the game that contradicts the codex entries about mages being controlled by templars or in servitude or in service to the Chantry, but David Gaider said those were factually incorrect as well. I suspect it's an issue of multiple writers handling the game and not everyone being on the same page.

No Lobs, you weren't. Look at the post I responded to.

LobselVith8 wrote...

klarabella wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...
Why
are you addressing interpretation? I was making a statement that David
Gaider, the head writer of Dragon Age, has stated certain things are
factually inaccurate.

Yes, because the codex is a collection of written texts, notes and opinions rather than an unbiased source of wisdom.

You're
missing the point. No one is contesting that the codex entries are
written from in-game persective and are biased. I was addressing that
Gaider has stated some mistakes were made, i.e. the reference to
apostates in the Magi Origin and the incorrect mention of how Maric died
in Something Wicked. I further added that he stated that the references
of templars controlling mages, as well as mages being in servitude to
the Chantry and mages being in service of the Chantry in the codex
entries are incorrect with his statement about how they are not
factually accurate, as opposed to simply being an issue of
opinion.

You were replying to Klarabella when she was claiming that using codex entries are valid tools of argument.

edited because I lost a bracket and screwed up the formatting.

Modifié par Benchmark, 22 avril 2011 - 07:01 .

[LobselVith8]

Benchmark wrote...

Lobs, maybe you didn't follow the discussions of Klarabella and In Exile that you decided to reply to with your David Gaider quote? You quoted Klarabella when you replied.

It certainly seemed like you were trying to undermine her position.

If you would like me to believe that your were not undermining her position, and were merely making a general comment about unrelated game mistakes, I will rescind all my anger at your post and apologize.

As long as we agree that Klarabella and In Exile have a right to use codex entries in their discussion.

I was replying to AlexXIV because the question was posed about whether there was anything in the game that stated that Knight-Commanders could invoke the RoA, and followed the post with a reply about there being no in-game reference to Knight-Commanders using the RoA with comments about game mistakes from Origins and the factual inaccuracy of mages being forced into servitude in codex entries.

[Benchmark]

In Exile wrote...

Avissel wrote...

My working theory is that the mage/templar war will cause a global weakening of the veil, which will lead to the changes she is talking about.

Given the crazy sandal prophecy that ''magic will come back'' that would make sense.

I was kind of thinking that his prophecy might mean that everyone was going to gain some use of magic, similar to the elven kingdoms. I thought that might make the whole Templar/Circle relationship obsolete and force a real change in the relationship of the average Thedan with magic.

[hoorayforicecream]

In Exile wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...
That's what they were supposed to be doing all along though. Wasn't it first enchanter Irving meting out the punishment to Jowan back in DA:O? The problem comes when you've got a first enchanter like Orsino, who purposely turns a blind eye to the members of his own circle and clandestinely supports blood magery.

The problem is Uldred. For all the good, say, Irving and Wynne did, Uldred was more than capable of overwhleming the Circle with pride and arrogance.

The problem is Uldred. The problem is Tahrone. The problem is Orsino. The problem is Decimus. The problem is, essentially, that enforcement is only as effective as the strength of the enforcers. Sufficiently strong mages (be it through politics, demonic influence, raw power, or any of a variety of factors) can buck and destroy the system, which mandates the need of a secondary (albeit optimally more hands-off) enforcement group, e.g. the templar order. In an ideal system, they'd leave the mages alone unless the mages cannot self-police. Then they come in and put down the bad guys. It just gets considerably more murky when you're dealing with people instead of ideals, because when somebody crazy gets put in charge, bad stuff happens all around.

[LobselVith8]

Benchmark wrote...

You were replying to Klarabella when she was claiming that using codex entries are valid tools of argument.

edited because I lost a bracket and screwed up the formatting.

In which Klarabella was discussing what I said to AlexXIV. I never told her that it was wrong to use codex entries, I was addressing that she missed the point of my statement because I wasn't contesting that the codex entries are written from the perspective of characters and, therefore, biased from the perspective of the people who wrote the entries. I followed that by going into what I was explaining in my original post - that I addressed some mistakes in the Magi Origin and Something Wicked that Gaider acknowledged, and that the codex entries about mages being forced into servitude were inaccurate.

[Avissel]

Benchmark wrote...
I was kind of thinking that his prophecy
might mean that everyone was going to gain some use of magic, similar to
the elven kingdoms. I thought that might make the whole Templar/Circle
relationship obsolete and force a real change in the relationship of the
average Thedan with magic.

That could still happen if the veil was weakened and the fade started to "seep" into the material world.

Modifié par Avissel, 22 avril 2011 - 07:07 .

[LobselVith8]

Benchmark wrote...

I was kind of thinking that his prophecy might mean that everyone was going to gain some use of magic, similar to the elven kingdoms. I thought that might make the whole Templar/Circle relationship obsolete and force a real change in the relationship of the average Thedan with magic.

Despite the complete lack of consensus on this thread and over this issue, do you think the future of DA will allow protagonists of either side to help either the mages or the templars? Or do you think we'll all be forced to have a singular "canon" outcome.

[Benchmark]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

In Exile wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...
That's what they were supposed to be doing all along though. Wasn't it first enchanter Irving meting out the punishment to Jowan back in DA:O? The problem comes when you've got a first enchanter like Orsino, who purposely turns a blind eye to the members of his own circle and clandestinely supports blood magery.

The problem is Uldred. For all the good, say, Irving and Wynne did, Uldred was more than capable of overwhleming the Circle with pride and arrogance.

The problem is Uldred. The problem is Tahrone. The problem is Orsino. The problem is Decimus. The problem is, essentially, that enforcement is only as effective as the strength of the enforcers. Sufficiently strong mages (be it through politics, demonic influence, raw power, or any of a variety of factors) can buck and destroy the system, which mandates the need of a secondary (albeit optimally more hands-off) enforcement group, e.g. the templar order. In an ideal system, they'd leave the mages alone unless the mages cannot self-police. Then they come in and put down the bad guys. It just gets considerably more murky when you're dealing with people instead of ideals, because when somebody crazy gets put in charge, bad stuff happens all around.

This is one of the really sad realities of Thedas. If you let Mages police themselves, the strongest mages get to say what is right and what is wrong. The strongest mages are blood mages. Tevinter is proof, it is a constant testing ground for mage vs mage warfare.

Therefore you need a powerful group that can contest the mages on equal footing, yet not be a real threat to the entrenched governments. Enter the Templars.

One way to talk about implementing the Templars would be to make them more like The Wardens. More itinerant enforcers that move from place to place when they are needed to stop a mage that has been able to escape the influence of his fellow "good" mages.

That brings the question, why travel to where all the different mages live, why not gather them all in one place so they can be monitored and taught by "good" mages and Templars can know where they are?

Now why not increase security by testing all mages, and give the Templars even more oversight.

Whoops.... slippery slippery slope, thou hast foiled me.
 

Modifié par Benchmark, 22 avril 2011 - 07:21 .

[Benchmark]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Benchmark wrote...

I was kind of thinking that his prophecy might mean that everyone was going to gain some use of magic, similar to the elven kingdoms. I thought that might make the whole Templar/Circle relationship obsolete and force a real change in the relationship of the average Thedan with magic.

Despite the complete lack of consensus on this thread and over this issue, do you think the future of DA will allow protagonists of either side to help either the mages or the templars? Or do you think we'll all be forced to have a singular "canon" outcome.

Do you want my hopes or my suspicions?<_<

My hope is you get a choice and that it is a real choice, one with more than two diametrically opposed outcomes.
A. Help mages, start mageocracy.
B. Help templars, smack mages on nose with newspaper.
C. Help mages and templars, reform system and make Fereldan a shining example that causes gradual but lasting change all throughout Thedas.

My suspicions, resulting from my experience playing DA2.

A. Get dazzled by intense action style gameplay, smoke, mirrors, and realize that all the choices you made still led to converting to the Qun.

Modifié par Benchmark, 22 avril 2011 - 07:30 .

[hoorayforicecream]

Benchmark wrote...

This is one of the really sad realities of Thedas. If you let Mages police themselves, the strongest mages get to say what is right and what is wrong. The strongest mages are blood mages. Tevinter is proof, it is a constant testing ground for mage vs mage warfare.

Therefore you need a powerful group that can contest the mages on equal footing, yet not be a real threat to the entrenched governments. Enter the Templars.

One way to talk about implementing the Templars would be to make them more like The Wardens. More itinerant enforcers that move from place to place when they are needed to stop a mage that has been able to escape the influence of his fellow "good" mages.

That brings the question, why travel to where all the different mages live, why not gather them all in one place so they can be monitored and taught by "good" mages and Templars can know where they are?

Now why not increase security by testing all mages, and give the Templars even more oversight.

Whoops.... slippery slippery slope, thou hast foiled me.
 

Thing is, that this isn't necessarily the case, since there are nations who have "free" mages, but there's no way to guarantee that such a thing will not happen (or hasn't happened) in such societies, nor have we ever been privy to how mages in said societies actually function. We've heard stories about Rivaini hedge-wizards or seers (or whatever) who are supposedly free, but we don't know that for fact since we've never seen any of them. The closest we've come is Isabela's short talk about her mother, who made a living pretending to be a seer.

[Benchmark]

Ok, the "My Little Pony" Isabella avatar is an instant win.

HoorayforIcecream, here is a coupon to get my support on any point you want to argue. Yes my morality is for sale, at least to "My Little Pony" Isabella.

[AlexXIV]

IanPolaris wrote...

In Exile wrote...

If templars disseminated their anti-magic training, that would be one way to counter-balance mages.

Given (per Alistair) that at least some anti-mage Templar techniques can be taught without lyrium addiction, and the only real entry requirement for Templar Training is training as a Warrior, if the Chantry were really interested in protecting the people from magic and mages from ordinary people, they would have offered (donated) this training to warriors across Thedas for a thousand years.....for cost (or perhaps even donated for free).

They don't.  Instead Templar training is a very closely guarded secret and (apparently) a warrior can (or is supposed to without Hawke plot armor) get into some real trouble with the Chantry for showing Templar training outside the order.

uotConclusion:  The Chantry actually doesn't care one whit about the supposed dangers of magic or the protection of mages.  They simply (at least the highest levels starting with the Divine) simply want a monopoly on magic for their own power....and they are willing to lie or at least dissemble to the rubes of Thedas and overstate the dangers of magic to keep this monopoly.

-Polaris

That's actually a very good point you raise and one that makes a lot of sense. The thesis would be that the Chantry, despite scaring people with their preaching about how dangerous magic is, indirectly make excessive use of it. Simply by training mages in the very towers the Tevinters did, despite the fact that it is more dangerous. Also as a side product they get the eventual Tranquil who are, despite allegedly having free will, without exceptions more than happy to work for the templars and Chantry. I for one have not seen one Tranquil who is not working for the Circle/Chantry.

So basically that's the biggest hypocrisy of all. They want the mages because they can haul them at enemies of the Chantry, but at the same time declaring they are too dangerous to be free. And their secrets how to fight against mages they keep to themselves so people wouldn't get the absurd idea that there is actually a way to stop mages from their evil business besides turning to the Chantry and templars for help.

To me that's just like the Qun who hold the mages like animals but still use them in their wars. So for me that looks like it is in the Chantry's best interest that people fear mages, that mages fear templars, and that there is a rift between mages and normal citizens so they don't learn that maybe mages can be nice and helpful and not just abominations.

I don't understand though why the Grey Wardens for example with their influence etc. don't stand up for mages more. I mean in the ranks of the Grey Wardens there don't seem to be the same problems as for example in the circles of the Chantry. Obviously treating mages as 'brothers and sisters' and not dangerous animals does have advantages, especially if you'd think that Grey Wardens know almost every secret there is to know in order to fight Blights, so also how to efficiently disable enemy magic and mages.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 22 avril 2011 - 07:42 .

[Benchmark]

AlexXIV wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

In Exile wrote...

If templars disseminated their anti-magic training, that would be one way to counter-balance mages.

Given (per Alistair) that at least some anti-mage Templar techniques can be taught without lyrium addiction, and the only real entry requirement for Templar Training is training as a Warrior, if the Chantry were really interested in protecting the people from magic and mages from ordinary people, they would have offered (donated) this training to warriors across Thedas for a thousand years.....for cost (or perhaps even donated for free).

They don't.  Instead Templar training is a very closely guarded secret and (apparently) a warrior can (or is supposed to without Hawke plot armor) get into some real trouble with the Chantry for showing Templar training outside the order.

uotConclusion:  The Chantry actually doesn't care one whit about the supposed dangers of magic or the protection of mages.  They simply (at least the highest levels starting with the Divine) simply want a monopoly on magic for their own power....and they are willing to lie or at least dissemble to the rubes of Thedas and overstate the dangers of magic to keep this monopoly.

-Polaris

That's actually a very good point you raise and one that makes a lot of sense. The thesis would be that the Chantry, despite scaring people with their preaching about how dangerous magic is, indirectly make excessive use of it. Simply by training mages in the very towers the Tevinters did, despite the fact that it is more dangerous. Also as a side product they get the eventual Tranquil who are, despite allegedly having free will, without exceptions more than happy to work for the templars and Chantry. I for one have not seen one Tranquil who is not working for the Circle/Chantry.

So basically that's the biggest hypocrisy of all. They want the mages because they can haul them at enemies of the Chantry, but at the same time declaring they are too dangerous to be free. And their secrets how to fight against mages they keep to themselves so people wouldn't get the absurd idea that there is actually a way to stop mages from their evil business besides turning to the Chantry and templars for help.

To me that's just like the Qun who hold the mages like animals but still use them in their wars. So for me that looks like it is in the Chantry's best interest that people fear mages, that mages fear templars, and that there is a rift between mages and normal citizens so they don't learn that maybe mages can be nice and helpful and not just abominations.

I don't understand though why the Grey Wardens for example with their influence etc. don't stand up for mages more. I mean in the ranks of the Grey Wardens there don't seem to be the same problems as for example in the circles of the Chantry. Obviously treating mages as 'brothers and sisters' and not dangerous animals does have advantages, especially if you'd think that Grey Wardens know almost every secret there is to know in order to fight Blights, so also how to efficiently disable enemy magic and mages.

This would definitely be a big question if you see any Chantry training camps to turn mages into "order following" artillery pieces in preparation to take over Thedas. That might pop up in DA3, never know.

Regardless it is definitely about control and who has it. Do you trust the Mages to have control of their powers? Do you trust the Chantry to oversee them without trying to dip into the cookie jar? Power corrupts, mages aren't the only ones that can fall to temptations.

Some quote I remember. Maybe a Chevy Chase movie.

"I don't trust anyone that makes more money than me."

[hoorayforicecream]

AlexXIV wrote...

I don't understand though why the Grey Wardens for example with their influence etc. don't stand up for mages more. I mean in the ranks of the Grey Wardens there don't seem to be the same problems as for example in the circles of the Chantry. Obviously treating mages as 'brothers and sisters' and not dangerous animals does have advantages, especially if you'd think that Grey Wardens know almost every secret there is to know in order to fight Blights, so also how to efficiently disable enemy magic and mages.

Because the Grey Wardens can't stop Blights by themselves, and usually can't afford to get embroiled in politics. Traditionally, no Blight (except for the 5th) has been stopped without the Wardens having an army comprised of several nations at their back. The Wardens are almost fanatically neutral in their politics (Warden protagonist being the major exception), because they have to be. They don't care about the politics of Thedas, as long as the nations honor their treaties with the Wardens to provide them troops to fight the Blights. They (usually) can't afford to get involved, because that alienates potential allies that they may need during a Blight. 

The wardens pretty much just do two things:
1. Fight darkspawn
2. Recruit people to fight darkspawn

Getting involved in Thedas politics is no guarantee to help do either of those, whereas neutrality does since it allows for the largest pool of potential recruits (via Right of Conscription if need be).

[AlexXIV]

Benchmark wrote...
This would definitely be a big question if you see any Chantry training camps to turn mages into "order following" artillery pieces in preparation to take over Thedas. That might pop up in DA3, never know.

Regardless it is definitely about control and who has it. Do you trust the Mages to have control of their powers? Do you trust the Chantry to oversee them without trying to dip into the cookie jar? Power corrupts, mages aren't the only ones that can fall to temptations.

Some quote I remember. Maybe a Chevy Chase movie.

"I don't trust anyone that makes more money than me."

I am not sure about Chevy Chase, but I know Joker says it.

[AlexXIV]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

I don't understand though why the Grey Wardens for example with their influence etc. don't stand up for mages more. I mean in the ranks of the Grey Wardens there don't seem to be the same problems as for example in the circles of the Chantry. Obviously treating mages as 'brothers and sisters' and not dangerous animals does have advantages, especially if you'd think that Grey Wardens know almost every secret there is to know in order to fight Blights, so also how to efficiently disable enemy magic and mages.

Because the Grey Wardens can't stop Blights by themselves, and usually can't afford to get embroiled in politics. Traditionally, no Blight (except for the 5th) has been stopped without the Wardens having an army comprised of several nations at their back. The Wardens are almost fanatically neutral in their politics (Warden protagonist being the major exception), because they have to be. They don't care about the politics of Thedas, as long as the nations honor their treaties with the Wardens to provide them troops to fight the Blights. They (usually) can't afford to get involved, because that alienates potential allies that they may need during a Blight. 

The wardens pretty much just do two things:
1. Fight darkspawn
2. Recruit people to fight darkspawn

Getting involved in Thedas politics is no guarantee to help do either of those, whereas neutrality does since it allows for the largest pool of potential recruits (via Right of Conscription if need be).

Well the Wardens are the only ones who can end Blights so that should give them some political leverage. Especially during Blights. But I guess maybe the Chantry would rather see Thedas swallowed by a Blight than 'releasing control' of the mages. And the Wardens probably know that all too well.

[moilami]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Camenae wrote...

What about mage templars, if mages are expected to police themselves?

I think that's totally plausible. Send a thief to catch a thief, they say. Templars don't seem to be as well-equipped to combat mages as they claim: resisting demons and blood magic seems to have very little to do with technique and much more to do with sheer strength of will, mages already have training in resising demons and the ability to break compulsion by blood magic (As evidenced in 'Enemies Among Us, if you bring a mage with you to interrogate Idunna) and it's possible for a mage to learn spells that dispel and counteract other magic.

If anything, it seems mages are more than qualified to police their own. I'd go so far as to say that Templars are redundant and that their official purpose is an excuse used to mask the fact that the Chantry just likes having its own personal, lyrium-addicted army.

That's what they were supposed to be doing all along though. Wasn't it first enchanter Irving meting out the punishment to Jowan back in DA:O? The problem comes when you've got a first enchanter like Orsino, who purposely turns a blind eye to the members of his own circle and clandestinely supports blood magery.

No. There are no dedicated mage mage hunters. There are sucky chantry puppet mages. Not mages living in a free society wanting to maintain a free society.

[hoorayforicecream]

AlexXIV wrote...

Well the Wardens are the only ones who can end Blights so that should give them some political leverage. Especially during Blights. But I guess maybe the Chantry would rather see Thedas swallowed by a Blight than 'releasing control' of the mages. And the Wardens probably know that all too well.

They could. But that doesn't mean they should. It wouldn't really help their goal of killing darkspawn or recruiting people to kill darkspawn.

The Wardens already trump the Chantry via Right of Conscription. If they want mages, they conscript mages (e.g. Anders). If they want templars, they conscript templars (e.g. Alistair). But the main reason they're able to maintain that right is because they don't abuse it.

[moilami]

Benchmark wrote...

Ok, the "My Little Pony" Isabella avatar is an instant win.

HoorayforIcecream, here is a coupon to get my support on any point you want to argue. Yes my morality is for sale, at least to "My Little Pony" Isabella.

It is a win but so is Ishmaeltheforsaken's portrait too.

[AlexXIV]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Well the Wardens are the only ones who can end Blights so that should give them some political leverage. Especially during Blights. But I guess maybe the Chantry would rather see Thedas swallowed by a Blight than 'releasing control' of the mages. And the Wardens probably know that all too well.

They could. But that doesn't mean they should. It wouldn't really help their goal of killing darkspawn or recruiting people to kill darkspawn.

The Wardens already trump the Chantry via Right of Conscription. If they want mages, they conscript mages (e.g. Anders). If they want templars, they conscript templars (e.g. Alistair). But the main reason they're able to maintain that right is because they don't abuse it.

Yeah I am just thinking that Warden's life is a life of sacrifice. All they have is nightmares and an early brutal death to look forward to. The only ones who have something to lose are the Non-Wardens. Because if the last Grey Warden perished the rest of the world will follow in the next Blight.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 22 avril 2011 - 08:30 .

[LobselVith8]

AlexXIV wrote...

Yeah I am just thinking that Warden's life is a life of sacrifice. All they have is nightmares and an early brutal death to look forward to. The only ones who have something to lose are the Non-Wardens. Because if the last Grey Warden perished the rest of the world will follow in the next Blight.

I'd wonder about the implications for the mage Wardens, including the Hero of Ferelden who is the Warden-Commander from the Circle of Magi, after the Circles break free from the Chantry. How are the templars and the people going to react to them? Are they going to be dragged into this issue or will their "neutrality" blanket them from both sides?

[hoorayforicecream]

LobselVith8 wrote...

I'd wonder about the implications for the mage Wardens, including the Hero of Ferelden who is the Warden-Commander from the Circle of Magi, after the Circles break free from the Chantry. How are the templars and the people going to react to them? Are they going to be dragged into this issue or will their "neutrality" blanket them from both sides?

Why would it make a difference? There were mage wardens long before the circle broke. Mages leave the circle jurisdiction when they are recruited into the Wardens (e.g. Anders). Asking this is like asking "What will the templars do about the rivaini seers now that the circles have rebelled?" They were there before; why would there be reason to think they wouldn't remain there after the break as a neutral third party?

[IanPolaris]

Lob,

I think the Grey Wardens sit this one (the Mage-Templar) war out and both sides are more than willing to let them. Grey Warden mages have no stake in the revolution. They are already free...as much as any Grey Warden is 'free' and already are not subject to Chantry law.

By the same token, I think the others would understand that Grey Wardens only get involved when they must, and that Grey Wardens are watching their backside for more Darkspawn/Archdemons while everyone else plays politics.

-Polaris

[In Exile]

AlexXIV wrote..
Well the Wardens are the only ones who can end Blights so that should give them some political leverage. Especially during Blights. But I guess maybe the Chantry would rather see Thedas swallowed by a Blight than 'releasing control' of the mages. And the Wardens probably know that all too well.

Except no one knows or buys this, so the Wardens can't use that for leverage.