257 réponses à ce sujet

[TheJediSaint]

nightscrawl wrote...
 As Sebastian says: why are we debating the Rite of Annulment when the one responsible is standing right here? The Rite is a really extreme reaction, one that throws the entire city into chaos, no matter who you side with.

Pretty sure the city would have been in chaos even without the RoA being invoked.  The way that the Chantry was destroyed would have traumatized the populace, leading to a level of civil unrest that would have tempted even a sane Knight Commander into annuling the Cicle.  The fact is, Anders wanted to start a war.  The fact that Meredith was completely bonkers only served his plan all the better.

Modifié par TheJediSaint, 09 octobre 2011 - 11:52 .

[Xilizhra]

(A) That giving the mages unrestricted leisures and privelages in the name of appeasing the allure of demons is effectively the equivalent of the position of the Teventer Magisters,

( It's incredibly unequal and discriminatory towards the super-majority of the population, who will not only have to pay for and supply the bodies to entertain the whims of these mages.

© The subordination of others freedoms to serve the mages leisures and whims is simply changing the position of domination and subordination in the favor of the minority.

All true. But it's worth noting that protecting the nonmagic population from demons is not the single highest priority of the Chantry, but maintaining its own dominance.

[nightscrawl]

TheJediSaint wrote...

The fact is, Anders wanted to start a war.  The fact that Meredith was completly bonkers only served his plan all the better.

Lol, well that's certinaly true. /sigh at crazy people.

[Dean_the_Young]

AlexXIV wrote...

You can compare guns to swords, but not to magic. Magic is more like nuclear weapons. And yes, saying that they are bad and at the same time using them is harmful. We are lucky enough to not have had a 3rd world war happening or we wouldn't have this conversation, but this doesn't make nukes harmless.

Actually, magic is more like a plague that can be contained by will, but has a tendency to spread in times of emotional distress.

Connor had training. Not sure what he was capable of without training, but he had a bloodmage teach him before he was taken over by a demon.

Connor was nowhere close to being fully, completely, or even well trained. He never had anything approaching a Circle curriculum. If you were attempting a counter-argument of 'Connor had training but succumbed, therefore training doesn't help,' you're going about it the wrong way.

Also I am not against training to control their power. But they are getting more powerful, they even have blood magic books lying around. We had it in the Circle of Ferelden and in Kirkwall both. Not to mention that the towers in which the Circles dwell are obviously ancient tevinter strongholds in which the veil that separates demons from the mortal world is especially thin.

Mages are not getting 'more powerful'. Mages are organizing, which is the difference. Ferelden and Kirkwall weren't examples of mages coming with new more powerful magics: Ferelden and Kirkwall were examples of small minorities of mages banding together to oppose a system.

Magic has always twisted and thinned the Veil. It wouldn't matter where you put the mages: eventually, it would thin there as well.

My problem is that their attitude that 'magic should serve men, not rule them'. Magic does not serve. It's like with demons and spirits. You can befriend a spirit and it may help you. But if you force a demon into servitude, it will come biting you into your butt. I don't really think the Chantry knows what they are doing, using magic like that.

Magic isn't like the force, as some collective pseduo-entity that has a will and makes actions. Magic is just non-technical technology with a lot of strings attached. It's a tool. As a tool, it isn't even the root of the problem: the real problem is the spirits, which are distinct from magic.

[Dean_the_Young]

Xilizhra wrote...

(A) That giving the mages unrestricted leisures and privelages in the name of appeasing the allure of demons is effectively the equivalent of the position of the Teventer Magisters,

( It's incredibly unequal and discriminatory towards the super-majority of the population, who will not only have to pay for and supply the bodies to entertain the whims of these mages.

© The subordination of others freedoms to serve the mages leisures and whims is simply changing the position of domination and subordination in the favor of the minority.

All true. But it's worth noting that protecting the nonmagic population from demons is not the single highest priority of the Chantry, but maintaining its own dominance.

It is, however, the priority of the Circle and Templars, which are the topic here. Not the Chantry.

[Dean_the_Young]

naledgeborn wrote...

Doesn't matter really. Sandal said when "he rises the skies will part and magic will come back". Every is a mage. No need for Templars anymore. Problem solved.

Or more people are mages, while some aren't. Or magic comes back and lots of people die in the apocolypse. Etc.

[TheJediSaint]

Xilizhra wrote...

All true. But it's worth noting that protecting the nonmagic population from demons is not the single highest priority of the Chantry, but maintaining its own dominance.

Actually I think the first prioity of the Chantry is to spread the faith, which is hard to do if  your adherents are being murdered by rampaging abominations and blood-mages. 

A more serious solution to the probelm with mages is perahps give to Harrowed mages more freedom, but at the same time make it harder for mages to undergo the Harrowing.  Only allow mages to be harrowed after they have demonstrated that they can use thier powers responsibly.

Modifié par TheJediSaint, 10 octobre 2011 - 12:04 .

[mredders91]

magic doesnt realy look to be the promble to me but reather the people who are using it magic can help you or hurt you is all a matter of who is using it and why. it has been said before that a technique isnt inhertly good or evil but how you uses it that define it

[TheJediSaint]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

naledgeborn wrote...

Doesn't matter really. Sandal said when "he rises the skies will part and magic will come back". Every is a mage. No need for Templars anymore. Problem solved.

Or more people are mages, while some aren't. Or magic comes back and lots of people die in the apocolypse. Etc.

Or none of the above.

[Dean_the_Young]

TheJediSaint wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

All true. But it's worth noting that protecting the nonmagic population from demons is not the single highest priority of the Chantry, but maintaining its own dominance.

A more serious solution to the probelm with mages is perahps give Harrowed mages more freedom, but at the same time make it harder for mages to undergo the Harrowing.  Only allow mages to be harrowed after they have demonstrated that they can use thier powers responsibly.

The practical difficulty with this, however, is enforcing a system of exusive certification when you allow dozens/hundreds/thousands of potential teachers to be out there without effective oversight.

It's one thing to say 'we trust you to not screw up your powers once you pass this test', but it's another to go 'we trust you to not consider teaching other hedge-mages out there once we can't see you.' It doesn't take much to suddenly have a unofficial system of non-certified mages spring up and start training (whether well or not) new magelings who'd rather get some 'unofficial' wizard training rather than go to a Circle with a super-hard test.

A system of exclusive licensing such as your breaks apart when you don't have a monopoly on training the mages. When all maglings come to you for training, it might work. But when you allow hundreds/thousands of potential teachers out there, beyond control or observation, with only their self-imposed refusal keeping your monopoly...

Situations like Connor or the Hawkes, in which mage-learning is discretely passed down via family connections, wouldn't be rare or exceptional. They'd be incredibly commonplace, as it would be comparitively easy to find a non-Circle teacher rather than go to the circle and maybe/possible graduate.

[Herr Uhl]

AlexXIV wrote...

Thing is if they were serious about keeping the 'magic threat' low they would have more precautions and would not let mages become as powerful. I mean if you arrest someone for murder, you don't give him books how to murder more efficiently. Or do you? So why do mages train mages in order to become more powerful? To serve the chantry in their exalted marches. Not the mages are the Chantry's problem, they are their own problem. They cause all the bad things that come to them themselves. And that's basically the rundown of the DA story. The Chantry has, in my eyes, become just another tevinter empire. Maybe not as evil, but evil enough to be stopped.

The main thing that they're afraid about is the abomination risk. And I think the severity of the abomination would depend on potential rather than current skill, as you might see in DA2 where the demons are all over the dreamer kid. At least that is my take on it, and it would make the giving book about murdering kind of odd.

As to the DA2 storyline, making both sides more sane would have helped greatly.

[Dean_the_Young]

mredders91 wrote...

magic doesnt realy look to be the promble to me but reather the people who are using it magic can help you or hurt you is all a matter of who is using it and why. it has been said before that a technique isnt inhertly good or evil but how you uses it that define it

The problem with magic is that it has a very significant involuntary aspect. Specifically, possession which can strike at any time, and to which the emotionally upset are particularly vulnerable... and a possessed mage can easily be even more powerful than they were before.

And it doesn't take hostile emotions. It doesn't matter what you intended. It just takes one slip, for entirely disproportionate results.

[TheJediSaint]

Well, any system needs to do two things.

1. Prevent Mages, either through training or tranquility, from becoming abominations.

2. Prevent Mages from using their powers to abuse non-mages.


Granted, no system is going to be 100% effective, but considering that it took one mage in one city to destroy the existing system of circles, there is definite need for reform. At least reforms that don't amount to adopting the Qunari practice of turning mages into saarabas.

[jamesp81]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...

Standard of living is irrelevant.

Context is always relevant. You can't claim to be treated badly if your treatment is better than most everyone else's in most every way.

You really don't get it, do you?

[TheJediSaint]

jamesp81 wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...

Standard of living is irrelevant.

Context is always relevant. You can't claim to be treated badly if your treatment is better than most everyone else's in most every way.

You really don't get it, do you?

He does get it, you're not understanding his point.

[jamesp81]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Well the fact that other people are also treated bad or worse is a bad excuse for treating people badly. Then we can throw all morale and ethics overboard and just say life is a **** and so are we.

No, the fact that people are being treated badly across the scale establishes what kind of world Thedas is. The morals and ethics of freedom and equality which you apply to their world don't exist.

They exist in me and in Anders. And since the dialogue options to support that freedom exist, that's enough to establish that those habits of thought exist on Thedas.

They exist in you. Anders doesn't share your politics.

Thedas is not a liberal-democratic society with western views of rule of law, civil rights, or even the ideals of the European Enlightenment.

Actually, Thedas demonstrates many of those thought patterns.  As evidenced by the fact that you have dialogue options to go in favor of same said ideas.

Even so, it will be a liberal democratic society after I chop enough heads.

[jamesp81]

mredders91 wrote...

TheJediSaint wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

TheJediSaint wrote...

What if they were Orlesians?

That's more plausible.

But while I would honestly love to support any number of potential revolutions happening on Thedas, only the mage one is actually happening now and only the mage one is something that I can give my in-game support to.

A peasent, revolting or not, is still just a peasant.  A revolting mage is potientially a walking weapon of mass destruction.  

revolts are still destructive doesnt matter who doing it people will still get hurt na dthe qun is looking more and more appealing

It is true that innocent people die in every war, even justified wars.

The mistake commonly made, however, is the belief that a just cause should be abandoned, because of that.  That is entirely untrue.

[AlexXIV]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Magic isn't like the force, as some collective pseduo-entity that has a will and makes actions. Magic is just non-technical technology with a lot of strings attached. It's a tool. As a tool, it isn't even the root of the problem: the real problem is the spirits, which are distinct from magic.

That's where our opinions go in different directions. I think magic is much like the force. Basically the force is a sort of sci-fi space age magic, but whatever. We don't know the origin of a supposed 'Maker' or the Fade. So we neither really know what magic is all about. Of course I can't prove my point, but I am pretty sure you can't prove yours either. Not yet anyway, I hope somewhere along the road we learn more in either the next games or other sources.

[Foolsfolly]

@ the OP:

The main thing for me was that while I thought Meredith was right about Anders terrorism not being tolerable, Orsino was also right that the Circle was totally uninvolved. There was no need to punish them any more than anyone else. So the decision to oppose the Right of Annulment was very straightforward for me. I thought Anders deserved to die for it but the rest of the mages were completely innocent of it.

That is exactly why the finale fails. It changed the debate. It was about Mages personal freedom vs the public's security. An interesting debate where there are strong feelings on both sides of it. A true morally gray choice the likes of which BioWare rarely taps a hold of.

They undercut that by having crazy mages show up constantly. Making it seem like the game, the devs, and common sense want you to side with the Templars who aren't turning into abominations and killing people every third night.

And then they drop it at the finale. The question that ends the game isn't one about security vs freedom but instead one of do you support slaughtering a group innocent of a terrorist attack?

That's a completely different question and one that's black and white. It's like if someone mugged you and you shot the next person you saw and called that justice.

There are a lot of problems with that finale but I feel that's the biggest problem of them all. Along with the whole Madness of Orsino and Meredeth being controlled by a plot device. It was all ****. Just complete and utter horse **** of an ending.

[jamesp81]

I think the biggest mistake they made in the final Big Choice was in
making it basically about the Rite of Annulment. You may in fact think
that the templar order is necessary, may like some individual templars,
or have worked yourself in supporting them by doing quests like Bounty
Hunter. But in the end, it all comes down to the Rite of Annulment and
whether you believe in punishing everyone for the actions of a few. Even
if fully half of all mages in Kirkwall were involved with demons, it's
not reason enough for killing the other half that are not. I bet I'm not alone in that.

Further exacerbating the problem is the RoA authorizes templars to kill everyone in the circle.  All of them.  Including the 6 year olds just brought in when their talent was discovered.  Chew on that for a while.

[AlexXIV]

TheJediSaint wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...

Standard of living is irrelevant.

Context is always relevant. You can't claim to be treated badly if your treatment is better than most everyone else's in most every way.

You really don't get it, do you?

He does get it, you're not understanding his point.

His point being that you're not a slave if everyone else is a slave as well? As in if we compare it to 'Matrix' they should all have stayed in the Matrix because they were all equally free and comfortable?

[Dean_the_Young]

jamesp81 wrote...

Even so, it will be a liberal democratic society after I chop enough heads.

Rather illustrative of why you don't understand liberal democracy...

or the importance of context.

[TheJediSaint]

jamesp81 wrote...

mredders91 wrote...

TheJediSaint wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

TheJediSaint wrote...

What if they were Orlesians?

That's more plausible.

But while I would honestly love to support any number of potential revolutions happening on Thedas, only the mage one is actually happening now and only the mage one is something that I can give my in-game support to.

A peasent, revolting or not, is still just a peasant.  A revolting mage is potientially a walking weapon of mass destruction.  

revolts are still destructive doesnt matter who doing it people will still get hurt na dthe qun is looking more and more appealing

It is true that innocent people die in every war, even justified wars.

The mistake commonly made, however, is the belief that a just cause should be abandoned, because of that.  That is entirely untrue.

It's an even more common mistake to resort to violence when peaceful solutions have not yet been exausted.

[TheJediSaint]

AlexXIV wrote...

TheJediSaint wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...

Standard of living is irrelevant.

Context is always relevant. You can't claim to be treated badly if your treatment is better than most everyone else's in most every way.

You really don't get it, do you?

He does get it, you're not understanding his point.

His point being that you're not a slave if everyone else is a slave as well? As in if we compare it to 'Matrix' they should all have stayed in the Matrix because they were all equally free and comfortable?

His point being that it's hard to justify murding innocent people to escape a life of comfort.

[AlexXIV]

TheJediSaint wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...

mredders91 wrote...

TheJediSaint wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

TheJediSaint wrote...

What if they were Orlesians?

That's more plausible.

But while I would honestly love to support any number of potential revolutions happening on Thedas, only the mage one is actually happening now and only the mage one is something that I can give my in-game support to.

A peasent, revolting or not, is still just a peasant.  A revolting mage is potientially a walking weapon of mass destruction.  

revolts are still destructive doesnt matter who doing it people will still get hurt na dthe qun is looking more and more appealing

It is true that innocent people die in every war, even justified wars.

The mistake commonly made, however, is the belief that a just cause should be abandoned, because of that.  That is entirely untrue.

It's an even more common mistake to resort to violence when peaceful solutions have not yet been exausted.

You can't sell weapons with peaceful solutions. Think of the economy for once damnit!