39 réponses à ce sujet

[Sir Pounce-a-lot]

I've always played the game with the assumption that the mages were being treated unfairly. Could I have been wrong? Is something like the Circle of Magi actually justified? I disagree with the rule that mages can't get married, and that the Chantry can just decide to kill them all. I also disagree with their persecution of the Dalish mages, since they basically have their own system of managing the proper use of magic. In Dungeons & Dragons, blood magic doesn't have anything to do with demons, and it doesn't enable mind control, but in the DA universe it does, and no one should be able to reach into someone else's mind - so I suppose that I can understand banning blood magic. In D & D, becoming a magic user is open to anyone that wants to study and train, but in DA it's something that you're born with. I'm not sure if keeping the mages in the tower or under constant supervision is justified, or if there would even be enough room in the tower for all the mages in Ferelden. It reminds me a little bit of the Starcraft universe where psychically-gifted people were handed over to the government and trained as ghosts (high-tech psychic assassins). Many ghosts died in their training or on dangerous missions, and at one point the emperor decided to "overhaul" the ghost program, killing all of them except for one that his son wanted.

Modifié par Sir Pounce-a-lot, 01 octobre 2011 - 07:29 .

[Klidi]

Hm. That for blood magic it is necessary to make a deal with a demon is said only in DA2.

In DAO, we see empty bookcase in the library, and then we find books on blood magic on the Irving's desk. He confirms that they were removed from the library so that apprentices wouldn't be tempted to learn blood magic from them. This happens after Jowan was accused to be the blood mage. Which means it is possible to learn blood magic from books as any other school. And the Chantry uses blood magic to trace apostates - do they also make deals with demons?

That's why I think it is just Chantry propaganda. Chantry created and managesTemplar order in order to control mages. For that purpose, they train Templars special abilities that drain mana. And let's not forget that the Chantry controls the lyrium trade.

Basically, blood magic uses not mana, but blood to cast spells. Any spell, not just blood magic spells. And, guess what - blood can't be drained by Templars special skills. Plus, you don't need lyrium for blood magic.

Which means if the mages learnt the blood magic, the Chantry would not be able to control them. They would also lose control over lyrium trade and consequently over Templars. In the end, it would be the same as in Tevinter - the mages would rule.

Now, I know what Fenris says about magisters, but Fenris was a slave. Iliterate and uneducated. He only knows about magisters what he heard from Danarius and his friends. It can be expected that Danarius's friends would be the same evil bastards as he was, and that they would talk about their opinions and views. That doesn't mean that all magisters are evil. The truth is we don't know much about Tevinter.

So no, it's not morally justifiable.

[ShimmeringDjinn]

Klidi wrote...

Hm. That for blood magic it is necessary to make a deal with a demon is said only in DA2.

In DAO, we see empty bookcase in the library, and then we find books on blood magic on the Irving's desk. He confirms that they were removed from the library so that apprentices wouldn't be tempted to learn blood magic from them. This happens after Jowan was accused to be the blood mage. Which means it is possible to learn blood magic from books as any other school. And the Chantry uses blood magic to trace apostates - do they also make deals with demons?

Now that right there is a good question.
In answer to the OP's question, No I don't think it's morally justifiable to keep mages on a leash, which amounts to making them slaves. They had no choice in becoming mages after all, they were born that way dispite the fact that their powers don't show until they are much older.
Sure mages need to be educated in order to respect their powers but keeping them on a tight leash is the wrong why to go about it and given what happened at the Tower it clearly does not work.
Slaves will only stay slaves for so long, and then comes rebellion.

[tyrannosaur56]

blood magic in itself is not evil. it is using own life source as mana. but it is the skills that come along that the chantry dreads... blood sacrifice involves taking another person life source, blood wound control another person blood and trun it against him and mind control which takes away one's free will...
however i don't see chantry giving lyrium to templars are any good either... it is like a drug cartel feeding drugs to its victim to put it under it's control.
so which is more evil? i think both are as evil as one another. therefore the chantry had no right to judge the mages coz they are doing the same things to the templars, making them their slaves to their ideal.

[Sir Pounce-a-lot]

I realize that using your blood for magic is not evil, but mind control is inherently evil. Blood magic enabled mind control in the Dragon Age universe, so it should be banned there. Then again, how much does it really enable mind control? It seems to me that all it can do is temporarily take control of one enemy during battle, and it only lasts for a minute or so. Uldred worked with demons, and that's what enabled him to have a much greater degree of mind control (I think). If there was some sort of technology in our universe that enabled people to control other people's minds, our government would probably ban it (or secretly use it against the people's consent).

[Klidi]

But then, shouldn't spells like Sleep, Walking Nightmare, etc. also be banned? They are also messing with the victim's mind.

Anyway, why is it 'evil' to control mind, but not to hurt or kill by using spells? Is mind control that much worse than burning someone, or turning him into ice and then crushing him, or even infest him and turn him into a bomb?

In fact, in case it was real mind control, it could for example help with interrogation - and no need for torture. I know I'd prefer few minutes of mind control than an afternoon in the 'iron maiden', for example.

[Sir Pounce-a-lot]

Klidi wrote...

But then, shouldn't spells like Sleep, Walking Nightmare, etc. also be banned? They are also messing with the victim's mind.

Anyway, why is it 'evil' to control mind, but not to hurt or kill by using spells? Is mind control that much worse than burning someone, or turning him into ice and then crushing him, or even infest him and turn him into a bomb?

In fact, in case it was real mind control, it could for example help with interrogation - and no need for torture. I know I'd prefer few minutes of mind control than an afternoon in the 'iron maiden', for example.

In combat, that kind of limited mind control is understandable.  I'm talking about the ability to control your neighbors' thoughts without them even knowing about it.  Things that are acceptable in war are not acceptable in everyday society.  As for interrogating criminals or POWs, looking into someone's mind is not the same as controlling their thoughts, and even if it were, it would still be an extension of war.  Would mind control technology ever be legal in a free society?  No way.  Could you imagine the outrage if WalMart were selling MindMold TM (batteries not included) for $399.99 plus tax?  In the Dragon Age universe, it would not be acceptable to have people walking around that can control your mind without you even knowing about it.  Like I said, mages should be free, but those that use their magic to violate the rights of others should be regarded as criminals.  Your freedoms end where another person's rights begin. 

BTW, Sleep and Walking Nightmare are similar to the terror-inducing weapons used by the US military.

Modifié par Sir Pounce-a-lot, 02 octobre 2011 - 09:05 .

[Klidi]

Of course, I agree with that.

But that's the difference between use and abuse of the blood magic. And all I'm saying is that any school of magic can be abused. Blood magic in itself is not more evil than other schools. Freezing someone or burning him is also not acceptable in the peace, and you can't buy a handy flamethrower to incinerate your annoying neighbour, either.

To take innocent children from their parents and imprison them just because one day they might abuse their power is just as wrong as the abuse of power itself.

In one case you use your power on someone who doesn't have it and can't defend himself.

In other case you are imprisoned because you have power others don't so they imprison you while you're still too young to defend yourself.

Both should be unacceptable.

[Sir Pounce-a-lot]

Klidi, blood magic involves the ability to control other people's minds, which means that only designated military operatives should be able to become blood mages, and there should be a system in place that prosecutes those that misuse that blood $agic. So a Grey Warden that specializes in BM would still be brought up on criminal charges if he, let's say, uses mind control on a woman, forcing her to have sex with him (similar to using a date rape drug). One possibility is to force all blood mages into the Grey Wardens. Another possibility is to tranquil blood mages (maybe ones that are not fit for military service). Even at that, there would need to be checks and balances in place to prevent blood mages from using their mind control in ways that are not clearly a part of their military objectives. Human rights, or people's rights, must be protected from mind controlling capabilities.

[Klidi]

Almost any spell can be abused, in direct or indirect way. Hell, even healer could say to a woman, I won't heal you/your relative unless you have sex with him. Or use a glyph of paralysis, for example.

Entropy has much more 'evil' spells as blood magic. Primal is all about violence. Spirit animates dead.

There is no reason to assume that blood mage will inevitably use it for mind control. It is just one of the possibilities. To force all of them into GW or to tranquil them is as much a crime against human rights as use of mind control.

[Sir Pounce-a-lot]

Klidi wrote...

Almost any spell can be abused, in direct or indirect way. Hell, even healer could say to a woman, I won't heal you/your relative unless you have sex with him. Or use a glyph of paralysis, for example.

Entropy has much more 'evil' spells as blood magic. Primal is all about violence. Spirit animates dead.

There is no reason to assume that blood mage will inevitably use it for mind control. It is just one of the possibilities. To force all of them into GW or to tranquil them is as much a crime against human rights as use of mind control.

Any power can be misused, but some powers should not exist at all (or if they do, they should be highly regulated). Shooting a fireball at someone isn't a lot different than using an explosive on someone. Everyone will know that I did it, and I will be arrested and brought up on criminal charges. But if I'm manipulating other people's minds, will they know about it? Probably not. In our society, people are allowed to have guns, but would they ever be allowed to have mind control technology in their living rooms? No. The brainwashed do not know that they have been brainwashed.

In the Dragon Age universe, a mage becomes a blood mage if they seek that magic out. At that point, they must be regarded as a threat. There is no choice. In the literature, it explained that even anatomical study is frowned upon because it is associated with blood magic. Well, my response to that is that biology is a field of science, not magic. Look at how far biology and medicine have come without biologists and medical researchers needing to cast spells.

[Klidi]

Sir Pounce-a-lot wrote...

Any power can be misused, but some powers should not exist at all (or if they do, they should be highly regulated). Shooting a fireball at someone isn't a lot different than using an explosive on someone. Everyone will know that I did it, and I will be arrested and brought up on criminal charges. But if I'm manipulating other people's minds, will they know about it? Probably not. In our society, people are allowed to have guns, but would they ever be allowed to have mind control technology in their living rooms? No. The brainwashed do not know that they have been brainwashed.

In the Dragon Age universe, a mage becomes a blood mage if they seek that magic out. At that point, they must be regarded as a threat. There is no choice. In the literature, it explained that even anatomical study is frowned upon because it is associated with blood magic. Well, my response to that is that biology is a field of science, not magic. Look at how far biology and medicine have come without biologists and medical researchers needing to cast spells.

And this is where we disagree.

People own weapons and keep them in their house if they seek those weapons.
And if someone throws dynamite at you, the fact that someone will know who it was will not help you any more, I'm afraid. But that it would be known who it was is not so sure. In an ideal world, perhaps. Unfortunately, in our society there are many unexplained crimes and many murders that walk around without ever being caught or convicted.

So what now? Should we now automatically arrest and kill, or, in 'better' case turn into a mindless puppet, anyone who owns a gun? They are a threat! The gun gives them the possibility to shoot someone!

A man who would abuse powers and manipulate fates of other people is a threat no matter if his weapon is a mind-controlling device, dynamite or gun.

There is no justified reason to punish in advance blood mages for something they might do, when the mind control is only one of many uses of the blood control, and in whole DA universe I don't remember anyone besides Idunna using it, and my rouge Hawke knew what was going on and was able to resist. All right, so he has exceptionally strong will, but still, I would expect to see much more attempts at it, if it really is such a great threat.

So I'm sorry but I still think that the 'evil mind control' is just a conveniet excuse of the Chantry to turn public against the mages who actually have the power to resist templars. Nothing better than to create a terrifying myth about evil blood mages that will control you, use you as a battery for their spell and eventually turn into abominations.

Especially as we see that in Kirkwall, where the Veil is thin, any mage can become an abomination, if controled by strong negative emotions. If it was so simple for a blood mage to control anyone, why did the blood mages in Kirkwall bothered to infest Templars with demons? They could have just mind-control Meredith, problem solved! Or if not Meredith, then at least that evil Templar who wanted to tranquil everyone? If blood magic was so terrible and powerful, cities like Kirkwall couldn't exist.

I have no idea what litrature you are talking about or who frowns on anatomical study and considers it a blood magic.

[Sir Pounce-a-lot]

Klidi, mind control could be used without anyone knowing about it. If I'm some pedophile with mind control capabilities, I could manipulate you and your family into thinking that your 9 year old daughter coming over to my house every day and "playing with me" is perfectly acceptable. Would you want a mind controller living next door to you? I doubt it. Let me say it this way: close to 100% of the people in a community would not want a mind controller living in their neighborhood. It would be universally unacceptable for everyone that is not currently being controlled, and once people found out what that person was and what they could do to them (against their consent and even without their awareness), they would all want rid of that person immediately. I don't know much about Dragon Age 2, and it doesn't look like a very good game. What I do know is that mind control capabilities are unacceptable. The only exception may be a very limited military use in a war, and even at that, the ones doing the controlling had better be kept in check, and it had better be a completely unavoidable war. Even at that, the UN and other humanitarian organizations would probably regard any mind control at all as being an atrocity.

"Indeed, the Chantry seems almost irrational in its fear of blood magic; going so far as to suppress anatomical study and ignoring more immediate or severe threats."
Source: http://dragonage.wik...iki/Blood_magic

Modifié par Sir Pounce-a-lot, 04 octobre 2011 - 05:39 .

[Klidi]

You can do the same with the gun in your hand, you know.
I wouldn't want a neighbour with collection of guns in his house either. But in case that person is just keeping them in his house and had never actually use them, I have no right to 'get rid of him'. Same with the mind controller. Unless it is proved he really used those powers in harmful way, nobody has any right to 'get rid of him' and if they tried, it would be criminal offence.

Again - to punish in advance only for ability to do something is against human rights. Innocent until proved guilty, not guilty because there is slight possibility you will do something.

In DAO there is not a single case where mind control was used outside of battle, and even then it is only for very short time. For me, that is not good enough reason for persecution of blood mages.

And I still don't see why mind control ability is unacceptable, but messing with the person's brain by giving them nightmares, or paralysing them, making them defenceless, or infesting them with bombs so they would hurt their friends is not.

[tyrannosaur56]

now, did jowan 'mind control' lily to like him and help him get rid of his phylactory? that will be an interesting view, given that jowan is a bloodmage.

[Klidi]

Greagoir said she wasn't controlled.

[thats1evildude]

"Morally justifiable"? Are you from the Giant in the Playground forums?

[Requiesta De Silencia]

Right or Wrong there is no right answer. I always played through thinking magic is as it's used, my **** characters used magic for evil (especially blood magic) and my VERY FEW honest and sweet characters (which usually romanced leliana) used magic for good, including blood magic.

[Sir Pounce-a-lot]

Shooting someone leaves physical evidence. Mind control doesn't. Actually, Lilly may have been controlled. the scary thing is that there is no way of knowing. Regardless, the only way to police mind control capabilities is to ban them, and to encarcerate anyone that seeks out and attains these abilities. Would a weapon that could anonymously inflict damage on other people ever be legal? If I designed a weapon where you could sit in your living room and attack someone just by pressing a button, and this weapon left no physical evidence ... Would I be able to buy it as easily as I could a firearm? No. Comparing mind control capabilities with handguns is comparing apples and oranges.

If you disagree, answer one question: How would you propose mind control capabilities be policed?

Modifié par Sir Pounce-a-lot, 06 octobre 2011 - 09:26 .

[Dtothe3]

Sir Pounce-a-lot, I believe you've described a mobile phone bombing device. Incidentally the methods needed to check up on such practices are as close to breaching regulations as you could get. If I'm not mistaken several laws have been re-written to make it entirely possible for the police to do so without breaking the law theirselves.

I'm pretty sure that Blood Magic would be entirely acceptable to the Grey Wardens. Alasdair (no matter how much we like him) was a flawed and self centred Warden. My mage Warden selflessly sacrificed Connor and took on board all guilt of the event, in order to become immensely powerful (for the greater good).

(That above sentence was written so it could be taken either way).

Klidi has also spotted that The Chantry has some bias in this. Does anyone really expect there to be no other motive outside of control and power? In Tevinter it's the mages, in Kirkwall and Fereldan it's The Chantry. Strange that the maker demands such a high toll.

Also, what of the inherrent abuse of power within The Templar regime, Anders alludes to rape, murder, and unjustified (Whats the term for "making tranquil"?). That's without even mentioning the threats made to families who wish to keep their children. Given what we saw first hand of The Templar order we can easily establish that they are as infallible as any mage, yet declare theirselves one with god, and thus, right. Reminds me of a group from the early to mid 20th century...

As for policing mind control, I'm not rightly sure. I assume WHEN a criminal act is committed the appropriate response is dealt out. I own a multitide of knives of various shapes, sizes and so forth. Some are for cutting my veg, meat, chopping bones, paring, peeling or even untangling my fishing line. Doesn't mean I'm going to stab someone, or even that the thought has crossed my mind.

Also Sir Pounce-a-lot. If Lilly was indeed controlled, then you're entire argument falls through as it becomes painfully obvious that the Templars actually have no idea how to prove or disprove that someone is possessed (a point explored in Dragon Age 2, sadly that cannot be discussed here) and furthermore, have no interest in learning.

[Klidi]

Sir Pounce-a-lot wrote...

Shooting someone leaves physical evidence. Mind control doesn't. Actually, Lilly may have been controlled. the scary thing is that there is no way of knowing.

If you want to roleplay it like that, fine. The game says something else. Greagoir is the Knight Commander of Templars. He goes to Lily and confirms she is not controlled. So apparently it is possible to know it.
This is confirmed in DA2 where Hawke can recognize that Idunna is trying to control him and can resist.

Regardless, the only way to police mind control capabilities is to ban them, and to encarcerate anyone that seeks out and attains these abilities. Would a weapon that could anonymously inflict damage on other people ever be legal? If I designed a weapon where you could sit in your living room and attack someone just by pressing a button, and this weapon left no physical evidence ... Would I be able to buy it as easily as I could a firearm? No. Comparing mind control capabilities with handguns is comparing apples and oranges.
If you disagree, answer one question: How would you propose mind control capabilities be policed?

Again - mind control is only one of the possibilities in blood magic, and we see that it is very rarely used. Blood magic can be used for many reasons and in many ways. To persecute people because they might use it would return us to our reall when people were burned because of accusations of being a witch. Usually just on the basis of an accusation of a neighbour. Without proof that a person acutally used mind control for harmful reasons, the persecution of blood mages would be no better than witch hunt.


And if you want to judge Thedas by morals and laws of our society, then tell me - are the weapons that enable mass paralysis legal and easily available for anyone?
What about the weapons that cause mass halucinations and drive victims crazy (cause 'spirit' damage)?
The weapons that rise the dead and use them as soldiers?
Drain life?
Infest people with bombs and make them walk to their family and friends and then explode, hurting those other people as well?
And I could continue.

Would they be allowed? If no, how come the users of this kinds of magic are not persecuted? Why is the mind control the only exception?

And please, try something else than 'body evidence'. It's not like they have technology for DNA identification, you know. The charred remains that couldn't be identified were no better than no body remains at all. If a mage would use a freeze spell and then crush prison, all that would remain would be shattered pieces of ice. Very helpful, indeed.

There is also no reason why the culprit couldn't take the paralysed or otherwise immobilisied victim and take them somewhere noone will find them - this is, after all, possilbe even in our society without blood magic.

[Sir Pounce-a-lot]

I don't doubt that in the Dragon Age universe (if it exists in some universe or another) the Chantry and the templars are corrupt and tyranical. I was taking these principles and applying them to the real world - or, the one that we know is real (our own). We've gotten to the part of the discussion where arguing over individual characters is like arguing over whether Pac-Man is the good guy or the evil thief breaking into the 4 ghosts' home and eating all their wafers attacking them when he eats a power pellet. Are Inky, Blinky, Pinky, and Clyde really the good guys, defending themselves and their home? See? We're talking about principles now, so what Alistair, the Grey Wardens, Jowan, etc. did isn't the issue now.

"Blood magic" is portrayed as an ability that can be developed by certain people, and it involves mind control. According to the literature and the story, it is not always obvious who is being controlled and who isn't. This ability would need to be policed - it isn't enough to just hope that people will all be nice and not do it. Of course, people do get away with some crimes, but the police at least need a way of combating a particular type of crime. Legal penalties need to be applied to those criminals that are caught. Is there any way at all of policing and combating mind control capabilities?

[gandanlin]

I've always sort of wondered if the Joining ritual used to induct new Wardens was not a form of blood magic.

[gandanlin]

re: the OPs question, "Is keeping the mages "leashed" morally justifiable in the Dragon Age?"

Hard to say.

Magic frightens people, and blood magic seems to be the form of magic that scares them the most. The morals of a society reflect beliefs about right and wrong conduct. Conduct that frightens people generally tends to be thought of as morally wrong.

Isolde's reaction to Connor's showing signs of being a mage could be taken as an example of a more general anti-magic sentiment prevailing throughout the DAO society. Interestingly, she volunteers to submit to blood magic when it appears that may provide the means to save Connor from his demon.

Magic is sort of an intermediary between fear and faith. So there is considerable ambivalence in feeling when magic, and especially blood magic, is considered in a moral light.

Modifié par gandanlin, 07 octobre 2011 - 10:02 .

[Sathirill]

Sir Pounce-a-lot wrote...

"Blood magic" is portrayed as an ability that can be developed by certain people, and it involves mind control. According to the literature and the story, it is not always obvious who is being controlled and who isn't. This ability would need to be policed - it isn't enough to just hope that people will all be nice and not do it. Of course, people do get away with some crimes, but the police at least need a way of combating a particular type of crime. Legal penalties need to be applied to those criminals that are caught. Is there any way at all of policing and combating mind control capabilities?

well can you control me blowing someone up with a fire ball or crushing them in a psycic prison or paralize them or pumping them so full of volts there families can't recognize them because the templars aren't all that great i killed many as a warden mage. Warriors and rougue can kill peoplewith out them knowing say you are walking around and suddenly there is an arrow sprouting out of your chest no one would know. Blood magic isn't evil it is the mages behind it that are. Jowan only wanted to be a better mage and yet they would still tanquilize hime. blood magic used for evil isn't right but neither is stabbing someone in the back, or decapitating them.