886 réponses à ce sujet

[Ryzaki]

Malcolm Hawke was not broken...I don't know where you got that from. Neither was Ella or Jowan Jowan's only issue was that he was a goddamn moron.

[esper]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

esper wrote...

I don't deny Tarohne was crazy, but her idea was better than: Let myself get possessed and do random damage. She specific targeted the templars in a place where it hurt - their paranoia. seen from a stricly war-point of view is getting the enemy to fight amongst themself a good strategy. From an etchical view was what she did terrible, and my Hawke is relieved to get rid of her before too many more jumps on the mages-are-evil bandwagon.

I agree. I wish Tarohne wasn't insane (along with Decimus, Grace, and pretty much every mage who doesn't bend knee to the Chantry) because I would have liked Hawke to side with a plan to dismantle the Order of Templars from their seat of power over Kirkwall. Ethically speaking, I think an apostate Hawke could think that it's better to die on your feet than live on your knees.

I think Tarohne should've stayed insane, but Hawke could've "That whole Templar thing was a good idea. Imperium 2.0 however, wasn't" (I'm conflicted on where I stand with the Templar possession thing. While a sound idea to demoralize them, there's no way to control the damage dealt. You may end up killing more good Templars than bad ones. you may end up killing mages too )

Even if she wasn't insane, I'd still kill her for wearing clown make-up. Plus there's still Idunna who can help in some way. Idunna could help by using her blood magic to only get secrets from the Templars and defend herself should they come after her, and could use regular magic to help an Apostate Hawke leading the Mage Underground, after Hawke either breaks her out of the Gallows or lets her go free, had those been an option.

I am so frustrating with Anders for keeping my Hawke out of the mage underground, I wanted to be part of it. And the templar possession plan was risky and etchically I still have some problems with it, but it is a step up, and I never understood why Trask didn't trusted Hawke if you are anti-meridith, but I am guessing that Grace was just to much: I hate the champion.
About Idunna is there anyway to not send her to the templars or kill her? I can't find a let her go option which I really wish there were.

[DPSSOC]

esper wrote...
About Idunna is there anyway to not send her to the templars or kill her? I can't find a let her go option which I really wish there were.

Forgive me it's early but WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?  She was complicit in the murder of how many people, she was going  to kill you, your friends, the lady who shows you the books, and for what?  Not to keep herself safe or ensure her freedom, but as part of some demented plan to raise another Imperium.  And you honestly want to let her go?  You are sitting in a room with an unrepentant murderer who just tried to make you their next victim and you're seriously thinking about letting them go?

[LobselVith8]

Sepewrath wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

People would get hurt whether Hawke stops or aids Tahrone - the mages living under Meredith's thumb, who suffer from templars like Ser Alrik and Ser Kerras, or the templars and their recruits. I could see a pragmatic pro-mage Hawke making such a decision, if the narrative permitted meaningful choices that were carried out throughout all three Acts. It would have even been nice if Decimus wasn't a cartoon and was instead a sane mage who would either accept assistance from a pro-mage Hawke or fight a pro-templar Hawke.

I cant imagine Decimus would have made much of an ally, the Circle broke him, he would have been nothing but a shining example of why there cant be apostates. He was definitely better off dead.

I meant if Decimus wasn't written as a complete moron like every mage antagonist who Hawke faces, because Decimus thinking that Hawke and his group are templars simply doesn't make any sense. It's as much of a plot railroad as Thrask thinking that the pro-mage, anti-Meredith apostate Hawke isn't going to be onboard for overthrowing the dictator that he spoke out against, but that would have required that we had a choice in the matter (much in the same way that Hawke let's the bad guy go in "Sheparding Wolves" and "Legacy" even if it's OOC for what we wanted our Hawke to do).

esper wrote...

I am so frustrating with Anders for keeping my Hawke out of the mage underground, I wanted to be part of it. And the templar possession plan was risky and etchically I still have some problems with it, but it is a step up, and I never understood why Trask didn't trusted Hawke if you are anti-meridith, but I am guessing that Grace was just to much: I hate the champion.

It's bad writing, it's as simple as that.

esper wrote...

About Idunna is there anyway to not send her to the templars or kill her? I can't find a let her go option which I really wish there were.

Unfortunately, no. You have to either kill Idunna or hand her over to the templars, because the writers never gave us the choice to agree that the templars need to be stopped for this quest.

[esper]

DPSSOC wrote...

esper wrote...
About Idunna is there anyway to not send her to the templars or kill her? I can't find a let her go option which I really wish there were.

Forgive me it's early but WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?  She was complicit in the murder of how many people, she was going  to kill you, your friends, the lady who shows you the books, and for what?  Not to keep herself safe or ensure her freedom, but as part of some demented plan to raise another Imperium.  And you honestly want to let her go?  You are sitting in a room with an unrepentant murderer who just tried to make you their next victim and you're seriously thinking about letting them go?

Because my blood mage Hawke is a anti-templar, pro-mage fighter? And she wanted to kill us because we were getting too close to the truth, I think Hawke has the ability to kill for less than that. And because I do not want to hand any sane mage over to the templars? Because she was a part of a plan that went beyond: "Let's get possessed." And because she was less crazy than Tarohne.

[EmperorSahlertz]

That Hawke can killed for less, should not spare the ones who do more.

[GodLikeDevil]

Blood Magic should be regulated. Not banned, but regulated. It's a tool, a dangerous one, but still yet another way of doing magic. If you ban it, more people will be drawn to the forbidden, and the greater the likelihood that an undesirable will learn it and abuse it. So better to acknowledge it, research on it further, in order that it may be utilized, and its abuse curbed and monitored.

I do not think it is inherently evil, but it makes whoever uses it susceptible to corruption, hence my stance of it being regulated.

[IanPolaris]

GodLikeDevil wrote...

Blood Magic should be regulated. Not banned, but regulated. It's a tool, a dangerous one, but still yet another way of doing magic. If you ban it, more people will be drawn to the forbidden, and the greater the likelihood that an undesirable will learn it and abuse it. So better to acknowledge it, research on it further, in order that it may be utilized, and its abuse curbed and monitored.

I do not think it is inherently evil, but it makes whoever uses it susceptible to corruption, hence my stance of it being regulated.

I completely agree.  IMHO Bloodmagic should be the "machine gun" of magic, i.e. strictly regulated and even prohibited to most normal mages, but not banned outright.  In fact banning it is IMHO one of the more brain-dead things the Chantry has done (and that's quite a feat given all the brain dead things the chantry has done) because banning Bloodmagic outright virtually insures that only the very worst element of mages (the ones you DON'T want having bloodmagic) are the ones that will have it....and given that Demons are accessible to any mage (depending on how risk adverse the mage is) and given that Demons can teach bloodmagic, it's not like the Chantry will EVER be able to stamp out all bloodmagic anyway.

-Polaris

[CrimsonZephyr]

IanPolaris wrote...
given that Demons are accessible to any mage (depending on how risk adverse the mage is) and given that Demons can teach bloodmagic, it's not like the Chantry will EVER be able to stamp out all bloodmagic anyway.

-Polaris

Well, they could try sending people into the Fade to just slaughter every spirit they see. It would be a more proactive solution than "don't get possessed, guys!"

Blood magic could possibly be regulated, but that wouldn't be politically expedient and face it, it doesn't have a very good record. If mages want to obtain public support, they are going to have to be even more fanatically anti-blood magic than the Templars - so fanatical that even the Templars think the mages are too hardcore about it. Whether it is inherently evil or not is beside the point. It's a question of perception. Because people think it's evil, it is therefore evil. Is that logically fallacious? Probably. But it's the only way blood magic is perceived.

[IanPolaris]

CrimsonZephyr wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...
given that Demons are accessible to any mage (depending on how risk adverse the mage is) and given that Demons can teach bloodmagic, it's not like the Chantry will EVER be able to stamp out all bloodmagic anyway.

-Polaris

Well, they could try sending people into the Fade to just slaughter every spirit they see. It would be a more proactive solution than "don't get possessed, guys!"

Blood magic could possibly be regulated, but that wouldn't be politically expedient and face it, it doesn't have a very good record. If mages want to obtain public support, they are going to have to be even more fanatically anti-blood magic than the Templars - so fanatical that even the Templars think the mages are too hardcore about it. Whether it is inherently evil or not is beside the point. It's a question of perception. Because people think it's evil, it is therefore evil. Is that logically fallacious? Probably. But it's the only way blood magic is perceived.

That is true only after a thousand years of the Chantry railing against bloodmagic.  Now, I do agree with you in part.  The mages themselves are going to have to control the criminal uses (such as unwilling human sacrifice) *pittilessly*, but I don't think it's a given that all bloodmagic would be considered evil for all time.

-Polaris

[EmperorSahlertz]

GodLikeDevil wrote...

Blood Magic should be regulated. Not banned, but regulated. It's a tool, a dangerous one, but still yet another way of doing magic. If you ban it, more people will be drawn to the forbidden, and the greater the likelihood that an undesirable will learn it and abuse it. So better to acknowledge it, research on it further, in order that it may be utilized, and its abuse curbed and monitored.

I do not think it is inherently evil, but it makes whoever uses it susceptible to corruption, hence my stance of it being regulated.

How exactly are you going to regulate someone, that can make you think everyhting is fine?

[LobselVith8]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

How exactly are you going to regulate someone, that can make you think everyhting is fine?

Blood magic isn't all powerful. If it was, no blood mage would have ever been defeated in the history of Thedas.

[EmperorSahlertz]

They don't need to be all-powerful. All they need is to manipulate whoever is assigned to regulate them. Which they can.

[TEWR]

I imagine mind control is a bit more obvious than how easy you make it out to be Emp.

Especially if someone makes you do something in public that you wouldn't want to do.


EDIT: Hand out copies of the Litany of Adralla to everyone. That's a good way to regulate blood magic.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 11 août 2011 - 08:23 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

I doubt that they are going to tie all blood mages to sticks in the marketplace and regulate them there, in full view of the public.

[CrimsonZephyr]

IanPolaris wrote...

CrimsonZephyr wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...
given that Demons are accessible to any mage (depending on how risk adverse the mage is) and given that Demons can teach bloodmagic, it's not like the Chantry will EVER be able to stamp out all bloodmagic anyway.

-Polaris

Well, they could try sending people into the Fade to just slaughter every spirit they see. It would be a more proactive solution than "don't get possessed, guys!"

Blood magic could possibly be regulated, but that wouldn't be politically expedient and face it, it doesn't have a very good record. If mages want to obtain public support, they are going to have to be even more fanatically anti-blood magic than the Templars - so fanatical that even the Templars think the mages are too hardcore about it. Whether it is inherently evil or not is beside the point. It's a question of perception. Because people think it's evil, it is therefore evil. Is that logically fallacious? Probably. But it's the only way blood magic is perceived.

That is true only after a thousand years of the Chantry railing against bloodmagic.  Now, I do agree with you in part.  The mages themselves are going to have to control the criminal uses (such as unwilling human sacrifice) *pittilessly*, but I don't think it's a given that all bloodmagic would be considered evil for all time.

-Polaris

It's not that the Chantry is necessarily entirely wrong. They are correct in that blood magic has many dangers and many applications that are disturbing. Whether blood magic has any beneficial uses remains to be seen. In my view, the Chantry's problem is in enforcing their ban on blood magic, they use it as a pretext to rile up anti-mage sentiment in general. Nevertheless, while regular magic may become more widely accepted, blood magic will not. It has too many possible abuses and it is a PR disaster waiting to happen. Mages really need to focus more on their reputation and less on the isolated academic possibilities of esoteric subjects.

But on an unrelated note, blood magic is rather obvious. I mean, there are only a few possible things one could be doing if they randomly spill half a gallon of their own blood.

Modifié par CrimsonZephyr, 11 août 2011 - 08:34 .

[DKJaigen]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

GodLikeDevil wrote...

Blood Magic should be regulated. Not banned, but regulated. It's a tool, a dangerous one, but still yet another way of doing magic. If you ban it, more people will be drawn to the forbidden, and the greater the likelihood that an undesirable will learn it and abuse it. So better to acknowledge it, research on it further, in order that it may be utilized, and its abuse curbed and monitored.

I do not think it is inherently evil, but it makes whoever uses it susceptible to corruption, hence my stance of it being regulated.

How exactly are you going to regulate someone, that can make you think everyhting is fine?

By being a bloodmage yourself. rogue bloodmages controlling kings and queens is inevitable you may as well train your own   bloodmages to counter it

[Dave of Canada]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I imagine mind control is a bit more obvious than how easy you make it out to be Emp.

Avernus admit he did it to assist the Warden rebellion, I think it was using blood magic to control lords or something. No idea.

[TEWR]

He used it on Teyrn Cousland I believe. But that doesn't say much about whether it was subtle or obvious.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 11 août 2011 - 09:00 .

[Vit246]

I believe the mind control aspect of blood magic is simply over-exaggerated by the Chantry for purposes of fear-mongering. Don't misunderstand, I imagine mind control is powerful, but not that powerful to the point where mind control is utterly subtle and never obvious at all. If mind control was actually that easy and powerful, than why isn't the Tevinter Imperium still ruling all of Thedas?

Modifié par Vit246, 11 août 2011 - 09:10 .

[Herr Uhl]

Vit246 wrote...

I believe the mind control aspect of blood magic is simply over-exaggerated by the Chantry for purposes of fear-mongering. Don't misunderstand, I imagine mind control is powerful, but not that powerful to the point where mind control is utterly subtle and not obvious at all. If mind control was actually that easy and powerful, than why isn't the Tevinter Imperium still ruling all of Thedas?

Because there are more people with pointy sticks than people that can mind control? I presume they can only mind-control one person at the time.

[Dave of Canada]

If it was obvious, I'd assume somebody would mention something.

[DKJaigen]

Dave of Canada wrote...

If it was obvious, I'd assume somebody would mention something.

We have never seen somebody mind controlled before. or a least we never seen somebody being mind controlled and communicating at the same time. It can be very obvious.

[EmperorSahlertz]

DKJaigen wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

GodLikeDevil wrote...

Blood Magic should be regulated. Not banned, but regulated. It's a tool, a dangerous one, but still yet another way of doing magic. If you ban it, more people will be drawn to the forbidden, and the greater the likelihood that an undesirable will learn it and abuse it. So better to acknowledge it, research on it further, in order that it may be utilized, and its abuse curbed and monitored.

I do not think it is inherently evil, but it makes whoever uses it susceptible to corruption, hence my stance of it being regulated.

How exactly are you going to regulate someone, that can make you think everyhting is fine?

By being a bloodmage yourself. rogue bloodmages controlling kings and queens is inevitable you may as well train your own   bloodmages to counter it

And if *your* blood mage decides to manipulate you? THe one you have had trained, and trust to protect you? Who will watch him? ANOTHER blood mage? Yeah, better ban the practice completely and eradicate all knowledge of it.
And If the mind control of Teyrn Cousland was obvious don't you think someone would have noticed and NOT joinned the rebellion?