49 réponses à ce sujet

[Harid]

We've had literally two different interpretations on why the Qunari left Thedas, and Bioware literally has not even attempted to come up with a true history of the conflict. We've literally been told the results from two entirely different point of views, and people only seem to take the one that goes along with their views, it seems.

It kind of muddies what exactly stopped the Qunari from taking Thedas.

[MichaelFinnegan]

HTTP 404 wrote...

I could possibly see the first circle being a haven for tevinter mages given by a charitable chantry at the time.  But to go through all those centuries without change or conflict till Da2? it just seems unbelievable to me, why now?

I don't have any definite answer to that, of course. Except to say: it had to happen at some time, and well DA is the time when Bioware wants us to see it. 

I just wish in the games they would talk more of the history of the circles because it just seems to me and probably most gamers that circles exist just to exist. Especially since the oaverarching plot in DA2 is about mages and templars.  If history was talked about a little more about the circles about past start up rebellions or Divines in the past wanting circles abolished, etc.  It would shed more light on the mage plight over the centuries instead of taking Ander's word for it.

I believe there are at least some compelling reasons for the existence of the Circles, which others have noted. But I agree with you about the lore. I also think we needed more history about the Circles  - more codex entries, more first hand experiences, a bit more perspective on the templars and mages, and so on. It almost appears as if DA2 was rushed out before building the full plot. . The history of the elves, dwarves, etc. seems to be getting revealed ever so slowly, piecemeal, and this does make it seem as if the mage vs. templar conflict could have waited a bit longer, too.

[Wulfram]

The Circles represent a way to control mages without forcing them into open rebellion. They may resent it, and some may try to escape, but for most it is tolerable and safe, which is better than death or tranquility.

If you committed yourself to killing all mages, then mages would be forced to fight back. And while they might not win, they'd be almost impossible to finally defeat - new mages are always being born after all.

Of course, excessive oppression such as went on in the Kirkwall circle risks defeating this purpose - if their imprisonment is not tolerable, then they have no reason not to rebel.

[HTTP 404]

MichaelFinnegan wrote...

HTTP 404 wrote...

I could possibly see the first circle being a haven for tevinter mages given by a charitable chantry at the time.  But to go through all those centuries without change or conflict till Da2? it just seems unbelievable to me, why now?

I don't have any definite answer to that, of course. Except to say: it had to happen at some time, and well DA is the time when Bioware wants us to see it. 

I just wish in the games they would talk more of the history of the circles because it just seems to me and probably most gamers that circles exist just to exist. Especially since the oaverarching plot in DA2 is about mages and templars.  If history was talked about a little more about the circles about past start up rebellions or Divines in the past wanting circles abolished, etc.  It would shed more light on the mage plight over the centuries instead of taking Ander's word for it.

I believe there are at least some compelling reasons for the existence of the Circles, which others have noted. But I agree with you about the lore. I also think we needed more history about the Circles  - more codex entries, more first hand experiences, a bit more perspective on the templars and mages, and so on. It almost appears as if DA2 was rushed out before building the full plot. . The history of the elves, dwarves, etc. seems to be getting revealed ever so slowly, piecemeal, and this does make it seem as if the mage vs. templar conflict could have waited a bit longer, too.

Im glad you see where I am coming from.    I dont doubt the way circles work, I honestly do not know why they begun or history on it over the centuries.

[HTTP 404]

Wulfram wrote...

The Circles represent a way to control mages without forcing them into open rebellion. They may resent it, and some may try to escape, but for most it is tolerable and safe, which is better than death or tranquility.

If you committed yourself to killing all mages, then mages would be forced to fight back. And while they might not win, they'd be almost impossible to finally defeat - new mages are always being born after all.

Of course, excessive oppression such as went on in the Kirkwall circle risks defeating this purpose - if their imprisonment is not tolerable, then they have no reason not to rebel.

I understand how the circle works, my question is why do they exist in the first place.  while your answer may seem to answer my question, it doesn't.  Mages make up a very minusicle part of the population, oppressing the minority population does not equate to imprisioning them in fear of rebellion.  It isn't like there are entire villages of mages out there if there were to be no circles.

Previous posters have said mages are useful in creating items, healing, and warefare.  All good reasons for Chantry in having circles.  However, why is this implied, read between the lines, etc. in the lore?

[Torax]

HTTP 404 wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

The Circles represent a way to control mages without forcing them into open rebellion. They may resent it, and some may try to escape, but for most it is tolerable and safe, which is better than death or tranquility.

If you committed yourself to killing all mages, then mages would be forced to fight back. And while they might not win, they'd be almost impossible to finally defeat - new mages are always being born after all.

Of course, excessive oppression such as went on in the Kirkwall circle risks defeating this purpose - if their imprisonment is not tolerable, then they have no reason not to rebel.

I understand how the circle works, my question is why do they exist in the first place.  while your answer may seem to answer my question, it doesn't.  Mages make up a very minusicle part of the population, oppressing the minority population does not equate to imprisioning them in fear of rebellion.  It isn't like there are entire villages of mages out there if there were to be no circles.

Previous posters have said mages are useful in creating items, healing, and warefare.  All good reasons for Chantry in having circles.  However, why is this implied, read between the lines, etc. in the lore?

It's read between the lines because the Chantry was founded ages ago. If your keeping track that is so long ago that many blights have arrived since then. So for the land as you are playing it? It's ancient history. Just because a character doesn't state exactly why they were made doesn't even mean they would be correct. The only person who maybe able to shed light on the subject is possibly Flemeth and she could even be lieing for her own amusement. Otherwise it would just be an opinion of someone who wasn't there before the idea of creating the Circles was founded. Not everything in the game needs to spelled out to the letter. I don't need to know exactly why there are Spectres in Mass Effect either. It's not important to the story at all. Only that they exist is relevent...

[GavrielKay]

There is a codex entry on the "History of the Circles," written by Sister Petrine.

http://dragonage.wik...y_of_the_Circle

It says that the mages agreed to live in the circles. I would think those mages didn't have anything like Kirkwall in mind.

[HTTP 404]

Torax wrote...



It's read between the lines because the Chantry was founded ages ago. If your keeping track that is so long ago that many blights have arrived since then. So for the land as you are playing it? It's ancient history. Just because a character doesn't state exactly why they were made doesn't even mean they would be correct. The only person who maybe able to shed light on the subject is possibly Flemeth and she could even be lieing for her own amusement. Otherwise it would just be an opinion of someone who wasn't there before the idea of creating the Circles was founded. Not everything in the game needs to spelled out to the letter. I don't need to know exactly why there are Spectres in Mass Effect either. It's not important to the story at all. Only that they exist is relevent...

In DA:O, this was true.  I didn't care about the history of the circle as the main plot didn't pertain to it.  In DA2, the main plot does pertain to the mage plight.  Thus a mention here and there from various characters in the game about circle history would go a long way in understanding and sheding perspective on the plot in Da2.

[HTTP 404]

GavrielKay wrote...

There is a codex entry on the "History of the Circles," written by Sister Petrine.

http://dragonage.wik...y_of_the_Circle

It says that the mages agreed to live in the circles. I would think those mages didn't have anything like Kirkwall in mind.

There would seem imo that there was an evolution of how the circles were in the beginning to how they came to be by Dragon Age time. interesting stuff

[Torax]

HTTP 404 wrote...

Torax wrote...



It's read between the lines because the Chantry was founded ages ago. If your keeping track that is so long ago that many blights have arrived since then. So for the land as you are playing it? It's ancient history. Just because a character doesn't state exactly why they were made doesn't even mean they would be correct. The only person who maybe able to shed light on the subject is possibly Flemeth and she could even be lieing for her own amusement. Otherwise it would just be an opinion of someone who wasn't there before the idea of creating the Circles was founded. Not everything in the game needs to spelled out to the letter. I don't need to know exactly why there are Spectres in Mass Effect either. It's not important to the story at all. Only that they exist is relevent...

In DA:O, this was true.  I didn't care about the history of the circle as the main plot didn't pertain to it.  In DA2, the main plot does pertain to the mage plight.  Thus a mention here and there from various characters in the game about circle history would go a long way in understanding and sheding perspective on the plot in Da2.

You are glossing over something. THEY WERE NOT THERE TO KNOW WHY IT WAS FOUNDED. Sorry for the all caps. Because NO ONE in the game was there for the founding they cannot even tell you anything about that exact fact. Your constantly being bothered by that is basically the equivalent of being a troll. Constantly using a safety net to keep pointing some jab towards Bioware? Just because the game doesn't appease some small fact for you does not mean they should or that you should keep bringing that up over and over. Points for why many would want the Circles to exist have already been made. Since you already know the game doesn't state exactly why it happened? Doesn't mean you need to use that as an excuse to continue the thread more and more without adding anything new to it.

Modifié par Torax, 19 juillet 2011 - 07:13 .

[maxernst]

HTTP 404 wrote...

GavrielKay wrote...

There is a codex entry on the "History of the Circles," written by Sister Petrine.

http://dragonage.wik...y_of_the_Circle

It says that the mages agreed to live in the circles. I would think those mages didn't have anything like Kirkwall in mind.

There would seem imo that there was an evolution of how the circles were in the beginning to how they came to be by Dragon Age time. interesting stuff

The Kirkwall circle is run by a lunatic.  I don't think it's representative of what the Orlesian Chantry has in mind either.  And don't forget at the time the circles were founded, the populace was probably out for blood, so they might well have seen living in the Circles under Templar supervision as being preferable to taking their chances in the outside world.  And that's assuming that "agreed to live in the Circle" isn't under duress, as in I agreed to give the man my wallet when he pointed a gun at me.  Who knows what the agenda of Sister Petrine is?

[Wulfram]

HTTP 404 wrote...

I understand how the circle works, my question is why do they exist in the first place.  while your answer may seem to answer my question, it doesn't.  Mages make up a very minusicle part of the population, oppressing the minority population does not equate to imprisioning them in fear of rebellion.  It isn't like there are entire villages of mages out there if there were to be no circles.

What's relevant isn't mage's numbers, but their power.  In open rebellion, they can cause untold damage.  Unconstrained, the Chantry fears they will rule.  So the Chantry looks for a solution which will control mages without provoking open rebellion.

[GavrielKay]

maxernst wrote...

The Kirkwall circle is run by a lunatic.  I don't think it's representative of what the Orlesian Chantry has in mind either.  And don't forget at the time the circles were founded, the populace was probably out for blood, so they might well have seen living in the Circles under Templar supervision as being preferable to taking their chances in the outside world.  And that's assuming that "agreed to live in the Circle" isn't under duress, as in I agreed to give the man my wallet when he pointed a gun at me.  Who knows what the agenda of Sister Petrine is?

From the Petrine codex, it doesn't sound like the mages were given a choice between being free (and risking backlash from the civilians) or being locked up.  It was more that they could either keep being the lighters of the eternal flame and nothing else, or they could live in circles away from people and maybe learn and do more magic.  To me it sounds like they chose the lesser of two evils at the time, but it grew to a larger evil in the next 1000 years.

I don't know if Petrine can be considered an objective or knowlegeable source on this, as it's been pointed out that it happened a long time ago.

[Torax]

GavrielKay wrote...

maxernst wrote...

The Kirkwall circle is run by a lunatic.  I don't think it's representative of what the Orlesian Chantry has in mind either.  And don't forget at the time the circles were founded, the populace was probably out for blood, so they might well have seen living in the Circles under Templar supervision as being preferable to taking their chances in the outside world.  And that's assuming that "agreed to live in the Circle" isn't under duress, as in I agreed to give the man my wallet when he pointed a gun at me.  Who knows what the agenda of Sister Petrine is?

From the Petrine codex, it doesn't sound like the mages were given a choice between being free (and risking backlash from the civilians) or being locked up.  It was more that they could either keep being the lighters of the eternal flame and nothing else, or they could live in circles away from people and maybe learn and do more magic.  To me it sounds like they chose the lesser of two evils at the time, but it grew to a larger evil in the next 1000 years.

I don't know if Petrine can be considered an objective or knowlegeable source on this, as it's been pointed out that it happened a long time ago.

Aye, since it's a codex from a woman who is just stating it as how she wished it to be told? We can attempt to take it at face value but odds are it's not fully pure. Either way it's the opinion listed by a member of one party in the conflict. Like taking the Word of a Tevinter Magister over and Elf about Elven History. Elves believe they were once immortal. Tevinter Magisters claimed they were never immortal. Who is right? When a Codex tends to support an opinion it's stated as if it's fact. But in the end it's information written by a character who is only stating their opinion. So for example, the many musings of the Qunari by Brother Genativi? We can only go on what he thinks they are and the few things they've told him. We definitely can't take it as one clear truth.

TLDR, A Codex is an opinion piece so without having agreed opinion history writings from every party in the matter in question? We can't even consider it all true. Lastly one that isn't even there now? Wishing it to just appear is like me wishing it wasn't over 100 degrees for my ride home today.

Modifié par Torax, 19 juillet 2011 - 11:30 .

[GavrielKay]

I think it's fairly obvious that the circles continue to exist because the Chantry has enough power to insist on it. The mages are too valuable a resource against the Qunari (and financially) to simply kill them. But the Chantry doesn't want to set them free either. There are lots of motives - noble and otherwise - for this on the Chantry side, but the fact is that they have enough power that they can enforce their will in the matter.

[HTTP 404]

GavrielKay wrote...

I think it's fairly obvious that the circles continue to exist because the Chantry has enough power to insist on it. The mages are too valuable a resource against the Qunari (and financially) to simply kill them. But the Chantry doesn't want to set them free either. There are lots of motives - noble and otherwise - for this on the Chantry side, but the fact is that they have enough power that they can enforce their will in the matter.

truth. except (obviously) that Chantry power (or templar for that matter) was not enough for Kirkwall circle incident (I dont think Kirkwall circle ever rebeled).   I am curious to see how the other circles came to this conclusion to revolt because of what happened in Kirkwall.  I can the reasons many have given here about the purpose of circles, maybe I just fail at seeing it so inherently like many here do in the games. 

Modifié par HTTP 404, 21 juillet 2011 - 02:03 .

[Sith Grey Warden]

I think another function of the Circles is to show that the Chantry is needed so that rulers in places like Ferelden (where Maric considered breaking ties to the Divine after taking the throne) won't try to usurp the Chantry. Without the Chantry and its Templars, mages would be running amok in the countryside, destroying villages, becoming abominations, and making the world unsafe for kittens and virgins!

[maxernst]

GavrielKay wrote...

I think it's fairly obvious that the circles continue to exist because the Chantry has enough power to insist on it. The mages are too valuable a resource against the Qunari (and financially) to simply kill them. But the Chantry doesn't want to set them free either. There are lots of motives - noble and otherwise - for this on the Chantry side, but the fact is that they have enough power that they can enforce their will in the matter.

I'm pretty sure that the nobility are just as happy not to have the problem of policing rogue mages, as well.  Even if they're small in number, they're going to be difficult for regular guards to bring to justice.  A big city might be able to handle them, but the sheriff in a small village is going to be overmatched.  They might envy the access to mages, but on the other hand (as we hear from Isolde), nobles are able to call upon mages for aid, so that probably mollifies that source of friction.  Plus, the Chantry probably supports the status quo in general, teaching the masses to be meek and humble and accept their lot in life.  One thing I like about DA is that the societies portrayed generally make sense from a functionalist point of view.  Too many fantasy worlds use quasi-feudal systems but don't seem to have the social glue to make the system stable, or rely on the people in power being inexplicably benign...the rulers of the city are lawful good!  Medieval Europe would have been a very different society without the church.  You can't just replace the Catholic Church with a sort of tolerant polytheistic culture and leave the rest of the social fabric untouched.

That's why I'm pessimistic about the opportunities for Anders' revolution to work.  It requires such a huge change in the social order.  The Chantry is a big part of the society and controlling magic is a big part of their entire purpose.  I'm not enthused about recreating the Tevinter experiment, and I can't see how you can ensure that mages receive proper training and without some sort of limits on their freedom.  As I've said elsewhere, I so wanted to help in a coup to replace Meredith with Thrask.  It only changes Kirkwall, but Kirkwall's a start...I hate Grace.  Stupid ****.

[GavrielKay]

maxernst wrote...
That's why I'm pessimistic about the opportunities for Anders' revolution to work.  It requires such a huge change in the social order.  The Chantry is a big part of the society and controlling magic is a big part of their entire purpose.  I'm not enthused about recreating the Tevinter experiment, and I can't see how you can ensure that mages receive proper training and without some sort of limits on their freedom.  As I've said elsewhere, I so wanted to help in a coup to replace Meredith with Thrask.  It only changes Kirkwall, but Kirkwall's a start...I hate Grace.  Stupid ****.

It will be interesting to see how they write it.  I hope they can actually craft a story that accounts for human nature.  There are ways to do it, especially if they put in a time lapse, but we'll see.

I hate Grace as well.  She was a low point in the storyline.  That and the whole Best Served Cold quest that assumes I'm supporting the Templars even though I publicly denounced Meredith at the beginning of Act 3.

[TEWR]

I hate how they say "We know you're spying for Orsino!"

Yes, I am spying for the man who fights for better lives for mages. I'm spying for the man who made it known that he wants Meredith gone. I'm spying for the man who hates her with a burning passion of burning hate.

So what? You attack me? Where's the logic there?

It's even worse when you add in how Hawke can't even tell them to not attack him. And it's made worse still by the fact that it can be traced back to Decimus acting like an idiot, which caused Grace to act like an idiot.

[HTTP 404]

Wulfram wrote...

HTTP 404 wrote...

I understand how the circle works, my question is why do they exist in the first place.  while your answer may seem to answer my question, it doesn't.  Mages make up a very minusicle part of the population, oppressing the minority population does not equate to imprisioning them in fear of rebellion.  It isn't like there are entire villages of mages out there if there were to be no circles.

What's relevant isn't mage's numbers, but their power.  In open rebellion, they can cause untold damage.  Unconstrained, the Chantry fears they will rule.  So the Chantry looks for a solution which will control mages without provoking open rebellion.

IDK, isolated attacks by powerful individuals doesn't equal rebellion, they could still fund templars to hunt apostates anyways.  I doubt it would be difficult to have an organized rebellion for a mage born in a town where there is probably no other mage.  But I respect that the chantry will control mages in a circle out of charity instead of hunting them.

[HTTP 404]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I hate how they say "We know you're spying for Orsino!"

Yes, I am spying for the man who fights for better lives for mages. I'm spying for the man who made it known that he wants Meredith gone. I'm spying for the man who hates her with a burning passion of burning hate.

So what? You attack me? Where's the logic there?

It's even worse when you add in how Hawke can't even tell them to not attack him. And it's made worse still by the fact that it can be traced back to Decimus acting like an idiot, which caused Grace to act like an idiot.

that whole scenario frustrates me when replaying... I've tried so hard to kill Grace earlier to no option at all for that.  I feel like every mage and templar you meet end up dying except Cullen.

[Sons of Horus]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I hate how they say "We know you're spying for Orsino!"

Yes, I am spying for the man who fights for better lives for mages. I'm spying for the man who made it known that he wants Meredith gone. I'm spying for the man who hates her with a burning passion of burning hate.

So what? You attack me? Where's the logic there?

It's even worse when you add in how Hawke can't even tell them to not attack him. And it's made worse still by the fact that it can be traced back to Decimus acting like an idiot, which caused Grace to act like an idiot.

Perhaps Orsino has his own agenda The Ethereal Writer Redux. After all it was mentioned in his letter to Quentin that he had been practicing blood magic too. Would this be a similar case to Uldred to try to deflect suspicion or to rid himself of a rival group forming in his own powerbase (I.e. Grace to stop her openly using blood magic) ?

[CrimsonZephyr]

Sons of Horus wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I hate how they say "We know you're spying for Orsino!"

Yes, I am spying for the man who fights for better lives for mages. I'm spying for the man who made it known that he wants Meredith gone. I'm spying for the man who hates her with a burning passion of burning hate.

So what? You attack me? Where's the logic there?

It's even worse when you add in how Hawke can't even tell them to not attack him. And it's made worse still by the fact that it can be traced back to Decimus acting like an idiot, which caused Grace to act like an idiot.

Perhaps Orsino has his own agenda The Ethereal Writer Redux. After all it was mentioned in his letter to Quentin that he had been practicing blood magic too. Would this be a similar case to Uldred to try to deflect suspicion or to rid himself of a rival group forming in his own powerbase (I.e. Grace to stop her openly using blood magic) ?

I don't think so. Uldred was pretty obviously a guy with an agenda. He had been planning his rebellion for ages, had political support from Loghain, and had trumpeted himself as the Circle's #1 maleficarum hunter. Orsino provided Quentin with materials and research notes, and openly admits he had no idea the gravity of his crimes. During both endings. So we know that much is true. Likely, Orsino maintained a scientific interest, but assumed Quentin was using cadavers. Though, one wonders why, upon discovering how insane Quentin was, Orsino didn't just find a way to have him assassinated.

[GavrielKay]

CrimsonZephyr wrote...
Though, one wonders why, upon discovering how insane Quentin was, Orsino didn't just find a way to have him assassinated.

Because something about Kirkwall mentally cripples anyone who might actually accomplish something good before everything goes to hell.