2008 réponses à ce sujet

[Silfren]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

What is obvious is that the Circle DOES teach its mages well enough. In the 900 years the Circles have stood, Abominations have been a rarity. Now if were as you claim, and that the Circle did a poor job of educating their mages, then the rate of Abominations would've been far higher, than what is stated by lore.

And no, the Harrowing is about as real as a cage fight. You may die, but the encounter is still staged. 

Correlation does not imply causation.  If there have been rare abominations since the Circles came into existence, it doesn't necessarily mean that the training it provides to mages is adequate.  Not when you also have the reality that ANY mage who fails their Harrowing ends up dead as the result of failure, and there is evidence that the "take no chances" attitude of the templars means that the merest, slightest hint of risk results in a dead apprentice.  It just means that many more mages are killed before given a real chance. 

As for the other, I wonder, when the Romans were feeding people to lions in an arena, would you call that an emulation?  Cage fight or not, the Harrowing is NOT an emulation.  It's not a "pet" demon, after all. It isn't a demon who is working FOR the templars to test the mage.  It isn't a benign spirit who is working with the templars to test the mage.  It is a real demon, with a real desire to possess.  

[EmperorSahlertz]

Would I call an arena match against a lion an emulation of a fight against a lion on the savannah? Yes. Very much so.

There are more mages in the current day of Thedas, than have been recorded for many ages. If the trainning of Mages were inadequate, then there would also be many more Abominations than had been recorded for ages.

[Silfren]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Would I call an arena match against a lion an emulation of a fight against a lion on the savannah? Yes. Very much so.

There are more mages in the current day of Thedas, than have been recorded for many ages. If the trainning of Mages were inadequate, then there would also be many more Abominations than had been recorded for ages.

This is not a given.  If mages are thrown into a Harrowing and killed outright either if they take too long or fail, then this does NOT stand as proof that the training is adequate.  

You are not presenting an adequate case, sorry.  Mages are locked away into prisons and literally kept separate from the rest of Thedas, and either killed or Tranquiled if deemed to be a risk.  We're not seeing a situation where the training of mages is proven adequate to reduce the likelihood of abominations, but one in which if the training is even BELIEVED to be inadequate, a mage is cut down before they even have a chance to prove themselves one way or another.  

Anyway, however, the Harrowing is no more a simulation than tossing a human being into an arena with a lion is a simulation.  The demon is as real as are the lion's teeth, jaws, strength, and desire to kill, and is just as willing to possess a mage as the lion is to eat the human.  Your assertion that it is a simulation would only work if the possibility of possession were not real, but only, er, SIMULATED, if the risk of being cut down by a templar were SIMULATED, rather than very, very real.

Really, you just made that up and now you're struggling to defend it on really shallow grounds.  "It's not a simulation of an encounter with a demon, it's a simulation of a natural encounter with a demon"....really?  I mean, really?

[Shadowvalker]

Hmm - I am wondering when the knight commander was appointed a Grand Cleric? Seems to me that Meridith oversteps her role. The right of annulment is reserved for the Grand Cleric to issue. In Origins Greagoir had to ask the chantry in Denerim for the right of annulment of the Circle? Or did I miss out on something?

But I think that Anders envoked the right of annulment of the Chantry as well as Meridith envolked it on the circle.. Neither of them have any right to do so.

One may state that the Chantry is to blame for the treatment of mages through their way of turning a blind eye to what the templar's are doing but killing civilian is a part of being a terrorist or a well known aspect of one.
Perhaps even the Seekers could be blame as well - they are the ones who should monitor the templar's?

As an RPG I state that Bioware - as Gamemaster - feed us players with to little facts to act upon. In the words of Fenris - Feedom is a noble ideal.....The hole realm and game is based mostly on hearsay.

[dragonflight288]

Hmm - I am wondering when the knight commander was appointed a Grand Cleric? Seems to me that Meridith oversteps her role. The right of annulment is reserved for the Grand Cleric to issue. In Origins Greagoir had to ask the chantry in Denerim for the right of annulment of the Circle? Or did I miss out on something?

But I think that Anders envoked the right of annulment of the Chantry as well as Meridith envolked it on the circle.. Neither of them have any right to do so.

One may state that the Chantry is to blame for the treatment of mages through their way of turning a blind eye to what the templar's are doing but killing civilian is a part of being a terrorist or a well known aspect of one.
Perhaps even the Seekers could be blame as well - they are the ones who should monitor the templar's?

As an RPG I state that Bioware - as Gamemaster - feed us players with to little facts to act upon. In the words of Fenris - Feedom is a noble ideal.....The hole realm and game is based mostly on hearsay.

She was appointed after helping overthrow the Viscount before Dumar. He was a tyrant, but was only truly overthrown after seeking to drive the Templars out of Kirkwall.

And Meredith does have to ask permission to perform the Right of Annulment. If Kerras is alive in act 3, he mentions that Elthina has been denying Meredith the right, so Meredith appealed directly to the Divine, going over Elthina's head, to try and get permission. After Anders killed the Grand Cleric in his bomb to destroy the chantry, Meredith was the top ranked Chantry representative there. At that point, she had every right to call for Annulment.

Once given the authority, it was the first thing she did, despite the fact that the crime she was accusing the entire Circle of had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that Anders did it, as he was an apostate and the mage underground had been destroyed.

[Shadowvalker]

Hmm.

Beneath the grand cleric is the mother (or, in the Imperial Chantry, the father).

I have yet to see where or how ranks in the chantry and templar order compares.. Who outranks who.

Are we certain that all mothers died in Anders newyears ******?

[cowoline]

The two most used arguments are 1 can be controlled by demons and may be a danger to others 2 The circle protects them from them selves.

With that logic we should lock op every child in the real world, because pedofile might harm them, and after that the child might become another childmolester.

Alright , the circle is necesary, but i think the greatest problem with solutions like that is when basic human rights are taken from them. Like why is a mage not allowed to fall in love and have a family?

Just look at what happend in Egypt and other countries in the middleeast. What if that uprising had started in Libya by an "anders" blowing up Gadaffis home or another official building? Then a lot of innocents would have been killed in the same (or at least close to) as what Anders did. Would we have blamed him as harshly? I'm not saying that terroisme is right, but i think that it is wise to remember that, the action may only be one persons, the blame is as much a faliur to listen by the people who are in power.

And before i get struck down by templars  yes i get that mages are dangerous and can be a mayor threat. But should wer lock up and contain any man with an IQ above 140 because Einstien contributed and advised that an atomic weapon should be made?

It would be wonderfull to be able to give an answer to all of this, but unfortunately the world isn't black and white.

Modifié par cowoline, 31 mars 2012 - 11:18 .

[slashthedragon]

cowoline wrote...

The two most used arguments are 1 can be controlled by demons and may be a danger to others 2 The circle protects them from them selves.

With that logic we should lock op every child in the real world, because pedofile might harm them, and after that the child might become another childmolester.

Alright , the circle is necesary, but i think the greatest problem with solutions like that is when basic human rights are taken from them. Like why is a mage not allowed to fall in love and have a family?

Just look at what happend in Egypt and other countries in the middleeast. What if that uprising had started in Libya by an "anders" blowing up Gadaffis home or another official building? Then a lot of innocents would have been killed in the same (or at least close to) as what Anders did. Would we have blamed him as harshly? I'm not saying that terroisme is right, but i think that it is wise to remember that, the action may only be one persons, the blame is as much a faliur to listen by the people who are in power.

And before i get struck down by templars  yes i get that mages are dangerous and can be a mayor threat. But should wer lock up and contain any man with an IQ above 140 because Einstien contributed and advised that an atomic weapon should be made?

It would be wonderfull to be able to give an answer to all of this, but unfortunately the world isn't black and white.

I am currently reading a fan fic in which an excellent solution for the "mage problem" is represented.
Are we allowed to post links?  The fic however is NSFW in places

[EmperorSahlertz]

Silfren wrote...
This is not a given.  If mages are thrown into a Harrowing and killed outright either if they take too long or fail, then this does NOT stand as proof that the training is adequate.

How the test is conducted have ZERO to do with the test's worst. You hopefully know that. Just because the test may result in an apprentice's death, does not mean the test is worthless. Quite the contrary in this case really. Since if he did indeed become possessed, he should be killed, and if he was taking too long, it could easily be a sign of him having lost himself within the Fade.  Both cases, serves to prove the Harrowing as a good test of the apprentices abilities. If the apprentice was actualy competent, he wouldn't take long, and he certainly wouldn't become possessed.

Silfren wrote... 
You are not presenting an adequate case, sorry.  Mages are locked away into prisons and literally kept separate from the rest of Thedas, and either killed or Tranquiled if deemed to be a risk.  We're not seeing a situation where the training of mages is proven adequate to reduce the likelihood of abominations, but one in which if the training is even BELIEVED to be inadequate, a mage is cut down before they even have a chance to prove themselves one way or another.

 
Obviously you are presenting a scewered and highly biased point of view. Templars AREN'T allowed to just "cut down" and apprentice they believe is at danger of possession (or they would have done so to Feynriel), and they certainly aren't allowed to make him tranquil either on a whim, since that would require the First Enchanter's signature (one of your heroic mages). So perhaps you should start and take all the cases and evidence we have into considertation, instead opf jsut the tiny bits and pieces that suit your point of view?

Silfren wrote... 
Anyway, however, the Harrowing is no more a simulation than tossing a human being into an arena with a lion is a simulation.  The demon is as real as are the lion's teeth, jaws, strength, and desire to kill, and is just as willing to possess a mage as the lion is to eat the human.  Your assertion that it is a simulation would only work if the possibility of possession were not real, but only, er, SIMULATED, if the risk of being cut down by a templar were SIMULATED, rather than very, very real.

 
THat would be true, IF I had said that the Harrowing was supposed to be a simulation for the Mage. I never did, and I never eant so. It IS a simulation however you twist and turn it, and squirm through your imaginary ideals. It is a simulation for everyone else. Just like it was for the spectators in the Roman arena, so it is for the Templars and the rest of the Circle.

Silfren wrote... 
Really, you just made that up and now you're struggling to defend it on really shallow grounds.  "It's not a simulation of an encounter with a demon, it's a simulation of a natural encounter with a demon"....really?  I mean, really?

Yes. Really. And if you can't see why, then you either don't want to. Or you already saw, and just wish you didn't. Either way, there isn't much that can be done for you.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Shadowvalker wrote...

Hmm.

Beneath the grand cleric is the mother (or, in the Imperial Chantry, the father).

I have yet to see where or how ranks in the chantry and templar order compares.. Who outranks who.

Are we certain that all mothers died in Anders newyears ******?

Gaider has explicitly said that once the Grand Cleric died, the authority rested solely on Meredith.

[TEWR]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Shadowvalker wrote...

Hmm.

Beneath the grand cleric is the mother (or, in the Imperial Chantry, the father).

I have yet to see where or how ranks in the chantry and templar order compares.. Who outranks who.

Are we certain that all mothers died in Anders newyears ******?

Gaider has explicitly said that once the Grand Cleric died, the authority rested solely on Meredith.

Correction: Gaider said that once the Grand Cleric died alongside the majority of Chantry priests -- where if any were to remain alive it was unknown where they were -- Meredith had the authority.

Simply killing Elthina wouldn't have given Meredith authority over anything.

[SlyGamer79]

Maybe the real question is which is the lesser of the two evils anders & meridith,
mages vs templars lol.

[Shadowvalker]

If such a vitial information is not given ingame - then it just adds to the confusion. That was a big mistake not to fix it in a patch!

It seems that people plays a game of witch they are withhold the rules?!

[dragonflight288]

If such a vitial information is not given ingame - then it just adds to the confusion. That was a big mistake not to fix it in a patch!

It seems that people plays a game of witch they are withhold the rules?!

Not necessarily. We knew the rules of the game that late into it. Some of us may not have known how the succession went, but it is in a Codex on the hierarchy of the Chantry.

[Adanu]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...


THat would be true, IF I had said that the Harrowing was supposed to be a simulation for the Mage. I never did, and I never eant so. It IS a simulation however you twist and turn it, and squirm through your imaginary ideals. It is a simulation for everyone else. Just like it was for the spectators in the Roman arena, so it is for the Templars and the rest of the Circle..

... WOrds cannot express how ignorant this statement is.

The Harrowing is, for all intents and purposes, throwing a mage to the lions and see if the mage has the 'strength' to keep it from their 'mind'.

There is no simulation. They ARE SENT INTO THE FADE WITH THE SOLE PURPOSE OF BEING MADE TO KEEP THE LIONS FROM EATING THEM.

Go play the Mage origin in Origins and read up on the Harrowing. A lot of what you're saying is just flat out not true.

[LobselVith8]

DeadPoolMK wrote...

I apologize if the following has been mentioned before, but 74 pages of debate is a lot to wade through.

I'm surprised no one's mentioned how Anders' actions will affect mages all over Thedas.

The average person probably believes in the Maker and the Chantry. They probably also have some fear of mages, if for no other reason, the Chantry has instilled that view.

So when people hear about a mage blowing up the Chantry in Kirkwall and the subsequent uprisings taking place all over the nation, how do you think they'll respond? With fear, that's how.

If people responded to mages with fear before, and they are responding to mages with fear now, how does that change anything? Wynne made it clear that people irrationally blamed mages for things that they weren't responsible for, and that the people would often kill mages as a result of blaming them for disasters that transpired. Even if the Hero of Ferelden is a mage and saves the entire world from the ravages of the Fifth Blight, it changes little for the plight of his people in the Circle of Ferelden, and in all the Circles of Magi throughout the Andrastian nations.

DeadPoolMK wrote...

Fear is dangerous as it often leads to hatred and violence.

The average person will now probably fear mages even more than before and for good reason. You can bet that some mages will be really pissed off at everyone else and attack indiscriminately. Even if most mages don't, it only takes one to cast a few incredibly destructive spells and level a village.

People blaming all mages for the actions of one isn't a "good reason," it's discrimination. It's the same asinine thinking that we see with Andrastians conflating the Tevinter Magisters with all mages, which is absurd when you consider that Arlathan had its own elves (and, according to elven lore, all the ancient elves possessed magical ability).

DeadPoolMK wrote...

If nothing else, Anders has most likely made the majority of the populace turn against mages more strongly than ever before. You can bet the Templars will be using this fear (probably by conjuring up stories and images of the Tevinter Imperium) to gain allies and new soldiers.

At least if Anders had made sure the Chantry was empty before setting off the bomb. Sure, the building itself would've been destroyed, but at least the Grand Cleric would still be alive. The destruction of the building would be symbolic enough without committing murder.

The focus of killing the Grand Cleric was that Anders wanted to force the issue, so that mages would fight to emancipate themselves from a system that he saw as slavery. Essentially, it was the idea that it's better to die on your feet than live on your knees.

DeadPoolMK wrote...

It'd be interesting if mages themselves were split on how to handle the situation. I could easily see mages splintering into different factions, some advocating peaceful methods while others use violence.

I know some people here might ask: "Well, what was the alternative? Keep mages locked up like animals forever?"

No, but people were slowly turning against the Templars in Kirkwall. In time there might have been enough support to pressure the Chantry and Templars into giving mages more rights and maybe eventually freedom. Other mage circles would eventually follow.

I have to respectfully disagree with you. If the Hero of Ferelden (from the Circle of Ferelden) saving the world by stopping the Blight wasn't enough to justify the emancipation of the local Circle of Magi in Ferelden (even though the Fereldens see him as being "blessed by the Maker"), I don't think one city-state in the grip of the Chantry of Andraste and the Order of Templars would have changed anything at all.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Adanu wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...


THat would be true, IF I had said that the Harrowing was supposed to be a simulation for the Mage. I never did, and I never eant so. It IS a simulation however you twist and turn it, and squirm through your imaginary ideals. It is a simulation for everyone else. Just like it was for the spectators in the Roman arena, so it is for the Templars and the rest of the Circle..

... WOrds cannot express how ignorant this statement is.

The Harrowing is, for all intents and purposes, throwing a mage to the lions and see if the mage has the 'strength' to keep it from their 'mind'.

There is no simulation. They ARE SENT INTO THE FADE WITH THE SOLE PURPOSE OF BEING MADE TO KEEP THE LIONS FROM EATING THEM.

Go play the Mage origin in Origins and read up on the Harrowing. A lot of what you're saying is just flat out not true.

And here we have another one. Big surprise. Now here is a thing I want you to try and wrap your brain around: It is not a simulation for the mage! Get it? Are you with me this far? Good.

Now that you understand that the situation is very real for the mage, you will need to understand the entire situation is still staged. It is not a naturally occured encoutner with a demon. It is a simulated encounter. Now for who is this a simulation? The Circle and the Templars. They have staged an encoutner with a demon, to give them an insight into wetehr or not the mage will be able to resist demons in the future.

To go back to use a simpler explanation an simily, so that you can follow. The arena. A Gladiator fighting a lion, was a simulation of fighting a lion on the savannah, for the spectators. For the Gladiator though, the fight will have the same outcome if he fails. But the entire fight is staged. In a controlled environment. Staged. Get it?

[Adanu]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Adanu wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...


THat would be true, IF I had said that the Harrowing was supposed to be a simulation for the Mage. I never did, and I never eant so. It IS a simulation however you twist and turn it, and squirm through your imaginary ideals. It is a simulation for everyone else. Just like it was for the spectators in the Roman arena, so it is for the Templars and the rest of the Circle..

... WOrds cannot express how ignorant this statement is.

The Harrowing is, for all intents and purposes, throwing a mage to the lions and see if the mage has the 'strength' to keep it from their 'mind'.

There is no simulation. They ARE SENT INTO THE FADE WITH THE SOLE PURPOSE OF BEING MADE TO KEEP THE LIONS FROM EATING THEM.

Go play the Mage origin in Origins and read up on the Harrowing. A lot of what you're saying is just flat out not true.

And here we have another one. Big surprise. Now here is a thing I want you to try and wrap your brain around: It is not a simulation for the mage! Get it? Are you with me this far? Good.

Now that you understand that the situation is very real for the mage, you will need to understand the entire situation is still staged. It is not a naturally occured encoutner with a demon. It is a simulated encounter. Now for who is this a simulation? The Circle and the Templars. They have staged an encoutner with a demon, to give them an insight into wetehr or not the mage will be able to resist demons in the future.

To go back to use a simpler explanation an simily, so that you can follow. The arena. A Gladiator fighting a lion, was a simulation of fighting a lion on the savannah, for the spectators. For the Gladiator though, the fight will have the same outcome if he fails. But the entire fight is staged. In a controlled environment. Staged. Get it?

No.

A simulation implies that there is a possibility of surviving regardless of outcome.

If the mage fails the possession, he/she DIES, no questions.

YOu have an odd sefinition of simulation... It's a fight to the death either way.

Simulation: the act or process of pretending; feigning.

There is no pretending involved. YOu either do it or die.

Modifié par Adanu, 02 avril 2012 - 11:10 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

No a simulation does in such way imply a survival. A simulation simply means that it isn't the real deal what is going on. But that it is reasonably close to gauge an outcome, had the situation been real.

For instance: Firefighters are sent into a building with REAL flames, but only dolls to rescue, to SIMULATE a real housefire. The danger of the fire is the same, but the situation is staged. This is to gauge how effective the firefighters in question would be in a real housefire, even though they've jsut entered a house on fire.

Another example would be Marines trainning to withstand the psychological pressure of sustained enemy fire. They have to crawl through the mud with barbed wire over their heads, with real live rounds in the LMG shooting over their heads. This is to SIMULATE the realities of warfare, even thoguh the bullets are still very deadly.

Simulations does in no way, form, or function, guarentee survival.

[arelenriel]

In the case of Anders actions I do not think the ends justify the means anymore than the actions of Uldred justified the means in DAO.  The same goes for Meredith. 


They are the same in that they are incapable of understanding anyone else's point of view as being valid. Part of this may be due to Justice and Idol but it is mostly just part of the characters personalities, both characters seem fairly self centered, selfish and impatient. They also seem fairly certain that they are the only one's in the right.


Blowing up the Chantry was wrong because it will only make things more difficult for those that are trying to change things by working within the bounds of the law (e.g. Wynne, Irving, the Warden if a mage).

Meredith's choice to call the Rite of Annulment was  also wrong for the same reason. Her actions superseded the more reasonable voices within the Chantry who wished to give mages more freedom but based on the requirement that the process occur slowly so that mages could prove themselves responsible and capable of managing their own problems.


Both Meredith and Anders eliminated the credibiity of the reasonable voices in both the Circles and the Chantry by committing acts of terrorism against the other group. Therefore they were both wrong because they failed to accept a middle ground (e.g. Anders accepting that not all mages saw the Circles as an evil thing, many viewed them as home and family, and Meredith not accepting that not all mages were evil or as dangerous as they were made out to be). Both actions were wrong and made things more difficult for those pursuing peace

Modifié par arelenriel, 03 avril 2012 - 01:30 .

[Adanu]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

No a simulation does in such way imply a survival. A simulation simply means that it isn't the real deal what is going on. But that it is reasonably close to gauge an outcome, had the situation been real.

For instance: Firefighters are sent into a building with REAL flames, but only dolls to rescue, to SIMULATE a real housefire. The danger of the fire is the same, but the situation is staged. This is to gauge how effective the firefighters in question would be in a real housefire, even though they've jsut entered a house on fire.

Another example would be Marines trainning to withstand the psychological pressure of sustained enemy fire. They have to crawl through the mud with barbed wire over their heads, with real live rounds in the LMG shooting over their heads. This is to SIMULATE the realities of warfare, even thoguh the bullets are still very deadly.

Simulations does in no way, form, or function, guarentee survival.

We're going to have to agree to disagree then.

As it is, Mages are thrown to the wolves for  real. There is no simulation to me.

[Bank92]

Man, choosing a side in the final fight was tough. The Templars just wanted order but their methods were similar to the U.S.S.R bringing tanks to countries that wanted to leave the Communist system. Anders is an extreme terrorist, like the I.R.A who wants to fight for the good of their own people but with methods that are very destructive.

[magelet]

I suppose the difference is like...a conservative dictator sort of character and a violent revolutionary character.

Sure both can cause problems but they are polar opposites, not really the same at all.

[arelenriel]

Polar opposites in some ways yet not in others since neither the conservative dictator nor the revolutionary character care how many innocents die in achieving the end game and neither is willing to accept that they may be wrong either in their beliefs or the methods they are using to achieve them

[LobselVith8]

arelenriel wrote...

Blowing up the Chantry was wrong because it will only make things more difficult for those that are trying to change things by working within the bounds of the law (e.g. Wynne, Irving, the Warden if a mage).

I understand what you're saying, but I don't think two of the three mages you cited are trying to change the status quo.

First Enchanter Irving isn't trying to change the law, he's trying to survive under the Chantry controlled Circle system. He makes that clear in the Magi Origin, when he explains why he signed the Rite of Tranquility for Jowan. If The Warden asks the new ruler to grant the Circle of Ferelden its independence, Irving is thrilled, profusely thanking the Hero of Ferelden for freeing the mages from "their shackles" when he could have asked for a title and wealth. 

Senior Enchanter Wynne doesn't try to change the status quo, as she recommends that The Warden is the one who can try to change things (based on Aneirin's recommendation) if he returns to the Circle after performing his duties as a Grey Warden and assumes a leadership position, as she doesn't think she has much longer to live; while Wynne clearly wants things to change, she asks The Warden to assume that responsibility. In fact, her argument against the Circles breaking free from the Chantry (as she is heading to Cumberland) is an attempt to prevent a genocide, because she argues in Amaranthine that the Chantry would rather kill all the mages than see them free.

The Warden from the Circle of Ferelden can try to change things, by asking the new ruler of Ferelden to emancipate his (or her) people from the Chantry of Andraste and the Order of Templars. Using the royal boon to liberate the mages, rather than asking for a title and wealth, is certainly a proactive attempt to change things for the mages in the Circle of Ferelden, but it doesn't transpire, because the Chantry refuses the new ruler's request. One of the Bioware devs, Michael Hamilton, explained the problem with the Magi boon:

Michael Hamilton wrote...

KawaiiKatie wrote...

Oh dear, I hope this doesn't all lead up to a huge disappointment.... Then again, I suppose that's true of the entire DA2 story, and not just the mages.

I've got my fingers crossed.....!

EDIT: Ah, I'm going mad! If Mage-Hawke, all on his/her own, can free the mages... It invalidates the efforts of my Mage-Warden so much more than just the Chantry denying the request. It's, "The Chantry said no to your request, Mage-Warden. But if that Champion of Kirkwall were to ask, then we might consider it." I... I don't know how to feel about this... Then again, I'm making assumptions.... I just hope the story doesn't play out that way....

Yes, yes, all my fretting is premature, but with DA2 still a month away, I don't know what else to think...

Since when has any dictatorship ever been turned over by asking politely?

Really think about what you're saying.

"I asked and they said no!"

It's been nearly a millennia of the mages living under the Chantry controlled Circles, and even the Hero of Ferelden saving the world from the Fifth Blight wasn't able to emancipate the local Circle of Magi as a reward for his efforts, or the efforts of the mages (who have participated in every single Blight). I understand that some people disagree with what Anders did, but like Michael Hamilton said, it's a dictatorship. I don't think there's a peaceful solution when the mages want to be free from the Chantry and its templars, and the Chantry and the templars want to control the mages. There's no middle ground, there are only two extremes that cannot be reconciled.