1008 réponses à ce sujet

[Ryzaki]

Filament wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Filament wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

Mages aren't even remotely comparable with nuclear weapons. Just saying.

Nope. They can brainwash you, let demons infest your body, or drain all the blood from you from a distance. 

Much more deadly and efficent than nuclear weapons. At least with those your opponent might end up hurting himself too. 

More deadly?

Yes. Unlike a Nuke someone doens't have to bother being careful with them. 

The original comparison was to someone with a nuke inside them that would go off if you made them upset.

 

Oh yeah that's silly. But they can if they desired do alot more damage than one nuke. 

[Harid]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Harid wrote...
Maybe Asteroid M is a better example?

I dunno.  I am not really a comic book nerd so, perhaps I should not be using them in my examples.

I admit it, I am an animated series nerd

Pretty much all of my knowledge of the comics, right there.

[Foolsfolly]

Deztyn wrote...

Village Idiot wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...

What
leaders where there in the civil rights movement then? (before Rosa)
I'm horribly bad at american history, and freely admit it. so feel free
to enlighten me.

Well, there was Bayard Rustin, who predated Dr. King and was the chief organizer for the March on Washington.

The NAACP had been around for about 50 years before Parks. Brown vs the Board of Education was before Parks. There had also been a few court cases to end segregation at the college level before that, but the details escape me.

Exactly so. I think the point of these posts can be summed up like this:

The Mage Revolution is not deep nor well thought out.

BioWare gave way too little backstory to them and did not attempt to tie Kirkwall's mages and their plight to a world wide plight. In fact, by the end of the game it's not about Mage Rights it's about killing all the Mages because one of them was a terrorist, which is a completely different issue (one further clouded by the fact that they made Meredith an insane total monster).

As such, there's no depth in the issue and any comparison to a real world equivalent will fail. Any real world revolution will have history, multiple points of view, and people who actually rallied, gathered support, and had a clear agenda. Those without those things were riots and were put down.

I still have not seen any real justification for the fate of the Kirkwall mages affecting the rest of the world. An insane Knight Commander killed a bunch of blood mages led by a Nercomancer/Blood Mage First Enchanter.

If anything the rest of the mages would want to distance themselves from that event because it speaks terribly for all mages. Especially since an  ex-Circle Mage Grey Warden killed untold numbers in a terrorist attack on the Chantry itself.

PR nightmare.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Foolsfolly wrote...
I still have not seen any real justification for the fate of the Kirkwall mages affecting the rest of the world. An insane Knight Commander killed a bunch of blood mages led by a Nercomancer/Blood Mage First Enchanter.

I can see it having influence. What I have yet to understand is mages being humiliated badly somehow translating into an inspirational event.

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Foolsfolly wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

DPSSOC wrote...

Harid wrote...
While one could say the some for mages, we don't know these people, nor were they brought up, so mages appear not to have leadership.

The Mages need an Xavier, also a Magneto to make the Xavier seem more reasonable and provide incentive to work with him.

Actually, if mages get a Magneto that can build a nation like Genosha, that could work.

Ideally, they don't need either, but someone in between (though I like Xavier and Magneto a lot). but really mages so far demosntrated that they don't deserve either.

They really haven't.

"We're born with incredible powers and people are afriad of us. LET'S MAKE DEALS WITH DEMONS BECAUSE I CAN'T STAND BEING IN A SCHOOL!"

.....

....my Templar bias is showing.

More like "let's make deals with demons because I don't want to be raped or get a lobotomy!"

The idea of being raped in a society where there is absolutely no chance that the rapist will be punished for his crime is absolutely horrifying to me. And yes, I would turn to blood magic to save myself from that, or to kill the man who raped me. Man, I don't think I'd hesitate for a second.

In a society where the man would be normally punished and sent to prison, I wouldn't resort to blood magic. I'd trust in the justice system.

Same thing with the lobotomy: if I knew someone was going to give me a lobotomy or turn me into a mindless slave, and there was some way for me to strike out against them, I would. If there's any concievable way for me to avoid being given a lobotomy when I clearly do not need one, I would use that first. But when it comes down to it, I will do blood magic to keep you from taking my mind away. I'm sorry, but I will.

So are you saying that if you were raped in a system where your rapist would not be punished, you would not use all resources in your power to prevent it, or to revenge yourself? Are you saying that if someone was going to destroy your mind, you would not attempt to harm them or resist them with every fibre of your being?

The point isn't that mages deserve complete autonomy. The point is that they are now in a system where the only hope for justice or vengeance is blood magic. If there was an independent, non-chantry-related council that tried and punished and in some cases executed templars found guilty of abuse, then I do not think the revolt would have ever happened. If there had been any sign from the Chantry that they were willing to start making things gradually better for mages, that they would actually move to quell the abuse internally, to do only what is necessary to keep others safe, not go insanely out of control. They've shown no indication of that whatsoever.

But you believe that a man who kills someone to prevent that person from giving him a lobotomy is just as bad as a man who kills another man for no reason. And I disagree.

You are saying that if you threaten a man with a lobotomy and he murders someone, that is proof that he was dangerous all along, and I do not agree.

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 17 juin 2011 - 12:43 .

[Furtled]

Foolsfolly wrote...
Rosa Parkes I know so I'll answer to that. The Civil Rights movement predated Rosa's actions. In fact, the Civil Right's leadership used Rosa's actions as a rallying cry.
There's no Mage leadership.

I'm not as familiar with the Civil Rights movement as I am the other examples so I'll bow to greater knowledge on that one, and I actually agree that there's no overall mage leadership at the point where everything kicks off - it's just a burgeoning movement flexing it's collective muscles.

It's entirely reasonable for me to accept that leaders can and will come though. Possibly from the various factions within the circles - resolutionsists, isolantionists, libertarians etc. (okay, maybe not the isolationists), or from an outside source like Tevinter or even Kirkwall.

Modifié par Furtled, 17 juin 2011 - 12:48 .

[Foolsfolly]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Foolsfolly wrote...
I still have not seen any real justification for the fate of the Kirkwall mages affecting the rest of the world. An insane Knight Commander killed a bunch of blood mages led by a Nercomancer/Blood Mage First Enchanter.

I can see it having influence. What I have yet to understand is mages being humiliated badly somehow translating into an inspirational event.

I can see an influence. I can even see Templars the world over clamping down on the Circles because of Anders and his ill thought out attack.

I hope DLC continues to forward the Mage plot because it needs work.

[IanPolaris]

Here's the deal. I dont think the mages AS mages (only) have a chance of winning this revolution. It does help that the Templars have revolted too which makes both the Chantry and Templars immesurably weaker and takes away the 'moral certitude' of the Templar side...i.e. you can now defy the Templars w/o necessarily defying the Chantry and that's an important point I think.

It's really a matter of numbers and mages aren't numerous enough.

That said.....that said....I don't think this conflict is at all a foregone conclusion.

1. Mages do have some leadership. We've seen it already w/r/t Cumberland, and the Towers each have their own heiarchies and thus established chains of command.

2. Assuming that some of the towers are lead by sane first enchaters (such as Irving), they will see right away (even Orsino saw it) that there is no way that mages by themselves can win this war.

The solution is obvious. Get allies. The most obvious and likely allies that I see the mages getting are the nobility of the various nationstates. We see this explicitly in Fereldan, and I see Fereldan being the Template that other towers will follow (or go down in defeat).

Mages by themselves won't have enough power to force a compromise. Mages allied with a self-interested nobility/royalty determined to cut the Chantry down to size and have more control over magic within their lands is an alliance that has a real chance of working.

-Polaris

[KnightofPhoenix]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...
The idea of being raped in a society where there is absolutely no chance that the rapist will be punished for his crime is absolutely horrifying to me. And yes, I would turn to blood magic to save myself from that, or to kill the man who raped me. Man, I don't think I'd hesitate for a second.
 

What about demons?
Yea, they prey on things like that. Even the most well intentionned can be a victim of possession.

In the frenzy of a bloody war, I would not trust a lot of mages of being able to resist, without proper checks.

[IanPolaris]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...
The idea of being raped in a society where there is absolutely no chance that the rapist will be punished for his crime is absolutely horrifying to me. And yes, I would turn to blood magic to save myself from that, or to kill the man who raped me. Man, I don't think I'd hesitate for a second.
 

What about demons?
Yea, they prey on things like that. Even the most well intentionned can be a victim of possession.

In the frenzy of a bloody war, I would not trust a lot of mages of being able to resist, without proper checks.

Most mages will understand that.  Even Anders admitted that regulation of magic (to help avoid such things) was necessary.  That would be an easy thing to give to potential noble allies...the right to regulate magic within their own lands.

-Polaris

[Zanallen]

Maybe Anders' actions and the conflict in Kirkwall leads to someone stepping up and championing the mages? It wouldn't be too hard to spin the situation to show the mages in a better light.

[KnightofPhoenix]

IanPolaris wrote...
Most mages will understand that.  Even Anders admitted that regulation of magic (to help avoid such things) was necessary.  That would be an easy thing to give to potential noble allies...the right to regulate magic within their own lands.

-Polaris

Hopefully they will, for the ones we saw in DA2 surely did not. Includign Anders who only sounds like a hypocrit when saying that (unless rivalled).

[TEWR]

dragonflight288 wrote...

I honestly can't see why people are saying the revolution will fail miserably, for one very good reason.

The Templars have abandoned the chantry as much as the mages. The Chantry had lost their sword arm. Now there are thousands of lyrium addicts unleashed from the chantry in a mad quest to hunt all mages. So that's thousands of people who are about to go into lyrium withdrawl. They will have to either to return to the chantry and follow chantry law concerning mages....which doesn't seem likely by the end of the game, or to loot, pillage, and likely rape across the countryside to get the coin to buy their own lyrium, or steal it from the chantry stores.

When you get thousands of addicts pillaging and destroying the lives of the innocent people around Thedas so they can continue their mage hunt, suddenly it seems like the mages aren't such bad guys as these templars say they are. Mages can gain a lot of popular support because of this.

If you think long-term, this revolution actually has a shot of succeeding.

The only thing that would really weaken the chance of the mages winning is if the Templars were smart enough to take lyrium with them from the Chantry storehouses.

[TEWR]

Furtled wrote...

Foolsfolly wrote...
Rosa Parkes I know so I'll answer to that. The Civil Rights movement predated Rosa's actions. In fact, the Civil Right's leadership used Rosa's actions as a rallying cry.
There's no Mage leadership.

I'm not as familiar with the Civil Rights movement as I am the other examples so I'll bow to greater knowledge on that one, and I actually agree that there's no overall mage leadership at the point where everything kicks off - it's just a burgeoning movement flexing it's collective muscles.

It's entirely reasonable for me to accept that leaders can and will come though. Possibly from the various factions within the circles - resolutionsists, isolantionists, libertarians etc. (okay, maybe not the isolationists), or from an outside source like Tevinter or even Kirkwall.

I wonder if the new novel will show mage leadership arising.

[Nashiktal]

You know a thought occurs.

Even if you play as a mage, you are never faced with the same temptations or problems as the rest of the mages do when it comes to demons or bloodmagic, and because of this (probably for gameplay reasons) and the way decisions and black and white morality were handled within DA:O, we never get to see how dangerous mages are supposed to be.

Alas we will probably never see this in game.

[IanPolaris]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...
Most mages will understand that.  Even Anders admitted that regulation of magic (to help avoid such things) was necessary.  That would be an easy thing to give to potential noble allies...the right to regulate magic within their own lands.

-Polaris

Hopefully they will, for the ones we saw in DA2 surely did not. Includign Anders who only sounds like a hypocrit when saying that (unless rivalled).

First of all the mages we saw in DA2 were not even a representative sample of mages in Kirkwall let alone Thedas. The Devs have already admitted that they skewed the sample we saw to push the "Mages are Evil Loonies" meme.  The Mages we saw in DAO and DAA seem to be a much more representative sample of what we might expect a typical cross section of mages to look like, and most (not all) are reasonable.

-Polaris

[Foolsfolly]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

More like "let's make deals with demons because I don't want to be raped or get a lobotomy!"

The idea of being raped in a society where there is absolutely no chance that the rapist will be punished for his crime is absolutely horrifying to me. And yes, I would turn to blood magic to save myself from that, or to kill the man who raped me. Man, I don't think I'd hesitate for a second.

In a society where the man would be normally punished and sent to prison, I wouldn't resort to blood magic. I'd trust in the justice system.

Same thing with the lobotomy: if I knew someone was going to give me a lobotomy or turn me into a mindless slave, and there was some way for me to strike out against them, I would. If there's any concievable way for me to avoid being given a lobotomy when I clearly do not need one, I would use that first. But when it comes down to it, I will do blood magic to keep you from taking my mind away. I'm sorry, but I will.

So are you saying that if you were raped in a system where your rapist would not be punished, you would not use all resources in your power to prevent it, or to revenge yourself? Are you saying that if someone was going to destroy your mind, you would not attempt to harm them or resist them with every fibre of your being?

The point isn't that mages deserve complete autonomy. The point is that they are now in a system where the only hope for justice or vengeance is blood magic. If there was an independent, non-chantry-related council that tried and punished and in some cases executed templars found guilty of abuse, then I do not think the revolt would have ever happened. If there had been any sign from the Chantry that they were willing to start making things gradually better for mages, that they would actually move to quell the abuse internally, to do only what is necessary to keep others safe, not go insanely out of control. They've shown no indication of that whatsoever.

But you believe that a man who kills someone to prevent that person from giving him a lobotomy is just as bad as a man who kills another man for no reason. And I disagree.

You are saying that if you threaten a man with a lobotomy and he murders someone, that is proof that he was dangerous all along, and I do not agree.

Of course I would.

The system's broken. I'm not going to disagree about that. I will say that both sides got covered in evil hoping that alone would add depth to the issue. Most mages you meet are evil. You hear stories about rapings and beatings. They're tranquiling mages who pass their Harrowing. They had to have a Knight Commander as insane as Meredith and they had to have only a handful of non-insane/blood mage mages in order to tell a story. Which was a huge mistake. I feel DA2 took an interesting aspect of Origins and completely ruined it. I find the whole Mage/Templar relationship much less interesting now. The lack of fraternities and both sides having less decent people than terrible people was a mistake.

They throw these things into the story and add no real depth to the issue at hand, in fact the game avoids the issues until the last act and then...look here they have nothing to say about the issue!

Tune in next time, DA fans. Same DA price. New DA game!

To the essense of your post however, yes they're oppressed and to get anything out of the system they have to challenge that system. Yes, the Kirkwall mages are horrendously oppressed.

As far as DA2 goes however, I don't meet a non-Bethany mage that's worth dying for. They're all abominations and blood mages who would harm far more innocents.

Remember the Circles exist for a reason.

EDITED: In this case more is not less. (I had more instead of less, sentence now makes sense)

Modifié par Foolsfolly, 17 juin 2011 - 01:01 .

[Nashiktal]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Furtled wrote...

Foolsfolly wrote...
Rosa Parkes I know so I'll answer to that. The Civil Rights movement predated Rosa's actions. In fact, the Civil Right's leadership used Rosa's actions as a rallying cry.
There's no Mage leadership.

I'm not as familiar with the Civil Rights movement as I am the other examples so I'll bow to greater knowledge on that one, and I actually agree that there's no overall mage leadership at the point where everything kicks off - it's just a burgeoning movement flexing it's collective muscles.

It's entirely reasonable for me to accept that leaders can and will come though. Possibly from the various factions within the circles - resolutionsists, isolantionists, libertarians etc. (okay, maybe not the isolationists), or from an outside source like Tevinter or even Kirkwall.

I wonder if the new novel will show mage leadership arising.

Actually this makes me fear that the mage revolution will become fractured between those with different ideologies. I am sure some mage factions will be absorbed into the bigger ones, but if the revolution leadership splinters in any way, it will just cause even more chaos and destruction.

[Deztyn]

Foolsfolly wrote...

Exactly so. I think the point of these posts can be summed up like this:

The Mage Revolution is not deep nor well thought out.

BioWare gave way too little backstory to them and did not attempt to tie Kirkwall's mages and their plight to a world wide plight. In fact, by the end of the game it's not about Mage Rights it's about killing all the Mages because one of them was a terrorist, which is a completely different issue (one further clouded by the fact that they made Meredith an insane total monster).

As such, there's no depth in the issue and any comparison to a real world equivalent will fail. Any real world revolution will have history, multiple points of view, and people who actually rallied, gathered support, and had a clear agenda. Those without those things were riots and were put down.

My hope is that DA3 will overlap with the last years of DA2 and provide a bit more perspective on the what's happening in the world outside of Kirkwall before the revolution.

David Gaider's next book is supposed to deal with the mage and templar situation. But it annoys me that I have to read a book to make sense of the game. (Not that I don't like reading. I love reading. It's the principle, damn it.)

I still have not seen any real justification for the fate of the Kirkwall mages affecting the rest of the world. An insane Knight Commander killed a bunch of blood mages led by a Nercomancer/Blood Mage First Enchanter.

The only way this makes sense to me is by imagining there's a lot of misinformation being spread around. (Varric, what did you do?) Like with a pro-templar Hawke the story is about how the mages courageously rallied against their enemies and would have won their Freedom™ if not for the Evil Champion™.

If anything the rest of the mages would want to distance themselves from that event because it speaks terribly for all mages. Especially since an  ex-Circle Mage Grey Warden killed untold numbers in a terrorist attack on the Chantry itself.

PR nightmare.

"See? Look what they can do if they're free! This is why we need to lock them up!"

This is why I just don't get the pro-Anders crowd. So many of his supporters believe he was justified in his attack and that it's a good thing for the mages, striking a blow against the Evil Chantry etc. But I don't see how it can possibly lead anywhere good.

[Foolsfolly]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Furtled wrote...

Foolsfolly wrote...
Rosa Parkes I know so I'll answer to that. The Civil Rights movement predated Rosa's actions. In fact, the Civil Right's leadership used Rosa's actions as a rallying cry.
There's no Mage leadership.

I'm not as familiar with the Civil Rights movement as I am the other examples so I'll bow to greater knowledge on that one, and I actually agree that there's no overall mage leadership at the point where everything kicks off - it's just a burgeoning movement flexing it's collective muscles.

It's entirely reasonable for me to accept that leaders can and will come though. Possibly from the various factions within the circles - resolutionsists, isolantionists, libertarians etc. (okay, maybe not the isolationists), or from an outside source like Tevinter or even Kirkwall.

I wonder if the new novel will show mage leadership arising.

Too little too late. Also something that important should have been in the game where the story was being set up. There shouldn't be required reading. You don't go to a movie that expects you to have played a game that tells you plot points not in the movie.

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Going back a bit: 

@KoP

Doh, you're right about the circles in cities. I was thinking of the one in Ferelden... which isn't anywhere. But that seems to be the exception. (A foolish one, in my mind. So much smarter to have them be away from things, so if there's a problem it can be quarantined more easily.)

I think the big issue that everyone is forgetting here is the strategic importance of Mages. Any country outside Tevinter or the Qunari empire has to shepard its mages carefully, They can't just crush all the non-loyalists, because that invites the Imperium and/or the Qunari to stride in and mage/gunpowder superiority them all into the ground.

A fight between two nations where one has an entire circle fighting with them and the other has only the 20% of that circle who were loyalists? The country with four times as many mages is the country that will probably win, I don't care what other issues there are. It's as if all of a sudden guns were able to decide whether or not to shoot for you, and you have to be nice to them in order to get them to fire.

Killing most of the mages is political and strategic suicide. If Nevarra alone decides "you know what? We're just going to go with this revolution thing" Then Orlais is going to be a smoking crater in the ground. If we don't have enough mages at the end of this, the Qunari or Tevinter will be ruling all of Thedas in mere centuries.

You could say that such things make it a bad idea for mages to revolt, because opening the door to the Qunari is tantamount to suicide. I agree that it is a risk, but a risk worth taking.

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 17 juin 2011 - 01:00 .

[Furtled]

Foolsfolly wrote...
As far as DA2 goes however, I don't meet a non-Bethany mage that's worth dying for. They're all abominations and blood mages who would harm far more innocents.

Except Emile, who's just a misguided idiot and Fenreyl who's (depending on the players decisions) either a frightened young man or the most dangerous mage in Thedas (with god awful taste in women). 

Modifié par Furtled, 17 juin 2011 - 01:07 .

[Gunderic]

Well, this thread is more interesting than Dragon Age 2 ever was, at least ( which admittedly, isn't really a hard standard to match or exceed ).

Modifié par Gunderic, 17 juin 2011 - 01:07 .

[TEWR]

Foolsfolly wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Furtled wrote...

Foolsfolly wrote...
Rosa Parkes I know so I'll answer to that. The Civil Rights movement predated Rosa's actions. In fact, the Civil Right's leadership used Rosa's actions as a rallying cry.
There's no Mage leadership.

I'm not as familiar with the Civil Rights movement as I am the other examples so I'll bow to greater knowledge on that one, and I actually agree that there's no overall mage leadership at the point where everything kicks off - it's just a burgeoning movement flexing it's collective muscles.

It's entirely reasonable for me to accept that leaders can and will come though. Possibly from the various factions within the circles - resolutionsists, isolantionists, libertarians etc. (okay, maybe not the isolationists), or from an outside source like Tevinter or even Kirkwall.

I wonder if the new novel will show mage leadership arising.

Too little too late. Also something that important should have been in the game where the story was being set up. There shouldn't be required reading. You don't go to a movie that expects you to have played a game that tells you plot points not in the movie.

True.


The leader of the mages should've been Hawke, were his story actually something likable. If he had actually risen to power in more of a way than just a mass murdered because the plot demanded it, and if he had tried to mediate the Mage-Templar tension in those 3 years after he was named Champion, he could've been a leader of mages. 

Well, only if the Kirkwall Circle said they were glad for Hawke's participation, trying to help, then if you side with the mages they tell you they'd gladly fight under him.


Basically, Hawke is the only person that I could see leading the mages if DA2's story was actually good. Alas, nothing.


Because I imagine that if Hawke had an entire Circle saying they'd fight under him against the Templars in Kirkwall, the other Circles would follow suit after word of what happened spread around. And then he could name a person to lead should something happen to him (vanishing off the face of Thedas), and blah blah blah.

[KnightofPhoenix]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...
@KoP
Doh, you're right about the circles in cities. I was thinking of the one in Ferelden... which isn't anywhere. But that seems to be the exception. (A foolish one, in my mind. So much smarter to have them be away from things, so if there's a problem it can be quarantined more easily.)

It is foolish, but that's because Thedasians today don't seem to like to think a lot and like to copy the Tevinter Imperium as much as possible (they were the ones who built the towers). Who probably regulated the towers in different ways.

You could say that such things make it a bad idea for mages to revolt, because opening the door to the Qunari is tantamount to suicide. I agree that it is a risk, but a risk worth taking.

It makes it a bad idea for mages to revolt before establishing or working to establish such an alliance with a state like Nevarra, especially if they end up damaging Nevarra's capital and Cumberland where they revolted. But we've already been through that.

And the Whte Chantry or soem Templar elements can be foolish enough to think that the Qunari are now weak, so they decide to kill all mages. It would be idiotic for sure, but I wouldn't put it past them.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 17 juin 2011 - 01:09 .