185 réponses à ce sujet

[GavrielKay]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

GavrielKay wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Mage freedom is most likely to be attractive to a leader who is already desperate - if you're being invaded by the Orlesians, then being able to deploy the Mages of your Kingdom en masse on the battlefield might be the thing that saves you,

Except that with the mages free, you can't simply order them to do it. With the Circles a king actually could.

Technically, with the circles, the King could beg the Chantry to allow a handful of mages to fight at some point removed from the battlefield where they can be watched like hawks. 

With the mages free, they can be recruited like any other person into the army, or as mercenaries or just as people who are interested in protecting their homeland.

So in the Chantry/Circles, the king could ask for violunteers who would join his cause, but without the Circle he can FORCE them, and that is okay. Gotcha....

I didn't say the King could force anyone - though of course if the mages had enlisted in the army, failing to obey orders is disertion or worse.  But nothing about what I said implied force. 

I only meant that you were wrong that the King had more control over mages while they are in Chantry controlled circles than he would if the mages were free.  The King has to ask the Chantry for help from the mages, and apparently the Chantry isn't terribly generous with that help.  The King cannot ask for volunteer mages from a Chantry circle, because only the Chantry can authorize a mage leaving the circle whether because they want to go or are needed in war.

[Drasanil]

A realistic mage victory, ie: one in which they pry concessions out of the Chantry/countries rather than topple the Chantry and establishing the Glorious Atheist League of Thedas (as much as some of the more rabid pro-magers would like), would probably involve very simple shift from over mages going from the Religious authority to the State one. So here goes as far as I’m concerned.

1) Templars become divorced from the Chantry and become a ‘secular’ state sponsored police force rather than a religious one.

2) Circles become state sponsored institutions, similar to a cross between a school and military boot camp for mages. Restrictions on family and such are a loosened and once a mage is ‘certified’ they’d likely enjoy a lot more freedom in exchange for the promise of military or some other form of service to the crown.

3) Formal laws preventing mages from inheriting titles or land from noble families as well as preventing them from holding higher offices bar some specific advisory positions to insure things don’t become Tevinter 2.0.

4) Apostates still hunted down like dogs, most people still fearing or loathing mages for the foreseeable future, the occasional lynching or demon out-break and the Chantry still retaining a great deal of political clout even if it is no longer carries much direct authority.

Modifié par Drasanil, 18 octobre 2011 - 10:46 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

GavrielKay wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

GavrielKay wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Mage freedom is most likely to be attractive to a leader who is already desperate - if you're being invaded by the Orlesians, then being able to deploy the Mages of your Kingdom en masse on the battlefield might be the thing that saves you,

Except that with the mages free, you can't simply order them to do it. With the Circles a king actually could.

Technically, with the circles, the King could beg the Chantry to allow a handful of mages to fight at some point removed from the battlefield where they can be watched like hawks. 

With the mages free, they can be recruited like any other person into the army, or as mercenaries or just as people who are interested in protecting their homeland.

So in the Chantry/Circles, the king could ask for violunteers who would join his cause, but without the Circle he can FORCE them, and that is okay. Gotcha....

I didn't say the King could force anyone - though of course if the mages had enlisted in the army, failing to obey orders is disertion or worse.  But nothing about what I said implied force. 

I only meant that you were wrong that the King had more control over mages while they are in Chantry controlled circles than he would if the mages were free.  The King has to ask the Chantry for help from the mages, and apparently the Chantry isn't terribly generous with that help.  The King cannot ask for volunteer mages from a Chantry circle, because only the Chantry can authorize a mage leaving the circle whether because they want to go or are needed in war.

When a king says "join my army" you don't get to deny him. You join his army. And it isn't the Chantry which decides wether or not the Circle joins the fighitng. That decision lies with the First Enchanter. It may or may not be up to the Knight-Commander to decide just how many mages joins the fighting (more likely that they only advise and supervise like Greagoir says, and Irving simply followed his advise). And again, it is not the Chantry which decides which mages get to leave the Towers, that decision (again) lies with the individual First Enchanters.
With the Circles a king can only ask the Circles for aid, and even if tehy agree to it, only volunteers will join him. Without the Circles, a king can (and will) force a mage to fight for him, even against the mage's will.

[GavrielKay]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
When a king says "join my army" you don't get to deny him. You join his army. And it isn't the Chantry which decides wether or not the Circle joins the fighitng. That decision lies with the First Enchanter. It may or may not be up to the Knight-Commander to decide just how many mages joins the fighting (more likely that they only advise and supervise like Greagoir says, and Irving simply followed his advise). And again, it is not the Chantry which decides which mages get to leave the Towers, that decision (again) lies with the individual First Enchanters.
With the Circles a king can only ask the Circles for aid, and even if tehy agree to it, only volunteers will join him. Without the Circles, a king can (and will) force a mage to fight for him, even against the mage's will.

That's an interesting extrapolation of the information we're actually given.  I don't recall anything about the First Enchanter being able to unilaterally allow mages to leave the circle.  I'm sure in circles that are functioning ideally, the Knight Commander and First Enchanter work together on those decisions.  I didn't ever get the impression that the mages (even high level enchanters) have that much independence.

As for a King forcing a mage to fight if they were free men and women...  well, possibly, but I'd hate to be the squad sent to forcefully enlist a mage who didn't want to join up.  Anyway, willing soldiers are always more effective.  It would accomplish more to offer mages an incentive to serve than to force them.

[TJPags]

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

[quote]DKJaigen wrote...

[quote]TJPags wrote...

[quote]Huntress wrote...

[quote]TJPags wrote...

So, the newly enlightened free mages are going to make their own people Tranquil in order to make money so the rest can live in style?
That's . . . . marvelous . . . . . [/quote]

There are mages who fear they own power, this mages will ask to be made tranquil, but is NOT forced upon them, is by their own choice. Yes there will be tranquil's, there will be good mages, there will be mercenaries mages, they'll be mages RULERS ( tevinter) and they'll be free mages in exile.

I hope we could see it.. next game is about Orlais and tevinter.. what a mess thats going to be! lol!

[/quote]


Why? Why would they do that?

Because thet dont like abominations.

Instead, maybe they won't even want to be trained. What about them? Do the other mages force them to be trained? Forcefully make them tranquil?

yes

And what about power hungry mages? Are the mages going to hunt them? Kill thenm? Forcefully make them tranquil?

yes

Which mage will be the one to stand up and say "you can do this, you can't do that"? And if a mage refuses? What then? Kill them? Imprison them? Make the tranquil? Force them out of their homes?

Tyranny of the majority. Also yes

It's not going to be all peaches and cream here, people. There are going to be criminal mages. And they will have to be policed by other mages. And there will be some who don't like that. Don't you think this is a recipe for a problem?

No

You really need to look up the word: disipline .And understand that mages will not tolerate bull**** from idiots that do not want to reign in their power. The circles( and not the templars who only enforce chantry law) already enforce such laws
[/quote]
[/quote]
So basically they would be back to square one, and instead of having the Chantry telling them what to do, it would just be some other mage. Great, and how many people will have died for that?

[/quote]

Thanks for getting there ahead of me. 


[quote]Huntress wrote...

[quote]TJPags wrote...

Why? Why would they do that?

Instead, maybe they won't even want to be trained. What about them? Do the other mages force them to be trained? Forcefully make them tranquil?

And what about power hungry mages? Are the mages going to hunt them? Kill thenm? Forcefully make them tranquil?

Which mage will be the one to stand up and say "you can do this, you can't do that"? And if a mage refuses? What then? Kill them? Imprison them? Make the tranquil? Force them out of their homes?

It's not going to be all peaches and cream here, people. There are going to be criminal mages. And they will have to be policed by other mages. And there will be some who don't like that. Don't you think this is a recipe for a problem?[/quote]

Why some mages want to be tranquil? they fear the maker and believe magic is a curse, some will have terrible nightmares and want them to end.[/quote]

But, you know, we just dismantled that entire system of religion that claims it's a curse.  It's now a gift.  From the maker.  Why would people want to give that up?

[quote]Huntress wrote...There is always power hunger people.. you are babbling. What to do with them? What we have been doing since DAO. I guess you missed that part? If someone become a danger for you and you're family you try to remove them.. is that concept new to you? Is not new to DA Lore.[/quote]

So now we have a few mages setting the rules for everyone else, instead of the Chantry.  Now we have mages forcefully making their own people Tranquil.  Or killing them.  Funny, I thought restricting their freedom, making them Traquil against their will were atrocities which MUST BE STOPPED.  Or did I miss that part of DA2 also?

[quote]Huntress wrote...who will stand against this mages? The leader of this mages. will some of the leaders be corrupted leaders? YES is like asking: is the water weat? But they'll be good leaders aswell, just like Wynne, Bethany, Irving.[/quote]

Oh, cool, one mage against many - or a few against many.  I suppose, then, that those in charge must be the ones with the most power . . . . ummmm, good idea?

[quote]Huntress wrote...I have never said it was going to be peaches and rainbows, I said they will break into groups, one seeking power, one who will exile themself and the ones who will serve, the ones who serve/seek power will be mercenaries, they work for rich merchants, lords, king's, the chantry.. well i hope you got what i mean. [/quote]

And who controls those mage mercenaries?  Who decides who they can work for?  Suppose they want to work for a nuch of bandits - is that okay in this new world?  Powerful mage, casting spells left and right . . . sure would be useful for a band of thieves. Probably make a lot of money, too.  Sounds great.

[quote]Huntress wrote...
One question, what can the templars do to stop a mage from turning him on a bag of bones? Nothing.
can you trully say the circles are working? no crazy mages roaming the streets, no apostes, no witches?... wake up and smell the estiercol. And to make you smell it even farther in ->there is Tevinter! full of mages and I haven't read anywere they are over run by demons, this mages have survive for more than 900 years without templars.

Templars are only good for killing, making tranquil, rape and torment the mages who already they have under control, some of this mages have never deal with a demon or are blood-mages. Yes POWER corrupt and templars should be removed from it.
Other thing the templar Order was created after the mages surrender, instead of making the circle an school as planned, they made them a prison and brain wash the new mages that it was for their own good. thats why so many young mages want to be tranquil, they belive it is a curse.

Templars are not necessary, elves never had need of them and they still roam the forests with leaders like: Lanaya.
[/quote]

Oh, so every Templar is evil?  See Gregor.  And if you concede that power corrupts - and it does - then why won't it corrupt free mages?  And please, dont hold Tevinter up as some shining light of mage freedom  - go ask Fenris about it.  Go ask Andraste, who fought a war to get out of it.  Oh, wait, don't ask Andraste - I forgot, we overthrew the entire religion based on her teachings because it repressed mages.

As an aside, Templars existed before the Circle Towers.  But that's not relevant to this conversation.

My point remains - To get out from Chantry rule, mages must destroy the Chantry as an organization.  This is the major religion in Thedas.  People will not be happy about that.  At all.

Mages will no longer have a place to learn in peace and quiet, with books, food, etc.  Instead of spending 8 hours studying, they'll have to spend 8 hours working for their food.  And don't say they'll use magic to do it - magic needs to be learned.  What do they do before they learn?  When they're bent over weeding a field or harvesting carrots?  When they're hungry because it's winter and there are no crops?  When the cow dies and there's no milk?  When the roof is leaking?

Mages will no longer have a bunch of teachers sitting around to teach them.  All those teachers are now out making their own living.  Or are THEY going to starve while they teach young mages?  Who likely have nothing to pay them with, except perhaps manual labor.  Remember, they need to be taught to READ before they can be taught to read a book of magic.  Feudal societies aren't exactly overflowing with the literate, after all

So, paying jobs, working 8 hours a day, need to find your own shelter, food, teacher, pay for all that, not to mention clothing, books, etc.  Go ask Alistair's sister how easy life is for those less fortunate.

Where do the parents of mage children go to find a mage to teach their child, anyway?  Mages R US?  Take out an ad in the local papers, "mage tutor needed for currently uncontrolled, untrained, illiterate peasant child"?

And exile - again, why exactly would I want to leave the only place I know, simply because I disagree with how you want to run it?  Why should I leave my family, or lover because you said so?  After all, didn't we JUST fight a war to keep that from happening? 

Not every mage is or will be bad.  But how do those who are get controlled?  How do new mages get trained?

What I see is many situations like Connor - privately found mage tutor, who knows how they'd get paid, and who knows what they'd teach or how well.  Not everyone can teach, you know.  Now, not all of these will turn out bad.  But I'm betting more do than when we had the Templars.

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quote]TJPags wrote...

So, the newly enlightened free mages are going to make their own people Tranquil in order to make money so the rest can live in style?
That's . . . . marvelous . . . . . [/quote]

I thought you were tired of the mage v. templar threads.[/quote]

I'm tired of the usual BS about "templars are evil" v "mages are walking time bombs".  This is a different issue.

[EmperorSahlertz]

GavrielKay wrote...

That's an interesting extrapolation of the information we're actually given.  I don't recall anything about the First Enchanter being able to unilaterally allow mages to leave the circle.  I'm sure in circles that are functioning ideally, the Knight Commander and First Enchanter work together on those decisions.  I didn't ever get the impression that the mages (even high level enchanters) have that much independence.

As for a King forcing a mage to fight if they were free men and women...  well, possibly, but I'd hate to be the squad sent to forcefully enlist a mage who didn't want to join up.  Anyway, willing soldiers are always more effective.  It would accomplish more to offer mages an incentive to serve than to force them.

First Enchanter Irving gives Wynne permission to follow the Warden around Ferelden, and Greagoir himself says that the Templars do not run the Circles, they merely advise and supervise.

So a mage would forcefully resist anyhting he don't want to do on his own free will? So he could also resist paying taxes, and it would be okay? You realie it is well within the "rights" of a king to demand his subjects join his army, right? If a king says "jump", the ONLY answer is "how high", unless of course you got your Circle...

Modifié par EmperorSahlertz, 18 octobre 2011 - 11:47 .

[GavrielKay]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

GavrielKay wrote...

That's an interesting extrapolation of the information we're actually given.  I don't recall anything about the First Enchanter being able to unilaterally allow mages to leave the circle.  I'm sure in circles that are functioning ideally, the Knight Commander and First Enchanter work together on those decisions.  I didn't ever get the impression that the mages (even high level enchanters) have that much independence.

As for a King forcing a mage to fight if they were free men and women...  well, possibly, but I'd hate to be the squad sent to forcefully enlist a mage who didn't want to join up.  Anyway, willing soldiers are always more effective.  It would accomplish more to offer mages an incentive to serve than to force them.

First Enchanter Irving gives Wynne permission to follow the Warden around Ferelden, and Greagoir himself says that the Templars do not run the Circles, they emrely advise and supervise.

So a mage would forcefully resist anyhting he don't want to do on his own free will? So he could also resist paying taxes, and it would be okay? You realie it is well within the "rights" of a king to demand his subjects join his army, right? If a king says "jump", the ONLY answer is "how high", unless of course you got your Circle...

Do you take everything to an extreme in order to make your point sound more reasonable? 

A King can theoretically conscript anyone in their country, however, in practice, things work much better when he offers to reward service and lets the willing join up.

It was my impression, that while Wynne asked Irving if she could leave, that it was done with the tacit approval of Gregoir who was standing right there.  From what I've seen and read in game, Gregoir could have vetoed Irving's decision had he wanted to.  The mages are kept in circles by the Chantry, not by their First Enchanters.

[LobselVith8]

TJPags wrote...

I'm tired of the usual BS about "templars are evil" v "mages are walking time bombs". This is a different issue.

Is it? It's another thread where we see the dichotomy between people who agree with the templars, and who agree with the mages. It's an irreconcilable issue. I don't even imagine it's realistic to assume there's a compromise between mages and templars in the narrative when people discussing the divide between the Order of Templars and the Circles of Magi can never reach a compromise.

[TJPags]

LobselVith8 wrote...

TJPags wrote...

I'm tired of the usual BS about "templars are evil" v "mages are walking time bombs". This is a different issue.

Is it? It's another thread where we see the dichotomy between people who agree with the templars, and who agree with the mages. It's an irreconcilable issue. I don't even imagine it's realistic to assume there's a compromise between mages and templars in the narrative when people discussing the divide between the Order of Templars and the Circles of Magi can never reach a compromise.

No, it's not.  I don't at all think this thread is about mages v templars.  This thread has eliminated that idea, by presupposing that there are no more templars.

This is something I'd think you would like, discussing how the mages go about integrsting themselves into society once they win their freedom.

[EmperorSahlertz]

GavrielKay wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

GavrielKay wrote...

That's an interesting extrapolation of the information we're actually given.  I don't recall anything about the First Enchanter being able to unilaterally allow mages to leave the circle.  I'm sure in circles that are functioning ideally, the Knight Commander and First Enchanter work together on those decisions.  I didn't ever get the impression that the mages (even high level enchanters) have that much independence.

As for a King forcing a mage to fight if they were free men and women...  well, possibly, but I'd hate to be the squad sent to forcefully enlist a mage who didn't want to join up.  Anyway, willing soldiers are always more effective.  It would accomplish more to offer mages an incentive to serve than to force them.

First Enchanter Irving gives Wynne permission to follow the Warden around Ferelden, and Greagoir himself says that the Templars do not run the Circles, they emrely advise and supervise.

So a mage would forcefully resist anyhting he don't want to do on his own free will? So he could also resist paying taxes, and it would be okay? You realie it is well within the "rights" of a king to demand his subjects join his army, right? If a king says "jump", the ONLY answer is "how high", unless of course you got your Circle...

Do you take everything to an extreme in order to make your point sound more reasonable? 

A King can theoretically conscript anyone in their country, however, in practice, things work much better when he offers to reward service and lets the willing join up.

It was my impression, that while Wynne asked Irving if she could leave, that it was done with the tacit approval of Gregoir who was standing right there.  From what I've seen and read in game, Gregoir could have vetoed Irving's decision had he wanted to.  The mages are kept in circles by the Chantry, not by their First Enchanters.

And I'm saying that if the king needed a mage, but no mage would willingly join, he would force them, and there would be nothing the mages could do about it. The Circles prevent that. Simple as that really.

Knight-Commanders probably can't veto the decisions of a First Enchanter, when it comes to decisions about actual mages and higher ranked memebers of the Circle. About apprentices they have a lot more to say.
There is a reason for why Greagoir says that the Templars don't run the Circles and for why Meredith didn't search the Gallows even though Orsino denied her. The reason is: The First Enchanters run the Circles.

And yes. Extremes helps at painting a picture. They show clear and define situations which aren't usually open to interpretation. If you try and moderate the depictions you end up with some mirred contraptions of indefinitions which only blur your original point.

[LobselVith8]

TJPags wrote...

No, it's not. I don't at all think this thread is about mages v templars. This thread has eliminated that idea, by presupposing that there are no more templars.

This is something I'd think you would like, discussing how the mages go about integrating themselves into society once they win their freedom.

Integrating into society... Overall, I think it depends on leadership - how mages achieve their victory, what methods are used to succeed against the Order of Templars (and possibly the Qunari), and how specific leadership view certain magical practices, from shape-shifting to blood magic. I think it would vary with each nation under their different mage leaders, unless the mages have united under a specific leader who lead them to victory (like The Warden from the Circle of Ferelden or a pro-active apostate Champion of Kirkwall). I think it would vary, depending on how the people see them, whether the people in certain regions supported the mages or opposed them, and how the different nations fare in the aftermath of the mage victory.

[TJPags]

LobselVith8 wrote...

TJPags wrote...

No, it's not. I don't at all think this thread is about mages v templars. This thread has eliminated that idea, by presupposing that there are no more templars.

This is something I'd think you would like, discussing how the mages go about integrating themselves into society once they win their freedom.

Integrating into society... Overall, I think it depends on leadership - how mages achieve their victory, what methods are used to succeed against the Order of Templars (and possibly the Qunari), and how specific leadership view certain magical practices, from shape-shifting to blood magic. I think it would vary with each nation under their different mage leaders, unless the mages have united under a specific leader who lead them to victory (like The Warden from the Circle of Ferelden or a pro-active apostate Champion of Kirkwall). I think it would vary, depending on how the people see them, whether the people in certain regions supported the mages or opposed them, and how the different nations fare in the aftermath of the mage victory.

It's mroe than that, though.

How do mages live?  Where do they live?  Who do they live with?  How are young mages taught?  Who decides these things?

Honestly, this is an interesting topic.  I see a lot of problems- and yes, I've mentioned many myself - and I'd love to see plausible, workable answers.

[blothulfur]

So your mages have achieved freedom and thus in your feudal societies stand equal with kings and other potentates, they have destroyed the holy warriors of your maker and have thrown down the religion that supports that deity. So this miniscule minority has gone from a position of favour that the vast majority of peoples in Thedas can only dream of to the highest office in the land through violence and destroying the peoples god, will the common folk truly believe that they want anything less than the ascension of new demon ridden magisters brought to power on seas of bas blood.

It will be Tevinter reborn.

[LobselVith8]

TJPags wrote...

It's more than that, though.

Wouldn't the specific mage leadership determine those things - how mages in the region are taught, where they live, their living accommodations, and all those inquiries about life in a post-mage Thedas? I'd assume the mage leadership would have a say, especially if they see mages as their "people" (as Circle mage Bethany does). Unless there is a strong mage leader who all the other regional mage leaders are listening to, I think the different regions might have some variations in how the mage lifestyle and education system is conducted.

Unless the region's leadership supported the mages - as King Alistair seems to in Dragon Age 2, where he either protects the apostates or advocates the Magi boon several years after it was turned down - or, at the very least, didn't support the opposition, I'd assume the mage leadership would have considerable say, especially if they had to topple the local leadership to maintain their sovereignty.

I think it's safe to say that there would be trial and error.

[TEWR]

TJPags wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

TJPags wrote...

No, it's not. I don't at all think this thread is about mages v templars. This thread has eliminated that idea, by presupposing that there are no more templars.

This is something I'd think you would like, discussing how the mages go about integrating themselves into society once they win their freedom.

Integrating into society... Overall, I think it depends on leadership - how mages achieve their victory, what methods are used to succeed against the Order of Templars (and possibly the Qunari), and how specific leadership view certain magical practices, from shape-shifting to blood magic. I think it would vary with each nation under their different mage leaders, unless the mages have united under a specific leader who lead them to victory (like The Warden from the Circle of Ferelden or a pro-active apostate Champion of Kirkwall). I think it would vary, depending on how the people see them, whether the people in certain regions supported the mages or opposed them, and how the different nations fare in the aftermath of the mage victory.

It's mroe than that, though.

How do mages live?  Where do they live?  Who do they live with?  How are young mages taught?  Who decides these things?

Honestly, this is an interesting topic.  I see a lot of problems- and yes, I've mentioned many myself - and I'd love to see plausible, workable answers.

I'll take a shot at this. No promises on it being kink-free, since the idea of a Templar Order of any sort has been eliminated:

How do mages live? -- they have two options: live like free men or live in the now autonomous Circles run by the mages. If they live like any other person, they cannot partake in politics of any sort. However, they are free to live normal lives outside of politics. They can have friends and families and do other things that the non-mage populus can. They can even use their abilities to help the land. Some would join the army while others would become doctors using their Spirit Healer talents.

Blood magic -- while it has its beneficial uses -- would be very tricky to integrate into society. So for the time being until I can think of a way it could be integrated, we'll assume that blood magic isn't a part of the mages' lives.

Right now, all I can think of is this: Ideally, only those mages who have proven to be of a good moral center (people like Merrill and Jowan) would be allowed to use it for beneficial purposes only.

Since Darkspawn can be used as spell fodder for blood magic, those spells that require sacrifices would use Darkspawn blood. Or animals. I'm sure animals could be used too. Nowhere is it stated that blood magic requires human blood only.

But like I said, it's a tricky subject in and of itself so let's assume that blood magic isn't allowed.

Now, were the mages to live in the Circles it would be of their own volition. They would serve as the teachers for the new mage children that are brought to the Circle, or as with a non-Circle mage would use their talents for the benefit of the Circle. Spirit Healers would help bring in money.

Where do they live? -- alongside the populus or in the Circles.

How are young mages taught? -- Should a mage child be discovered, the child and his parents would meet with a mage of the Circle and have a discussion on what's wanted. If the mage child is okay with going to the Circle, then the mage from the Circle would escort him and also begin teaching him the basics along the way (no dealing with demons and the like).

If the child doesn't want to leave and there is a mage living in the general area, the mage child would go to him/her and ask that he/she take the child in as his/her pupil. If the mage refuses, the child would be required to go to the Circle.

But there's also this: a mage from the Circle could volunteer to teach the child at his home as sort of an extension of the Circle.



Like I said, no promises on being kink-free since the idea of Templars has been eliminated.

[TheCreeper]

KJandrew wrote...

People keep going on about how the Templars are all going to be going through Lyrium withdrawals. But there's bound to be a few Templar sympathisers in the Chantry giving them a line. Plus on the converse Mages also need Lyrium, without it they get knackered and can't cast any spells for a while after a few castings. So without the Chantry's supply, what are they going to do after their mages can't cast any more and a bunch of guys with swords are charging at them?

From what I've read some of the Templars went off (after the end of the game) to find their own source of Lyrium outside chantry control, which sounds rather worrying to me because I can just see a bunch of templars raiding the chantry and the dwarves for Lyrium.

[blothulfur]

Why raid the dwarves, the carta and others will sell it no questions asked. Knowing Bhelen he'd play both sides against each other to drive up prices and profit from the topsiders little war, it's not like the dwarves have anything to fear while they are the only supply of the ore and they openly scorn mage spells.

[EmperorSahlertz]

I feel I must (again) point out that mage who actually learn how to heal are RARE, and mages who are spirit healers are even more rare, so to build an economy on them is simply not feasible, or to even use them as an example of what mages could do is unfeasible, simply because not all mages can do it.
Give examples of actually widespread feasible use of mages, instead of what a minority within the minority might be able to do.

[TheCreeper]

Still, the templars with their own source of Lyrium outside the chantry is a scary thought.

[TJPags]

As mentioned by Emp, healers are somewhat rare. And how much can most people really afford to pay? Enough to keep, say, 300 mages in food, clothing, etc.? That could take a lot, you know.

Now, as to living with everyone else . . . .where? What house? Buy one? With what money? Build one? Do they know how? Barter services? What services . . . . which brings us back to the problem. Mages are intellectuals. They've been raised in Circle Towers. They haven't farmed, worked for a smith, or a baker, etc. Do they have these skills? Some might. Others . . . not so much. Remember, you're not just born knowing things . . . you need to learn them, either from others while doing, or by being taught. Mages were taught certain skills that may not exactly be ones that can make money.

And what do they do if they want to settle in a village, and the village doesn't want them? Or a City? Again, some villages or cities might. Others might not.

There was talk about regional mage councils . . . why? Would all mages agree with this? And if not, what do those do? Go their own way? Regulated how? Controlled by whom?

I think that there ARE things mages can do to earn a living . . . a smith might well asl a mage to fire up the metal for the anvil. Saves buying charcoal, no? Might be cheaper. But, remember, spend 8 hours working, less time to train, or learn, or teach. We're talking now about, essentially, night school, and night school after a day of, perhaps, physical labor - night school isn't easy. And the teachers would likely want to get paid. I know my college professors got paid. I'd want to get paid - wouldn't you?

So there's a lot of expenses mages now have, which means jobs. Which means less time to train, learn, or teach.

[TEWR]

well I wasn't saying the spirit healers would be the only source of income. Just a source of income.

[TEWR]

TJPags wrote...

As mentioned by Emp, healers are somewhat rare. And how much can most people really afford to pay? Enough to keep, say, 300 mages in food, clothing, etc.? That could take a lot, you know.

Now, as to living with everyone else . . . .where? What house? Buy one? With what money? Build one? Do they know how? Barter services? What services . . . . which brings us back to the problem. Mages are intellectuals. They've been raised in Circle Towers. They haven't farmed, worked for a smith, or a baker, etc. Do they have these skills? Some might. Others . . . not so much. Remember, you're not just born knowing things . . . you need to learn them, either from others while doing, or by being taught. Mages were taught certain skills that may not exactly be ones that can make money.

If you actually read all of the books in the Circle Tower of Ferelden in Witch Hunt (and by read I just mean what the game tells you), you can see that there are a great deal of tomes that deal with more than just magic. There's how to grow plants, the nature of certain beasts, etc.

And what do they do if they want to settle in a village, and the village doesn't want them? Or a City? Again, some villages or cities might. Others might not.

I would think that the populus would be educated on the potential benefits of having a mage living in the city.

There was talk about regional mage councils . . . why? Would all mages agree with this? And if not, what do those do? Go their own way? Regulated how? Controlled by whom?

Could I see the post on this idea? I don't want to jump to conclusions and I'm bouncing between like 8 different threads at the moment.

[Largenir]

Actually mage-templar civil war very soon and very fast turn into big war of the states coalitions, which will be led by Orlais and Tevinter empires. The Imperial Chantry dont miss chance to destroy the Orlais-based chantry and restore the old Empire in all glory. Both chantries proclaim a crusade, and here it is - the real continental war...

[TJPags]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

TJPags wrote...

As mentioned by Emp, healers are somewhat rare. And how much can most people really afford to pay? Enough to keep, say, 300 mages in food, clothing, etc.? That could take a lot, you know.

Now, as to living with everyone else . . . .where? What house? Buy one? With what money? Build one? Do they know how? Barter services? What services . . . . which brings us back to the problem. Mages are intellectuals. They've been raised in Circle Towers. They haven't farmed, worked for a smith, or a baker, etc. Do they have these skills? Some might. Others . . . not so much. Remember, you're not just born knowing things . . . you need to learn them, either from others while doing, or by being taught. Mages were taught certain skills that may not exactly be ones that can make money.

If you actually read all of the books in the Circle Tower of Ferelden in Witch Hunt (and by read I just mean what the game tells you), you can see that there are a great deal of tomes that deal with more than just magic. There's how to grow plants, the nature of certain beasts, etc.

And what do they do if they want to settle in a village, and the village doesn't want them? Or a City? Again, some villages or cities might. Others might not.

I would think that the populus would be educated on the potential benefits of having a mage living in the city.

There was talk about regional mage councils . . . why? Would all mages agree with this? And if not, what do those do? Go their own way? Regulated how? Controlled by whom?

Could I see the post on this idea? I don't want to jump to conclusions and I'm bouncing between like 8 different threads at the moment.

Ever read a book about, say, growing an acre of potatos?  Ever do it?  (and if you have, have pity on a poor city boy for thinking it's hard and/or more complicated than it looks    I actually have trouble getting grass to grow instead of weeds )  Not everything is easy to translate from book to practical use, is my point.  And in the case of growing your own food . . . well, mess up, you go hungry.

Who would educate the populous?  Remember, these are people raised to believe in the Chant of Andraste - which has been destroyed by mages in the course of this war.  They won't look happily on that, it may even reinforce their belief that mages are dangerous.

As to the mages regional idea, see Lob's post just a few above yours . . . I don't recall much talk about it earlier in the thread, except for the vague comments about the mages just living in the old Circle Towers - which brings up the problem of feeding and clothing all those people.

[TheCreeper]

You know Andraste being a mage is a rather popular Heresy/Rumor, I imagine a lot of mages would try to promote that as a way of druming up support with the people.