585 réponses à ce sujet

[Dave of Canada]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

What makes you think the Templars loyal to the state instead of the Chantry will treat mages any better? The Templars need to be loyal to an ideal. They should be seperated from the Chantry, but certainly not become part of the state.

They'd also have to submit to the rule of the monarchy who might fully demand eliminating the mages or releasing them, nothing keeping them in check like the Chantry. Who says a monarch wouldn't demand that all mages be trained like war dogs, to be used in his battles against other nations?

[TJPags]

Oh, now we're back onto two old issues:

The Harrowing is so terrible. I suppose nobody here was ever taught to swim by being tossed into a pond or a pool?

And yes, put the Circles under control of the nation its in. So we have on consistency whatsoever, no guarantee of cooperation, lives of mages subject to the whim of the ruler regarding whether they live or die, live well or poorly, are even taught to read, or are simply kept as war machines.

Ahhh, yes, all these are so much better.

[TEWR]

TJPags wrote...

Oh, now we're back onto two old issues:

The Harrowing is so terrible. I suppose nobody here was ever taught to swim by being tossed into a pond or a pool?

I taught myself. No one tossed me into a pool or helped me learn.

Not that I mean anything by that in regards to the Harrowing.

And yes, put the Circles under control of the nation its in. So we have on consistency whatsoever, no guarantee of cooperation, lives of mages subject to the whim of the ruler regarding whether they live or die, live well or poorly, are even taught to read, or are simply kept as war machines.

Ahhh, yes, all these are so much better.

I think it depends on how the state implements control of the Circles to fall under their jurisdiction. If they set up a bunch of rules and guidelines that were absolute, it might not be so bad.

[Cobra's_back]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

What makes you think the Templars loyal to the state instead of the Chantry will treat mages any better? The Templars need to be loyal to an ideal. They should be seperated from the Chantry, but certainly not become part of the state.

New laws written up covering the rights of all citizens (mages included). The war with the mages isn’t going to go always. I’m not saying the Templars rule. I’m proposing inputs from both groups are addressed by the state. This could be a king and his parliament. The Templar can have all the ideals they want as long as it does not conflict with the rights of citizens. This allows the Templars views to be heard. They don’t have to be part of the state. It would be to their benefit to have a representative at the state level. The same should be said for mages.

[TJPags]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Oh, now we're back onto two old issues:

The Harrowing is so terrible. I suppose nobody here was ever taught to swim by being tossed into a pond or a pool?

I taught myself. No one tossed me into a pool or helped me learn.

Not that I mean anything by that in regards to the Harrowing.

And yes, put the Circles under control of the nation its in. So we have on consistency whatsoever, no guarantee of cooperation, lives of mages subject to the whim of the ruler regarding whether they live or die, live well or poorly, are even taught to read, or are simply kept as war machines.

Ahhh, yes, all these are so much better.

I think it depends on how the state implements control of the Circles to fall under their jurisdiction. If they set up a bunch of rules and guidelines that were absolute, it might not be so bad.

To take the second point first:  But the point is, each nation may have radically different rules, some better, some worse than what we have now.  If so, how would that be better?

To the first point:  You taught yourself?  While I find that impressive, I'd think it dangerous.  Anyway, my point was, there are a lot things we learn even today that have significant risk, and are done without warning and with limited if any training.  I personally see the Harrowing no differently.

[phaonica]

TJPags wrote...

To take the second point first:  But the point is, each nation may have radically different rules, some better, some worse than what we have now.  If so, how would that be better?

If the mages were given any freedom to move from one nation to another, they'd potentially have somewhere else to go if they didn't like the rules. Also, there could be multiple concurrent experiments going on dealing with what methods seem to best offer the best balance of safety and freedom for both mages and nonmages.

[TEWR]

TJPags wrote...


To take the second point first:  But the point is, each nation may have radically different rules, some better, some worse than what we have now.  If so, how would that be better?

To the first point:  You taught yourself?  While I find that impressive, I'd think it dangerous.  Anyway, my point was, there are a lot things we learn even today that have significant risk, and are done without warning and with limited if any training.  I personally see the Harrowing no differently.

Perhaps the state and the Circles of each state would have to meet to set up the appropriate rules for each nation? I don't know.

Thing is though, what we put ourselves at risk for in our world have certain precautions in place to make sure we still survive. Cars have seat belts and airbags. Pools have lifeguards.

The Harrowing has the person going in, and there is no way to save them if something happens. There's only a way to save other people, which while good, wouldn't have to happen if the Harrowing and what it entailed was taught to the mages.

And it wasn't so bad learning on my own. Doggie paddle at first (as embarassing as that was even though I was a kid) from one side to another, and then once I did that I started practicing other styles. There were ledges for me to grab onto if I needed to, but I never had to.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 28 septembre 2011 - 12:28 .

[dragonflight288]

First thing when discussing issues or reforms on anything is to remember one very important fact. No system is perfect. Everything always look better on paper than in practice.

Yes, each individual ruler is different and the views may change from one king to his heir a couple decades down the line. But the thing that will be improved is the Chantry losing its political and military power. They can preach and holler all they want, they may encourage crusades, but because the Chantry itself is so tied into Orlesian politics, taking magic and templars aside, Whatever they may or may not decide to do will also be in Orlais's interest.

They don't teach or even read the Canticle of Shartan because it's considered far too heretical. The idea that elves are equal to humans is a scandal many humans will despise. And elves would hate it too (Dalish self-righteousness. I'm looking at you)

As for people objecting to new ideas to reform or improve the circle, saying we don't have results or proof that shows it's better than what's in place. That's true, we don't have proof. But we do have proof that the current system is an epic failure and definitely needs reforms.

[Heimdall]

I don't see how putting the Templars under the control of the state would be much better. One or two monarchs might free mages at their own risk. We would do well to remember that most people in Thedas fear magic, a sympathetic monarch may very well face open rebellion. Or, of course, a Monarch might train his mages as war machines or simply wipe them out all together to save tax revenue in maintaining their prisons. It could be better, but it seems more likely to me that it would end up being worse for the mages.

Note: I've always taken the Harrowing to be the Mage's chance to prove that they are able to resist demons, not to teach them how. It is this proof that allows the First Enchanter and the Knight Commander to put in the signatures and advance you to the rank of fully fledged Mage so that you may continue your magical studies and gain more magical power (Thus attracting more demons).

Modifié par Lord Aesir, 28 septembre 2011 - 12:38 .

[Heimdall]

dragonflight288 wrote...

First thing when discussing issues or reforms on anything is to remember one very important fact. No system is perfect. Everything always look better on paper than in practice.

Yes, each individual ruler is different and the views may change from one king to his heir a couple decades down the line. But the thing that will be improved is the Chantry losing its political and military power. They can preach and holler all they want, they may encourage crusades, but because the Chantry itself is so tied into Orlesian politics, taking magic and templars aside, Whatever they may or may not decide to do will also be in Orlais's interest.

They don't teach or even read the Canticle of Shartan because it's considered far too heretical. The idea that elves are equal to humans is a scandal many humans will despise. And elves would hate it too (Dalish self-righteousness. I'm looking at you)

As for people objecting to new ideas to reform or improve the circle, saying we don't have results or proof that shows it's better than what's in place. That's true, we don't have proof. But we do have proof that the current system is an epic failure and definitely needs reforms.

True, but we also need proof a new system wouldn't just be worse.

[EmperorSahlertz]

dragonflight288 wrote...

First thing when discussing issues or reforms on anything is to remember one very important fact. No system is perfect. Everything always look better on paper than in practice.

Yes, each individual ruler is different and the views may change from one king to his heir a couple decades down the line. But the thing that will be improved is the Chantry losing its political and military power. They can preach and holler all they want, they may encourage crusades, but because the Chantry itself is so tied into Orlesian politics, taking magic and templars aside, Whatever they may or may not decide to do will also be in Orlais's interest.

They don't teach or even read the Canticle of Shartan because it's considered far too heretical. The idea that elves are equal to humans is a scandal many humans will despise. And elves would hate it too (Dalish self-righteousness. I'm looking at you)

As for people objecting to new ideas to reform or improve the circle, saying we don't have results or proof that shows it's better than what's in place. That's true, we don't have proof. But we do have proof that the current system is an epic failure and definitely needs reforms.

So you don't care at all about the mages' well-being. You just want to decrease the Chantry's influence and power.

[TJPags]

phaonica wrote...

TJPags wrote...

To take the second point first:  But the point is, each nation may have radically different rules, some better, some worse than what we have now.  If so, how would that be better?

If the mages were given any freedom to move from one nation to another, they'd potentially have somewhere else to go if they didn't like the rules. Also, there could be multiple concurrent experiments going on dealing with what methods seem to best offer the best balance of safety and freedom for both mages and nonmages.

See, I don't know if that would happen.  The mages in a country become a resource.  I'm not so sure any given country is going to allow them to leave.  They might be viewed as spies, as traitors, etc.  No guarantee nations would trade secrets, either.

Even in these mage threads, there are a lot of people who mention the mages being useful in war.  People mention it often in terms of Alistair hoarding mages from the Chantry in the event of an Orlesian invasion. 

Given that view, why would a ruler let mages leave?  Why would they discuss the best way to keep them alive with other rulers?  After all, if I have them, and you don't, I have an edge, right?  If yours die from poor training, better for me.

IMO, doing this makes mages a national resource, and I don't see a lot of altruism about the best way to treat/train them.

[Cobra's_back]

Dave of Canada wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

What makes you think the Templars loyal to the state instead of the Chantry will treat mages any better? The Templars need to be loyal to an ideal. They should be seperated from the Chantry, but certainly not become part of the state.

They'd also have to submit to the rule of the monarchy who might fully demand eliminating the mages or releasing them, nothing keeping them in check like the Chantry. Who says a monarch wouldn't demand that all mages be trained like war dogs, to be used in his battles against other nations?

It may be their religious conviction that gets in the way of treating the mages as an equal. Whatever the problem, mages can’t get married, have a home or raise a family. Take religion out of it and have a bunch of guys arguing in parliament might just get everyone what they mostly need. The only reason I wanted a representative from the Templars is because they have the longest fighting history with the mages. They could act as a check and balance to the Mages demands.  
I agree with what you say. History has had some super bad Monarchs. On the lighter side if Anders had a wife and two screaming kids he might have been too busy to blow up the chantry.

[TEWR]

TJPags wrote...

phaonica wrote...

TJPags wrote...

To take the second point first:  But the point is, each nation may have radically different rules, some better, some worse than what we have now.  If so, how would that be better?

If the mages were given any freedom to move from one nation to another, they'd potentially have somewhere else to go if they didn't like the rules. Also, there could be multiple concurrent experiments going on dealing with what methods seem to best offer the best balance of safety and freedom for both mages and nonmages.

See, I don't know if that would happen.  The mages in a country become a resource.  I'm not so sure any given country is going to allow them to leave.  They might be viewed as spies, as traitors, etc.  No guarantee nations would trade secrets, either.

Even in these mage threads, there are a lot of people who mention the mages being useful in war.  People mention it often in terms of Alistair hoarding mages from the Chantry in the event of an Orlesian invasion. 

Given that view, why would a ruler let mages leave?  Why would they discuss the best way to keep them alive with other rulers?  After all, if I have them, and you don't, I have an edge, right?  If yours die from poor training, better for me.

IMO, doing this makes mages a national resource, and I don't see a lot of altruism about the best way to treat/train them.

A smart ruler though would see that if the mages are happy, then they'll be far more useful than if the ruler just wants them to be the dogs of the military. If you care for the mages' well-being, then they'll return the favor.

It's basic human ethics and psychology. If you treat a man like an animal, don't be surprised when he eventually bites. If you treat a man like a man though, he will be grateful.

If a ruler can't see that the Chantry's horrendous disposition towards the mages is what brought this on and that ruler ends up trying to make the mages his military lapdogs, then he was never fit to rule in the first place.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 28 septembre 2011 - 01:21 .

[phaonica]

TJPags wrote...

See, I don't know if that would happen.  The mages in a country become a resource.  I'm not so sure any given country is going to allow them to leave.  They might be viewed as spies, as traitors, etc.  No guarantee nations would trade secrets, either.

Even in these mage threads, there are a lot of people who mention the mages being useful in war.  People mention it often in terms of Alistair hoarding mages from the Chantry in the event of an Orlesian invasion. 

Given that view, why would a ruler let mages leave?  Why would they discuss the best way to keep them alive with other rulers?  After all, if I have them, and you don't, I have an edge, right?  If yours die from poor training, better for me.

IMO, doing this makes mages a national resource, and I don't see a lot of altruism about the best way to treat/train them.

Fair enough. If we were to consider, then that mages will be abused (suspected of being spies or traitors, thought of as resources and not people, etc) outside of Circles, does that mean that in order for mages to be recognized as equal citizens, that some authority must come into play that forces nations leaders and citizens to follow certain rules concerning the protection of mage rights? Who would have the authority to force the nations comply like that? Templars (given that this perhaps was their job in the first place)? And who is to stop that authority from itself becoming abusive (because if I've learned anything from discussing this conflict, it's that authority creates oppression:P)?

Modifié par phaonica, 28 septembre 2011 - 01:18 .

[Cobra's_back]

Lord Aesir wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

First thing when discussing issues or reforms on anything is to remember one very important fact. No system is perfect. Everything always look better on paper than in practice.

Yes, each individual ruler is different and the views may change from one king to his heir a couple decades down the line. But the thing that will be improved is the Chantry losing its political and military power. They can preach and holler all they want, they may encourage crusades, but because the Chantry itself is so tied into Orlesian politics, taking magic and templars aside, Whatever they may or may not decide to do will also be in Orlais's interest.

They don't teach or even read the Canticle of Shartan because it's considered far too heretical. The idea that elves are equal to humans is a scandal many humans will despise. And elves would hate it too (Dalish self-righteousness. I'm looking at you)

As for people objecting to new ideas to reform or improve the circle, saying we don't have results or proof that shows it's better than what's in place. That's true, we don't have proof. But we do have proof that the current system is an epic failure and definitely needs reforms.

True, but we also need proof a new system wouldn't just be worse.

I agree with you that all system have problems and you don’t want something worse. If the Chantry could be persuaded to give this growing population the right to marry, raise a family and own a home many mages probably won’t be fighting. If the chantry won’t consider it, then the mages will not give up.

[TJPags]

phaonica wrote...

TJPags wrote...

See, I don't know if that would happen.  The mages in a country become a resource.  I'm not so sure any given country is going to allow them to leave.  They might be viewed as spies, as traitors, etc.  No guarantee nations would trade secrets, either.

Even in these mage threads, there are a lot of people who mention the mages being useful in war.  People mention it often in terms of Alistair hoarding mages from the Chantry in the event of an Orlesian invasion. 

Given that view, why would a ruler let mages leave?  Why would they discuss the best way to keep them alive with other rulers?  After all, if I have them, and you don't, I have an edge, right?  If yours die from poor training, better for me.

IMO, doing this makes mages a national resource, and I don't see a lot of altruism about the best way to treat/train them.

Fair enough. If we were to consider, then that mages will be abused (suspected of being spies or traitors, thought of as resources and not people, etc) outside of Circles, does that mean that in order for mages to be recognized as equal citizens, that some authority must come into play that forces nations leaders and citizens to follow certain rules concerning the protection of mage rights? Who would have the authority to force the nations comply like that? Templars (given that this perhaps was their job in the first place)? And who is to stop that authority from itself becoming abusive (because if I've learned anything from discussing this conflict, it's that authority creates oppression:P)?

Organization always creates oppression - someone is always at the bottom of the heap, after all.  That is the way it is, and nothing will ever change that.

I'm certainly not saying mages WILL be abused  . . . hell, in certain respects they're not being abused now - they eat well, they're housed well, they're taught, all things that in many medievel type societies doesn't happen except for those at the top.  Yet I understand that some people think the simple act of locking them up is abuse.

Be that as it may, it remains my opinion that mages in different countries could well be treated differently, and even realtively, some would be treated better than others.  Sure, the potential for abuse is there in any event, be it locking them in cages, not feeding them well, not teaching them to read, etc.

How to ensure that all mages are treated equally?  Easy answer, but one that I can't see people agreeing to - a central authority, independant of any nation, takes charge of them.

[dragonflight288]

So you don't care at all about the mages' well-being. You just want to decrease the Chantry's influence and power.

Oh I do care about the mages well being. But I also acknowledge there are far more intricately tied factors into it. The Chantry interprets "magic exists to serve man" as mages should be locked up and denied families entirely. The former master of Shale is an example of a Mage through extraordinary circumstances was granted permission to marry...he fought in the war against Orlais.

But out of every mage in the Circle, how many were allowed to answer Cailan's call to fight darkspawn? Seven. Seven out of how many mages?

The chantry as a political institution is not going to allow mages any sort of freedom, because it's a curse of the maker. And the templars are primarily recruited from religious zealots and not from people with a strong moral fiber. The majority of templars won't view mages as anything close to humans either, and that's a result of the Chantry's recruiting methods over 1000 years.

I don't claim to have all the answers, but I think one of the first steps in helping correct the mess should be keeping the Chantry out of politics.

[phaonica]

TJPags wrote...

Be that as it may, it remains my opinion that mages in different countries could well be treated differently, and even realtively, some would be treated better than others.  Sure, the potential for abuse is there in any event, be it locking them in cages, not feeding them well, not teaching them to read, etc.

How to ensure that all mages are treated equally?  Easy answer, but one that I can't see people agreeing to - a central authority, independant of any nation, takes charge of them.

Non mage citizens are treated differently in every country, too. Is that a similar problem? Should some authority ensure that nonmage citizens are treated the same as they are in every other country?

And if some of those nations would abuse mages if they were directly under the authority of the state, how would one enforce the rules set by the independant authority you propose? Why would said abusive nation comply to the rules set by that independant authority?

[TJPags]

phaonica wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Be that as it may, it remains my opinion that mages in different countries could well be treated differently, and even realtively, some would be treated better than others.  Sure, the potential for abuse is there in any event, be it locking them in cages, not feeding them well, not teaching them to read, etc.

How to ensure that all mages are treated equally?  Easy answer, but one that I can't see people agreeing to - a central authority, independant of any nation, takes charge of them.

Non mage citizens are treated differently in every country, too. Is that a similar problem? Should some authority ensure that nonmage citizens are treated the same as they are in every other country?

And if some of those nations would abuse mages if they were directly under the authority of the state, how would one enforce the rules set by the independant authority you propose? Why would said abusive nation comply to the rules set by that independant authority?

Wow - I feel like I'm on the wrong side of this discussion. 

But hey, why not?

In order:

No, I don't think it's a problem that non-mage citizens are treated differently in different countries.

As to mages, obviously the independant authority would have to have complete autonomy when it comes to mages, and some force to ensure compliance.  Or agreement by treaty.  Essentially, yes, I'm saying there should be a Chantry-like structure.

And hey, I wouldn't mind mages being treated differently in every country.  As I said, mages are currently treated better and live better under the Chantry system than non-mage peasants in many medieval type societies.  I have no problem with the Chantry in any way (other than that I personally don't care for organized religion, but I don't think that's relevant).

If people really want to ensure that mages are treated no worse than the average person, then they ultimately need to be treated just like average people.  Which means no Circles, no Chantry, no Royal or national rule, no special benefits to being a mage, etc.  They'd learn or not if they could find and afford a teacher.  If not - well, they die.  Or get killed.  Soldiers or other peace keepers would hunt and kill them if they commit a crime such as murder, imprison or fine them for lesser crimes such as theft or assault, etc.

Oddly, I don't think those in favor of "mage rights" would necessarily like to see some random peasant families mage child die because they can't afford training, or the child killed for murder and the family imprisoned for harboring a fugitive when they try to protect them.

[phaonica]

TJPags wrote...
Wow - I feel like I'm on the wrong side of this discussion. 

I just do the devil's advocate thing. I don't really have a side. I just like to discuss.

If people really want to ensure that mages are treated no worse than the average person, then they ultimately need to be treated just like average people.  Which means no Circles, no Chantry, no Royal or national rule, no special benefits to being a mage, etc.  They'd learn or not if they could find and afford a teacher.  If not - well, they die.  Or get killed.  Soldiers or other peace keepers would hunt and kill them if they commit a crime such as murder, imprison or fine them for lesser crimes such as theft or assault, etc.

That's what it comes down to, I think. Certainly ideally, one would hope for a system that allowed everyone to be treated fairly and equally, mage or non mage. Considering that currently it could be argued that the non mages are not exactly experiencing fair treatment, either, it is more reasonable, I think, to come up with some kind of system where non mages and mages are at least treated equally (though not yet fairly).

That is, unless some persistant conflict arises that solidly proves that mages are too great a danger for completely equal treatment. And though that might put some people at risk, one might ask themselves how much of one's own personal safety are they willing to risk in order to honor the freedom of others and ask the same in return.

Modifié par phaonica, 28 septembre 2011 - 02:56 .

[TJPags]

Well, it's always a fine line, giving up freedom for safety. We could probably have a long discussion on the concept alone.

In the Thedas situation, obviously some allowances, IMO, have to be made for the fact that mages have a distinct advantage in any confrontation with a non-mage (particularly one not trained at arms) and runs the risk of possession. And possession, as we know, is bad.

[Quething]

TJPags wrote...

Oddly, I don't think those in favor of "mage rights" would necessarily like to see some random peasant families mage child die because they can't afford training, or the child killed for murder and the family imprisoned for harboring a fugitive when they try to protect them.

Behold the power of capitalism! You yourself just said that mages are a resource. If your child turns out to have mage talent, you stop being poor. Because the wealthy and powerful have a vested interest in seeing mages found and trained for the services they provide. No mage would ever go untrained except by choice.

Now, many mages would naturally be exploited. But that's already true, and right now they have no recourse. A poor mage child in need of training might at least have the hope of shopping around for the best patron, or worst case, taking the risk of trying to train herself (and since magic is genetic, learning from a family member will often be a viable option). That's a far better set of choices than a mage child has in the Circle system.

[Urzon]

I got a question...

For a mage that is selling enchanted goods and the like, how much money do they actually get to keep from the sell?

I can only imagine that a large portion of it goes to the Chantry to pay the templars (salary, armor, training, etc) and help maintain the Circles (food,clothes, supplies, etc). I'm just wondering how much money do they get to keep to buy personal items. Since, im sure mages like to buy their own clothes and books. Not to mention if they are doing personal research on different braches of magic, they might have to buy their own supplies.

And if the Chantry is funding the templar and Circles threw the selling of enchanted good and mage products, how will the Mage/Templar War effect the cash flow of the Chantry?

Modifié par Urzon, 28 septembre 2011 - 07:41 .

[esper]

Urzon wrote...

I got a question...

For a mage that is selling enchanted goods and the like, how much money do they actually get to keep from the sell?

I can only imagine that a large portion of it goes to the Chantry to pay the templars (salary, armor, training, etc) and help maintain the Circles (food,clothes, supplies, etc). I'm just wondering how much money do they get to keep to buy personal items. Since, im sure mages like to buy their own clothes and books. Not to mention if they are doing personal research on different braches of magic, they might have to buy their own supplies.

And if the Chantry is funding the templar and Circles threw the selling of enchanted good and mage products, how will the Mage/Templar War effect the cash flow of the Chantry?

Would money even be of value to them given the fact that mages are essentally in prison and can't buy anything?