131 réponses à ce sujet

[River5]

Aetika wrote...

River5 wrote...

Circles of Magi could become learning institutions (I'm refering to the Circles of Magi as an organization responsible for keeping and teaching magic knowledge and history, not necessarily the building)...  Enchanters wishing to become masters to apprentices could need to be accredited and their training program approved by the Circles before being allowed to teach, etc.

No, all he wants and all that most of us that agree with him want is the right for mages to live among people and be allowed to love, have children, raise families, get a job or join the king's service shall they wish to!

Exactly this. This is what I had in my mind, when I said I hope we will have a chance to give mages absolute freedom.

River5 wrote...

But my initial gut reaction was definitely to go "WTF?!?!?!  
What-where-how--Anders-who-is- what-this-I-don't-even...  ARRRRRRRG!"

 I was angry because I was like...spending all my years in Kirkwall talking about mages rights pretty much every time I could and he still decides to not share his mind with me. But kill him? No. Then I would have to kill Sten, Fenris, Zevran and Isabela for their actions

Unfortunately, it seems that the game can't assume that your character spent all theses years advocating for mages rights, and supporting Anders' cause...  Or, don't really give you the opportunity to fully get there.

If I had been fully in control of the gameplay, here is what would most likely have happened between Anders and my character...



Anders: "Mages should be..."

Hawke: “FREE!!! YES!!! Chantry bad! Mages awesome! Magic good!!! Good
magic!!! 100% with you!!! Love you now!!! Can I help you with your manifesto?
Want me to start distributing copies? Nevermind that, want me to write the
whole darn thing for you? Want to leave Kirkwall so we can go petition all
other cities and rally them to our cause? What do you mean we can't leave
Kirkwall? What kind of stupid game is that? Wait, here's king Alistair... King
Alistair!!! You like mages too, right? How about transforming the Circles in
Ferelden into learning institutions, and letting the mages go back to their
families after class? What do you mean your had a Blight to fight and your
country isn't at its strongest? I helped you fight the darn... Ooops! Sorry!
Wrong life! So... You gonna help us? Pretty please? Did you know your mom was a
mage and an elf? What? You didn't read the book?”


So, ask yourself this question...  Are you really mad at Anders for not having shared his thoughts with you?

Or...  Are you really mad at the game because all your character could do about mages rights until then was agree with Anders whenever he spoke of mages freedom...  Do a few tasks for mages support groups...  Reply "all mages aren't bad mages" here and there...  But never actively do anything about it?

Lol!

Hawke: "You never shared your thoughts with me!"
Anders: "But...  But you've never showed any interest to come with me to the mages underground meetings...  Or help me with my manifesto...  Or use your influence to gather allies to our cause...  You've never shown any initiative towards it either...  You seem to make it a priority in life to try to stay out of trouble, and avoid having to make hard choices as much as possible...  So how was I supposed to assume that you would suddenly want to get involved into something as big and significant as this?"
Hawke: "Stupid gameplay..."

[Huntress]

non-post wrote...

This proves how radical the pro-mage group has become. I wonder what all you will do if you don't get absolute freedom for mages at the end of DA3?

Is the Chantry evil? No, it has just become too powerful and is in need of a Reformation. As for the Black Chantry, I thought the magisters wanted to keep their power? That is why they broke off from the White Chantry.

What were the reasons the mages were locked up in the first place? Is it because they are different or is it because from the actions of the magisters in the Tevinter Imperium?

How does Tevinter, Rivain, the Chasind, or the Dalish deal with abominations? Do we know or has that part of the story not been fleshed out yet? If it has, please tell me where so I can look it up.

How did the magisters gain control of Tevinter? Was because the first Archon talked to Dumat and learned blood magic or did the magisters already rule Tevinter? I don't think that has been fully fleshed out as well.

The point I'm getting at is, you and all other pro mages are putting modern rights and freedoms on a fictious world that has no inkling to "the Rights of Men". There is no Magna Carta or an Iroquois Constitution written. I haved played both sides in DA2 and I have found them both to be fully justified. Neither one of them was with a selfish player. Anders will always die in my playthroughs, because I don't see justification in his actions.

I was going to make a very long post, I decided not to, after reading you're post I thought either you were a very young person, or simple someone who lives in a cave, never been tought history, or ever picking up a book to do researchs. If you want to learn since when Man's have fought for freedom, get the library card and use it.

You don't see many things, I dought you know what freedom means or feels like, this days people talk about it as something that just exist, not many know how it feels in the heart, skin or when is missing.

if you want to know about places in Thedas, hit the wiki.

Modifié par Huntress, 28 juin 2011 - 05:19 .

[River5]

R0vena wrote...

Well, it was very easy for me for the first time I played. I never liked Anders regardless of his actions in the end and I liked Sebastian just fine. It was a simple choosing between a companion I hated and companion I liked. No politics were involved in this decision.

That said, couple of times I intentionally played a very aggressive pro-mage Hawke with the views quite different from my own. This Hawke let Anders live, of course. They were best buddies.
My point being - letting Anders live or not depends on the character of Hawke more than anything else and I don't quite understand the arguments about was it right or wrong to kill him. It could be perfectly justified for one type of Hawke and absolutely unimaginable for the other.

Indeed.  And it is important to keep in mind that I am merely expressing my opinion on the subject, not trying to say that this is how other players should approach the issue as well.

The reason why I put this point up is mainly because I've read many posts where people claimed that executing Anders for his crime was the only truly "moral alternative".

You could choose to kill Anders to punish him for his crimes...  Because you consider him a dangerous man and want to prevent him from doing any more damage...  Because you actually support him, but are seeking to give more weight to his cause (by making him a martyr)...  Because (on rivalry), he is scared that he is losing himself to Justice, and begs you to free them both...

Or, simply, because you feel that this is the way your character would react in such a situation.

There are some pretty good and valid arguments supporting both killing Anders, and letting him live.

But I won't accept having someone say that killing Anders is the only choice that is morally right...  Like I'm not trying to pretend that my own personal perception of the situation, and how I chose to respond to it, is right.

This is what I believe (and I've had characters that will got completely against my beliefs), and those are my arguments to support that particular point of view.

[Big I]

River5 wrote...

There are some pretty good and valid arguments supporting both killing Anders, and letting him live.

While I hate what Anders did letting him live is no more indefensible than sparing Loghain, Sten or Zevran.

[River5]

LookingGlass93 wrote...

I'm pro-mage, but I was absolutely sickened by what Anders did in DA2. If he'd attacked the templars he'd possibly have been justified, but even then that sort of indiscriminate attack would have also killed templars who acted like Thrask, Emoric and Keran, or even some decent "hardliners" like Cullen.


But he didn't attack the templars. He blew up a building full of innocent people. Elthina didn't force Anders or anyone else into the Circle; she doesn't even seem to mind having dealings with Apostate Hawke, even elisting them for a clandestine meeting with an agent of the Divine. The brothers and sisters of the Chantry, priests who spent their time administering good works to the public and preaching a moral code of compassion, never made any mages tranquil. Anders killed them anyway.


Injustice, even systematic injustice, does not justify the wanton murder of innocent civilians. That's what he did. He didn't need to do it. He could have limited his attack to the templars, or even just to Meredith. He didn't because he was so sick that he thought an all out war between the Circles and the Templars would be better than working within the established system.


There were other options. There were templars like Thrask who believed in a gentler approach. There was the possibility of establishing Circles free of Chantry control (if they didn't already exist) in Ferelden and Orzammar. There was even the option of simply replacing Meredith with someone who's not actually insane.


Anders is a murderous madman, a disgrace to the Grey Wardens and mages everywhere. He got more mages killed in that stunt and what it provoked than would have died under the status quo. He squandered the sympathy people felt for oppressed mages by becoming everything they fear about magic. He is, in short, an abomination.

Well, Thrask was killed, his revolution crushed, and Cullen tells you that all of those who had tried to join with him (mages and templars alike, except Alain, Keran, and Samson, if you intervene...) were executed and put on display outside of the Gallows as an "example".

If Anders ever believed that there would have been hope to change the system by collaborating with people within that system, then that very event probably destroyed that hope.

I won't go over how ineffective going after Meredith and the Templars directly would have been, because this was already covered in my initial post.

[River5]

LookingGlass93...  If find your point of view interesting...

If both of us were members of a Fraternity of Enchanters...  You'd probably be among the Aequetarians or Loyalists...  And I with the Libertarians.

[Big I]

River5 wrote...
Well, Thrask was killed, his revolution crushed, and Cullen tells you that all of those who had tried to join with him (mages and templars alike, except Alain, Keran, and Samson, if you intervene...) were executed and put on display outside of the Gallows as an "example".

If Anders ever believed that there would have been hope to change the system by collaborating with people within that system, then that very event probably destroyed that hope.

I won't go over how ineffective going after Meredith and the Templars directly would have been, because this was already covered in my initial post.

Kirkwall is not Thedas. Templars like Thrask exist in other places, Cullen himself was one such templar before Uldred kidnapped him. If Anders' goal is as a global as he says, there's nothing stopping him from going to Starkhaven or Ferelden or anywhere else to work with people discontented with the status quo.


Furthermore, the problem is not the Chantry. The problem is the Templar Order and their brand of enforcement of the law. You cannot equate the Chantry, a religious organisation, with the Templars. The Templars are a semi-independent military organisation with a different command structure - that's one of the reasons why what Petrice was doing with Varnell was illegitimate, she had no authority over templars. Elthina had no control over the day to day activities of the templars, that's why Kirkwall had a Knight-Commander in the first place.


Also, Anders' choice, the oppression of the status quo or revolution, was a false one. It was not a question of either or. Reform under the existing system was possible, due mostly to the fact that Meredith was being draconian even by templar standards. In Ferelden even without the Mage Warden boon there was a relaxing of standards. It didn't need to lead to a war that is going to get more mages killed than ever before. Slow change is preferable to civil war.

[Big I]

River5 wrote...

LookingGlass93...  If find your point of view interesting...

If both of us were members of a Fraternity of Enchanters...  You'd probably be among the Aequetarians or Loyalists...  And I with the Libertarians.

I'd say Aequetarian or Isolationist. Loyalists struck me as being too self hating.

[LobselVith8]

non-post wrote...

This proves how radical the pro-mage group has become. I wonder what all you will do if you don't get absolute freedom for mages at the end of DA3?

How is it radical for people to want the abolition of an institution that is viewed by Anders and others (including a pro-mage Hawke) as slavery? We see Anders kill his first love Karl when he begged for death over living life as a templar puppet. Karl's death lead him to be part of the mage underground and to try to make a difference. It's interesting to note that Bethany and Leandra point out how Anders reminds them of Malcolm Hawke.

non-post wrote...

Is the Chantry evil? No, it has just become too powerful and is in need of a Reformation. As for the Black Chantry, I thought the magisters wanted to keep their power? That is why they broke off from the White Chantry.

I don't see it as altruistic to have the Rite of Tranquility when it robs a person of their humanity, or to force mages across the continent into subjugation.

non-post wrote...

What were the reasons the mages were locked up in the first place? Is it because they are different or is it because from the actions of the magisters in the Tevinter Imperium?

History of the Circle codex explains why. The mages in an Orlesian cathedral protested their lack of rights under the Andrastian Chantry peacefully, and the templars had to convince Divine Ambrosia II not to declare an Exalted March on her own cathedral. Mages were imprisoned in Circle Towers as a result.

non-post wrote...

How does Tevinter, Rivain, the Chasind, or the Dalish deal with abominations? Do we know or has that part of the story not been fleshed out yet? If it has, please tell me where so I can look it up.

Gaider addressed the Chasind and the witches of Rivain aren't controlled, and that the people deal with abominations when they arise, which makes them identical to the Dalish when Merrill explained that the clan hunts and kills an elven mage who has become an abomination.

non-post wrote...

How did the magisters gain control of Tevinter? Was because the first Archon talked to Dumat and learned blood magic or did the magisters already rule Tevinter? I don't think that has been fully fleshed out as well.

It started with the first Magister, Thalsian,  who claimed to have received knowledge of blood magic from the Old God Dumat, and came into power. It's no different than the Andrastian nations, where the "nobility" come into power; there is no democracy in Thedas, from what we've seen so far.

non-post wrote...

The point I'm getting at is, you and all other pro mages are putting modern rights and freedoms on a fictious world that has no inkling to "the Rights of Men". There is no Magna Carta or an Iroquois Constitution written. I haved played both sides in DA2 and I have found them both to be fully justified. Neither one of them was with a selfish player. Anders will always die in my playthroughs, because I don't see justification in his actions.

Anders makes the argument that mages deserve the same rights that most people receive, and even argues that elves should be fighting alongside mages to gain equality as well.

[Addai]

River5 wrote...
And what if that's exactly what we players will become privy to?  The "Chart of Human Rights" of our modern world wasn't always there.  To acquire it, some people needed to have dreamt it, and fought for it.  Using violence if necessary.

So what if Anders is such a dreamer?  What if he see the world not as it is, but as it could be?

What if most pro-mages simply allow themselves to share his dream, and wish for Thedas to move closer and closer to an ideal?

What if, confronted with the horrors and inequalities of the Dragon Ages (that includes the way elves are treated, the Caste system in Orzammar, the slavery in Tevinter), some of us are wishing for changes...  And hoping that we will become witnesses to such changes?

Perhaps we see change coming to Thedas as a good thing, and are willing to take the leap!  

The Magna Carta was a product of centuries of Germanic custom which said that no chieftain was entitled to rule over any other except as the others agreed to be ruled by him.  It's based not on any humanist sensibility but on the idea that if Lars is strong enough to hold his land, Sven can't kick him off it, and Gunnar can only be king if he's stronger than all the others and they all agree they're better off if he's in charge.

It was not based on a "dreamer," i.e. a naive and mentally unstable man who decides to blow up a building.

Even if I agree that the Chantry needs to be taken down a peg, and that Kirkwall desperately needs a stable civil government, at the point that someone decides on mass destruction, the conversation about that is over and the only question is how to restore order and limit the loss of innocent life.  In what I consider my "canon" game, I side with the mages, but on the basis I just said, it's just as reasonable to side with the templars.  I also kill Anders not because of a sense of justice, but because he's a dangerous abomination and if Hawke wasn't so feckless, she probably should have taken him out much earlier.

[FieryDove]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

@OP excellent post. I agree wholeheartedly, as I always let Anders live (save for one playthrough where I experimented.).


....I really wish I could just slap Sebastian in that scene. Quick somebody make a Sebastian slapping mod!

I would pay for a DLC add-on for that...and if it let us talk him down. Anders trumps Seb everytime in my games. What a waste of VO...sniff.

Something big had to happen. Just talk and prayers and wistful thinking didn't do anything as clearly the Grand cleric showed.

[Wulfram]

If Anders believes mages should have rights, perhaps he shouldn't have turned all the Mages in Kirkwall into unwilling sacrifices in his crusade.

[River5]

LookingGlass93 wrote...

River5 wrote...

LookingGlass93...  If find your point of view interesting...

If both of us were members of a Fraternity of Enchanters...  You'd probably be among the Aequetarians or Loyalists...  And I with the Libertarians.

I'd say Aequetarian or Isolationist. Loyalists struck me as being too self hating.

And Isalotionists want mages to be isolated from the general population, whereas I believe that this is exactly the worse course of action, because mages need to become active, productive members of the community by learning to care about the world outside of their towers, and sharing the same rights as any man.

I just believe that the Chantry shouldn't be involved in any way or form with the regulation of magic.

So 100% Libertarian there!    

[River5]

River5 wrote...

LookingGlass93 wrote...

River5 wrote...

LookingGlass93...  If find your point of view interesting...

If both of us were members of a Fraternity of Enchanters...  You'd probably be among the Aequetarians or Loyalists...  And I with the Libertarians.

I'd say Aequetarian or Isolationist. Loyalists struck me as being too self hating.

And Isalotionists want mages to be isolated from the general population, whereas I believe that this is exactly the worse course of action, because mages need to become active, productive members of the community by learning to care about the world outside of their towers, and sharing the same rights as any man.

I just believe that the Chantry shouldn't be involved in any way or form with the regulation of magic.

So 100% Libertarian there!    

Oh!  Sorry!  I thought that you meant that I was an Isolationist, not that you would side with either Aequetarians, or Isolationists...  My bad!  Lol!

[R0vena]

River5 wrote...

There are some pretty good and valid arguments supporting both killing Anders, and letting him live.

But I won't accept having someone say that killing Anders is the only choice that is morally right...  Like I'm not trying to pretend that my own personal perception of the situation, and how I chose to respond to it, is right.

Can't argue with that. Indeed there are good arguments for both decisions. I am not sure I would kill Anders at all if not the nesessity to choose between him and Sebastian. It is quite possible I would decide it were best for him to live and try to make things right - as Merrill proposed.
But since the game forces you to choose between the two... oh, well.

[DreamerM]

Thank goodness for church bombings. To say that moment was the most memorable in the game is understating it: to hear some people talk, you'd think it was all that happened in the game.

Though as far as long-running, never-to-be-resolved debates go, I really think Loghain provided a better one. Since Loghain made his choices with a clear head, and Anders is...well...he's crazy.

And this I say as an Anders fan. I like Anders. But he is absolutely barking mad. He's got a delicious cocktail of crazy brewing in that brain of his, with schizophrenia, bipolar, disassosiative-personality disorder, and depression all competing for space in the bits of his brain not occupied by a Fade Spirit who wants to kill Templars and take names, minus the taking names part.

So yeah.

[In Exile]

Foolsfolly wrote...
Why is that not mentioned? When the storyline deals with "DOWN WITH THE SYSTEM" why isn't anyone (other than Fenris) asking what the new system would be? What would it be based on? What's a good alternative?

Because no one is interested in talking about it. You have people show commitments to certain ideas (the circle should train mages!) but none of this is cashed out for a coherent worldview. The plight of the mages is, in that sense, overwhelming for most people.

The real question is what happens if the system doesn't want to go down even if the templars lose (i.e. the people rally for the Chantry against the mages). Do the mages start an oppressive dictatorship? Flee from Chantry controlled lands? Surrender?

[In Exile]

River5 wrote...
Have we been advocating for "absolute freedom"?  All that most of us are hoping for is a reform allowing mages the same rights as any other man.  Like I said, if it isn't right to control your neighbor using extortion, than it shouldn't be any more right to do so with the use of magic.

But you can extort your neighbour. And you can mind control with magic. So how do you protect people? A right is only a right to the extent it can be enforced and protected by the law.

You can easily have laws making magical training mandatory for all children as soon as their powers emerge.  You can even have registries and keep philacteries should you wish to do so.

So we take mages away from their parents to centralized systems of learning (potentially against the wishes of the parents) and we force them to register their identities and keep track of them using what is essentially an impossible-to-beat spy network.

Circles of Magi could become learning institutions (I'm refering to the Circles of Magi as an organization responsible for keeping and teaching magic knowledge and history, not necessarily the building)...  Enchanters wishing to become masters to apprentices could need to be accredited and their training program approved by the Circles before being allowed to teach, etc.

So, we have a building where we bring mages to study, keep them there until they are adults, track them if they try to leave, and have a training period for senior mages to treat junior mages.

So far, it sounds exactly like the Circles that already exist.

The mages need to be taught to become accountable and responsible for their powers, and how to use them.

Still sounds like the Circle.

And now the big question: how do you enforce this? You tell a mage not to burn people alive for fun - but what's stoping the mage? Other mages? Okay. But what let's common people avoid being ruled over by their genetic superiors?

That the only way for people to be safe is by segregating them.

Your proposed system does that too. Even assuming mages have the right to mobility under your proposal, they're still taken away as children and forced to give up their original life for one in the Circle (at least for a time) and have to be tracked where-ever they go.

Then, if they do, call the Right of Annullement and wipe out all of said building's inhabitants (innocents and guilty alike) wondering how you wounded up with abominations in there in the first place.

Actually, Rite's don't require abomiantions. The first one was calld because the Circle was rebelling against the templars, not because there were abominations. DA:O's Rite was very different from the one in lore; the lore actually tells us what happened in DA2 is the norm, not the exception.

I've never, ever heard Anders go "Whoohoohoo!  We must have absolute freedom without any form of regulation!"

No, all he wants and all that most of us that agree with him want is the right for mages to live among people and be allowed to love, have children, raise families, get a job or join the king's service shall they wish to!

Relative to what a peasant in the era can do, that is absolutely freedom without regulation. Not that this isn't a noble end; it's just that it's calling a spade a spade. And I think mages should be free - but there needs to be a counter-balance to their power.

What if, confronted with the horrors and inequalities of the Dragon Ages (that includes the way elves are treated, the Caste system in Orzammar, the slavery in Tevinter), some of us are wishing for changes...  And hoping that we will become witnesses to such changes?

And what if, like the USSR, the changes aren't the idealistic outcome you hoped for?

[In Exile]

LobselVith8 wrote...
It's not more political. Mages refer to themselves as a people. Even Circle mage Bethany asks a pro-templar Hawke not to make her choose between family and "her people."

If it is race, though, then it becomes a real issue of integration. Thinking of it this way creates a perpetual divide between mages and non-mages.

Modifié par In Exile, 28 juin 2011 - 07:04 .

[Huntress]

The templars feels confident with the power they have over mages that, now they are inventing better ways to deal with them ( carver letter to hawke)
I dought any of this new inventions is after the mages well being. And you spit about loss of innocent lifes... How do you see this mages been turn into tranquils agaisnt their will?

Shouldn't we call this type of templars monsters? Abominations? why? because they don't have a demon inside their head? they are worst that Anders or any monster and the worst part of it, they hide under a chantry rules, they use the chantry as a shield and everything they do is justified. This templars prey of mages already jailed, under their control.

And yet some see Anders as a monster? for having a demon who wants the mages, all mages to be free from the tyranny of the templars?
Am not saying is good to have a demon inside you, not at all, demons break the soul of the one who they possesed, Demons do not understand the rules of living creatures, none of them.
Am saying that this demon is helping Anders get strong to fight for justice.

Innocent people are going to die, innocent people have died and many more had died many centuries ago when Andrasted made her war, or you think Andraste wrote a letter to the imperium asking them to leave quietly? War is neither pretty or simple.

This is why I defend Mages and can live with innocent lifes been lost, the innocents mages are dieying already.

[Aetika]

River5 wrote...

So, ask yourself this question...  Are you really mad at Anders for not having shared his thoughts with you?

Or...  Are you really mad at the game because all your character could do about mages rights until then was agree with Anders whenever he spoke of mages freedom...  Do a few tasks for mages support groups...  Reply "all mages aren't bad mages" here and there...  But never actively do anything about it?

Well at first playthrough I was mad at him for not telling me, though I understood his reasons. Every other playthroughs I was mad at game that once again put me in the middle of some mess with limited ways out of it. It felt really helpless.
My first playthroughs tend to be little bit fuzzy, I usually need more playthroughs to sort my opinions properly

[HopeVessel]

The people in the system may be corrupt but that doesnt mean the system is terrible. Elthina didnt order all those bad things, it was the knight commander. I want mage freedom, but its impossible. Well true freedom is, it is to everyone actually, but there needs to be a system that teaches them and allows them use their powers wisely.

And i dont like that they turn into abominations when they are defending themselves, and i think anders plan wasnt good either. I dont believe hurting innocent people is necessary to create change. And saying that since im going to die why not just turn into an abomination and risk killing innocent people is not good to get support for a cause. Whenever mages turn to abominations, demons, raising the dead, it doesnt help them in any way. Anders even mentions something like this, even though he is an abomination. What is justice? Is it not different for everyone? What makes the spirit right?

I think anders is a horrible leader for the mage movement, given that he may have killed an innocent mage and he killed innocent people in the chantry. Im still afraid of mages anders, you did nothing to help, since i know you will kill me for your own selfish reasons, or just because you are crazy by dealing with a spirit, either one isnt good.

So innocent mages are more important than innocent non-mages? So you would sacrifice innocent people and use their blood to fuel your own goals? Thats not a good argument for those who fear tevinter. I know thats probably not what you mean but the point is that you dont help your case by doing it. Is innocent loss of life necessary? If it is, would it not be better to sacrifice your "own kind" to show that you aren't selfish.

What sounds better? We will sacrifice ourselves to ensure that mages and maybe others live better lives in the future, or we will sacrifice other people (those that arent really a part of the conflict, innocents) to ensure that mages and maybe other people live better lives in the future.

[sphinxess]

In Exile wrote...

River5 wrote...
Have we been advocating for "absolute freedom"?  All that most of us are hoping for is a reform allowing mages the same rights as any other man.  Like I said, if it isn't right to control your neighbor using extortion, than it shouldn't be any more right to do so with the use of magic.

But you can extort your neighbour. And you can mind control with magic. So how do you protect people? A right is only a right to the extent it can be enforced and protected by the law.

You can easily have laws making magical training mandatory for all children as soon as their powers emerge.  You can even have registries and keep philacteries should you wish to do so.

So we take mages away from their parents to centralized systems of learning (potentially against the wishes of the parents) and we force them to register their identities and keep track of them using what is essentially an impossible-to-beat spy network.

Circles of Magi could become learning institutions (I'm refering to the Circles of Magi as an organization responsible for keeping and teaching magic knowledge and history, not necessarily the building)...  Enchanters wishing to become masters to apprentices could need to be accredited and their training program approved by the Circles before being allowed to teach, etc.

So, we have a building where we bring mages to study, keep them there until they are adults, track them if they try to leave, and have a training period for senior mages to treat junior mages.

The mages need to be taught to become accountable and responsible for their powers, and how to use them.

And now the big question: how do you enforce this? You tell a mage not to burn people alive for fun - but what's stoping the mage? Other mages? Okay. But what let's common people avoid being ruled over by their genetic superiors?

That the only way for people to be safe is by segregating them.

Your proposed system does that too. Even assuming mages have the right to mobility under your proposal, they're still taken away as children and forced to give up their original life for one in the Circle (at least for a time) and have to be tracked where-ever they go.

What if, confronted with the horrors and inequalities of the Dragon Ages (that includes the way elves are treated, the Caste system in Orzammar, the slavery in Tevinter), some of us are wishing for changes...  And hoping that we will become witnesses to such changes?

And what if, like the USSR, the changes aren't the idealistic outcome you hoped for?

Any noble is going to ensure he had the forces on hand to enforce the laws. I really don't see your point - it seems a mage that has property or a family is a lot less likely to risk them by playing with blood magic or extorting the neighbors

Currently the system removes children that show any sign of magic and breaks all contact with the family. Most of course want this thanks to the Chantry teachings that a magic user is cursed - the familys that don't can even be killed if they fight to defend their child from the Templars. Without the chantry choices can include the rich hiring private teachers and  I would think few poor ones would turn down free schooling for a child <the ones that don't believe the chantry teachings can even see their child again>

We would now have a university where actual research can be done on magic. Who knows what can be learned - i.e. force mages casting spells to drill wells etc- I see nothing to show that any research has been done in the circles for the entire 700 years they have been in control of the chantry

Whats to stop a mage from casting a fireball for fun and frolic? Town guards consisting of warriors and mages. Whats to stop anyone from killing a noble and taking his estate? Remember the DA:O human noble origin? If the king had lived do you think he would have gotten away with that?

If the changes don't work you adjust. The chantry has had its chance - 700 years of control and still doing things the same way - look at the Harrowing a huge number fail and yet the survivers still aren't trusted - why the heck is it even being done then?

[Huntress]

HopeVessel wrote...

The people in the system may be corrupt but that doesnt mean the system is terrible. Elthina didnt order all those bad things, it was the knight commander. I want mage freedom, but its impossible. Well true freedom is, it is to everyone actually, but there needs to be a system that teaches them and allows them use their powers wisely.

And i dont like that they turn into abominations when they are defending themselves, and i think anders plan wasnt good either. I dont believe hurting innocent people is necessary to create change. And saying that since im going to die why not just turn into an abomination and risk killing innocent people is not good to get support for a cause. Whenever mages turn to abominations, demons, raising the dead, it doesnt help them in any way. Anders even mentions something like this, even though he is an abomination. What is justice? Is it not different for everyone? What makes the spirit right?

I think anders is a horrible leader for the mage movement, given that he may have killed an innocent mage and he killed innocent people in the chantry. Im still afraid of mages anders, you did nothing to help, since i know you will kill me for your own selfish reasons, or just because you are crazy by dealing with a spirit, either one isnt good.

So innocent mages are more important than innocent non-mages? So you would sacrifice innocent people and use their blood to fuel your own goals? Thats not a good argument for those who fear tevinter. I know thats probably not what you mean but the point is that you dont help your case by doing it. Is innocent loss of life necessary? If it is, would it not be better to sacrifice your "own kind" to show that you aren't selfish.

What sounds better? We will sacrifice ourselves to ensure that mages and maybe others live better lives in the future, or we will sacrifice other people (those that arent really a part of the conflict, innocents) to ensure that mages and maybe other people live better lives in the future.

How much power should we allow the chantry to have?  how much power is allow to the templars? Who will dictate them how much power is going to be use over mages? Mages can't because of fear of them becoming another tavinter imperium then who? a king? rofl. wake UP.

it seems that the only one who should learn how to use the power is mages, yet everyone in Thedas do not care about who falls victime of their actions, who rules, who is slaved, that can only be enforced on to mages, right?
Everything seems impossible when you sit and think about it and by not taking any action towards that goal.

Waiting for someone also to do it for you, is not the way to go, not one should care for you but yourself.
I wish to know how many people freed themself by just wishing, dreaming or talking about it.

Wich war have been fought and not one but the "bad people" had died? let me know what you believe after trying to find the amount and getting zero reference about it.

Anders never mention to be the leader, he wants HAWKE to lead the revolution, if you don't agree and have him rival then he wants to become a Martyr, but never a leader.

Meaning of Martyr: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martyr
Meaning of Leader:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leadership

I m not saying innocents people are NOT important, I m saying that they are going to die, people die in wars, been neutral towards it, been in favor or against they die. No war is won or lost without casualties stop deluding you'reself.

You sacrifies everyhting if you make a war, first and more important is YOU'RE life that you are putting on the lines, then you sacrifies you're friends lifes, because they'll follow you, then You're childrens will die for you, for you're cause... tell me is that  not enough sacrifices. isn't that price high enough? And yet people will do it, Myhawke knew bethany was going to die just because she was a mage. is my hawke lifes more worthy that bethany? She didn't think so , if Myhawke has to die for defending bethany, she will, and she will take few heads with her.

What sounds better? To me is way better if the chantry and templar will start teaching young mages that they are  cursed, that equality is for few and not everyone, that the mages do not fit as been humanoids, less being called humans or elves, they should start been called, monsters or weapons, that mages should be grateful for the mercy of the chantry and templars for allowing them to live. that mages very existance is a threat to real humans and themaker itself. Any mage questioning any of this should be put to death as soon as possible, mages shouldn't think for themself. <_< Happy?<_<

Ps; I just described how so many of the templars sees the mages, please ignore the last paragraph, is already happening in DA2.

Modifié par Huntress, 28 juin 2011 - 10:47 .