2008 réponses à ce sujet

[Lynata]

Silfren wrote...
Anyway, even if it were true that at one point the doctrines of Andrastianism as taught in Tevinter were precisely the same as Andrastian doctrine elsewhere, you cannot underestimate the power of history, tradition, and culture.

Tradition and culture, even how history is taught, can be changed, though. We've seen this happen all over the world, time and time again. I find it difficult to accept that Tevinter's past is supposed to be the one and only reason for it suddenly switching back to its origin when it was running on par with Andrastian beliefs for centuries. That would be like the people in Ferelden suddenly deciding they want to be hill-dwelling barbarians again.

I find it far more likely that Tevinter succumbed to the one thing that never changes.

The hubris of man.

Greed, envy, pride and the hunger for power are prominent social traits in all these nations - ready and preying on the weak. They just need to be tapped...

It's not like the nobility of Ferelden or Orlais would act and think much differently than the nobility of Tevinter, after all. The one thing separating them is that the latter are capable of sacrificing slaves to gain even more supernatural power and thus influence. If the former would have access to the same option, I do believe it would see increasing use over the years; tools of the political games just like assassinations, blackmail and betrayal. But to have this option, you need to be a mage ... see where I'm getting at?

Modifié par Lynata, 11 avril 2012 - 08:51 .

[Silfren]

Lynata wrote...

That might depend on what kind of templars we'd be allowed to ally with, if any. After reading Asunder, I can only hope that there are any templars left loyal to the Chantry instead of the Seekers.

It puts me in a tight spot, actually. The templar faction as commanded by Lambert seems to represent the worst of their order(s) - conviction clouded by fear, and sheer brutality instead of stern yet compassionate vigilance. The current mages definitively have the more charismatic position, yet they already have a couple bad eggs in the casket and overall I am convinced that on the long run it can only lead to trouble. Even so, they seem to be the better option, given the alternative.

I suspect that we will see moderate templars like Greagoir and Evangeline, who will side with the Chantry under Justinia's leadership.  This sort of situation has the potential for many more factions to develop than just two or three, but to keep the game from becoming unwieldy I think we can expect to see a faction that supports Justinia's vision of the Chantry and another that supports Lambert's, with possibly one or two more middle-road varieties.  After all there are bound to be people who refuse to support Lambert's split, but don't agree with Justinia's radical perspective, and vice versa.

Of course, this is a very optimistic view based on my fervent hope that the Bioware team took the hint over player backlash against the utter removal of choice.

[Silfren]

Lynata wrote...

Tradition and culture, even how history is taught, can be changed, though. We've seen this happen all over the world, time and time again. I find it difficult to accept that Tevinter's past is supposed to be the one and only reason for it suddenly switching back to its origin when it was running on par with Andrastian beliefs for centuries. That would be like the people in Ferelden suddenly deciding they want to be hill-dwelling barbarians again.

Of course it can be, but that doesn't mean it necessarily will.  I didn't make an argument suggesting that culture doesn't change, I simply pointed out that Tevinter's previous cultural makeup easily and plausibly explains why it reverted to this former system rather than develop into a system more akin to the rest of Thedas.  My point was only that Tevinter's example does not stand as evidence that mages INEVITABLY become corrupt and evil merely for being mages, without the Circle system in its present incarnation.  Only when other examples arise, of mages who go down that route WITHOUT the same historio-cultural background of legal and unrestrained slavery, blood magic, and other abuses, could thise argument be made. 

It's not like the nobility of Ferelden or Orlais would act and think much differently than the nobility of Tevinter, after all. The one thing separating them is that the latter are capable of sacrificing slaves to gain even more supernatural power and thus influence. If the former would have access to the same option, I do believe it would see increasing use over the years; tools of the political games just like assassinations, blackmail and betrayal. But to have this option, you need to be a mage ... see where I'm getting at?

Again, however, you have to take the history and culture into consideration.  Those things DO matter.  Orlais DOES have access to the same option, but has not taken it.  I think this is in no small part due to the lack of a historical backdrop of the same foundation of slavery and blood-mage aristocracy, and the addition of the White Chantry's doctrines.  After all, those Chantry doctrines don't seem to have much impact on Orlais's historical background of noble excesses, despite the fact that the Chantry's seat of power is in Orlais and thus is most influential here.

Ferelden's culture is entirely different from that of both Orlais and Tevinter.  You don't see the same degree of aristocracy excesses and abuses, and you see (okay, at this point I'm speculating more than a little) less doctrinal twisting, excuse-making, or outright ignoring of Chantry philosophy in order to accomodate the pre-existing cultural backdrop as you do in Orlais and Tevinter.  I think there are reasons for the difference.

[Silfren]

Davillo wrote...

I play Anders as the main character

Great.  How is this relevant to the discussion?

[Silfren]

Lynata wrote...

It's not like the nobility of Ferelden or Orlais would act and think much differently than the nobility of Tevinter, after all. The one thing separating them is that the latter are capable of sacrificing slaves to gain even more supernatural power and thus influence. If the former would have access to the same option, I do believe it would see increasing use over the years; tools of the political games just like assassinations, blackmail and betrayal. But to have this option, you need to be a mage ... see where I'm getting at?

This is why there should be an independent organization whose purpose is to keep guard against magical abuses and (immoral) uses of blood magic.  There is absolutely no reason at all why there could not be a templar-like police force created as a safeguard against rogue mages, but that wouldn't involve taking mage children away from their families to be locked away in prisons until they "prove" that they can be trusted to walk about freely. 

[prizm123]

i think Merideth was so far gone, that even if the chantry had not been blown up and Elthina did come out to mediate, Merideth would have killed her

[Silfren]

prizm123 wrote...

i think Merideth was so far gone, that even if the chantry had not been blown up and Elthina did come out to mediate, Merideth would have killed her

By the end of Act 3, this is entirely possible, even very likely.  But it doesn't excuse Elthina's utter failure to take action, and it doesn't say anything about what might've happened earlier in the story, before Meredith was pushed beyond the edge of no return by the idol.

[TEWR]

Lynata wrote...

Whilst I'd agree that the Chantry doesn't do enough, I remain convinced that it is the primary supplier of compassion, be it direct (feeding the poor, providing shelter, armed protection) or indirect (influencing the people to help their fellows), simply because any alternatives are either too small or limit their support to people somehow connected to themselves.

And I see it as the primary supplier of tyranny that tried to mask its horrific acts with miniscule good deeds.

The Mother who went to the elven alienage to conduct the marriage ceremony and pleaded with the nobles not to interfere (City Elf Origin) was a Chantry cleric as well, by the way, so it's not exactly like they don't care at all what happens there

And had Divine Renata I not decreed that the Elves of the Dales be forced to live in Alienages, the Elves wouldn't be abused.

Had the Elves of the Alienages actually been seen as people rather then tools, they might've had a decent life in Andrastian Thedas.

The Chantry exerts a great deal of influence over the political spectrum. The Grand Cleric of Denerim is even present at the Landsmeet and speaks out against Loghain when it's revealed he's been interfering with Templar duties.

They truly want to show that they care after what they did to the Elves of long ago? Argue to the nobles that the Elves are better represented in the future and are treated properly, rather then with disdain.

A City Elf has to propose the idea to the Ferelden monarch(s) just to see some progress in how the Elves are treated.

The Chantry isn't a compassionate organization. It's a callous one that sees fit to do the worst things possible and then do a few good deeds so that the populus will accept them for being benevolent.

Divine Justinia V and those that agreed with her are the only people I can truly see as holding the Chantry's core values at heart.

Lynata wrote...

Yet where do you take this ratio from?

....it's an illustrative example to prove a point.

Lynata wrote...

Exactly. Because the Kirkwall Circle has always been corrupted

No it hasn't.

[Koire]

Lynata wrote...
Tradition and culture, even how history is taught, can be changed, though. We've seen this happen all over the world, time and time again. I find it difficult to accept that Tevinter's past is supposed to be the one and only reason for it suddenly switching back to its origin when it was running on par with Andrastian beliefs for centuries.

Tevinter looks a lot like the Byzantine Empire. The foundations of the latter didn't change for 1,000 years. If that happens in the real life, why can't it happen in a game?
Living in a country which took a lot after Byzantium, I can say that's entirely possible. Although the mere concept of this.. historical stasis might be difficult to comprehend for those living in more dynamic societies.

prizm123 wrote...
i think Merideth was so far gone, that even if the chantry had not been blown up and Elthina did come out to mediate, Merideth would have killed her

I agree with that.

Modifié par Koire, 12 avril 2012 - 11:04 .

[DPSSOC]

Silfren wrote...

DPSSOC wrote...
And the on-going practices of the Tevinter Imperium in the present day.  You know all that slavery and blood magic and oppression that Andraste lead a rebellion against?  Yeah that never stopped.  The Chantry's stance is justified by the mere existence of the Imperium because, in the one nation mages were allowed freedom, they've established an oppressive, brutal mageocracy.

Not to mention every society that has free mages has them in positions of authority (Dalish Keepers, Chasind Shamans, Rivani Seers), so it's not hard for the Chantry to justify the stance; if mages are free they will put themselves in charge (because they have everywhere) and they're going to be evil and corrupt (Tevinter, the closest parallel to White Andrastian society).

You also ignore that there are mages like Decimus, Grace, Idunna, Tarohne, Uldred, Connor, etc. who justify the Chantry's stance on a more day by day basis.

No, it is not justified.  Tevinter is a separate place with a different culture and history.  It does not follow that because the Tevinter Imperium had, and later returned to, an oppressive, slave-driven magocracy, that any other society with free mages will inevitably follow suit.

 

Well yeah it does.  Just like it follows that if I put flame (or even heat) to gasoline it will catch fire. 

Silfren wrote...
Mages being in positions of authority does not equate to mages being oppressive, slave-owning, blood-magic using, dictatorial tyrants.  Unless you can provide evidence that the Dalish, Chasind, and Rivaini peoples all have societies comparable to the aforementioned slave-owning, blood-magic using, oppressive society of Tevinter, this is a ridiculous non-argument.

Well let's look at the Dalish the only one we're given a really good look at.  Paraphrasing Lanaya from DA:O Dalish Keepers train numerous apprentices who compete amongst themselves for the position of First.  Those who can't trace their heritage back to Dalish nobility have to work harder to prove themselves.  Sound familliar?  Tevinter magisters have numerous apprentices serving and learning under them who compete amongst themselves in order to become the magister's apprentice.  Those who aren't members of Tevinter nobility have to work harder to achieve this position.

The only difference between the two is that the Dalish don't have the population to support Tevinter's brand of competition.  There aren't enough mages among the elves to afford them killing one another off.  Similarly this applies to the behaviour of the Keepers; they don't resort to the same kind of behaviour as the magisters because they don't have the numbers for it.  If the Elves were ever to reach the level of Tevinter their leadership would become just as corrupt, self serving, and decadent and competition among mages would be just as fierce.

Silfren wrote...
Decimus, Grace, Idunna, Tarohne, and Uldred do not justify the Chantry's stance.  They justify the need for a well-trained and readily positioned magi police force in every major settlement, but they do NOT justify locking mages away under the current system.

 

And how, pray tell, do you effectively police a non-visible minority across an entire continent?  You don't, you can't, even with our level of technology it's not possible.  People slip through, and when a mage does they destroy villages.  If it wasn't possible for one mage to level a decent size town you'd have a point, but the destructive potential of mages means they need to be monitored and the only effective means of doing that is keeping all of them you can find in one place.

Silfren wrote...
And Connor is exactly proof of just why the current system is so badly broken.  Had his mother not been a) humiliated by the mere thought of being mother to a mage child, and not been terrified of losing her son forever, then she would not have felt the need to hide her son from the Chantry and seek out an illegal apostate to train him in unsafe conditions.

I brought up Connor as an example of what mages will do, the young in particular, when exposed to the day to day emotional interactions we take for granted.  Let's say Connor was receiving proper Circle training at home when his father became deathly ill.  You really think things would have gone differently?  You really think a young boy wouldn't leap at any chance to save his father regardless of knowing the dangers? 

[Koire]

DPSSOC wrote...

And how, pray tell, do you effectively police a non-visible minority across an entire continent?  You don't, you can't, even with our level of technology it's not possible.  People slip through, and when a mage does they destroy villages.  If it wasn't possible for one mage to level a decent size town you'd have a point, but the destructive potential of mages means they need to be monitored and the only effective means of doing that is keeping all of them you can find in one place.

Keeping them in one place results in the Veil becoming thinner and thinner and the mages - more succeptible to demonic posession. Don't you think it creates more problems than it solves?

PS Re Circles and the Veil - confirmed by Gaider:
"I mean why do they put the Circles of Magi wherever there's a thin Veil? It's really dangerous, but it's sort of a chicken-egg thing. Even if they did build a Circle where there wasn't a thin Veil eventually over time the Veil would thin anyhow. And it happens to be that these are the more magical places, the thinner the Veil is the more magic you have available."

Modifié par Koire, 12 avril 2012 - 12:33 .

[LobselVith8]

Lynata wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Her motivation is to kill every mage, irregardless of the fact that they are innocent of Anders' actions.

Exactly. Because the Kirkwall Circle has always been corrupted.

If that was the case, why she Meredith repeatedly claim that she will kill the Circle of Kirkwall to appease the people?

Lynata wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Also, Aveline notes that Darktown is patrolled. She says, "The guards don't come here often enough." Darktown is like Gotham City, but that doesn't mean it isn't a part of Kirkwall officially. I can seen Aveline as a Ferelden version of Gotham's own Commissioner Gordan.

"Gotham City" is an officiall recognized settlement with a dedicated police force. The comparison lacks in adequacy.

Kirkwall's city guard also patrols the areas outside of the city. Yet just like with Darktown, it doesn't show up "often enough".

Darktown is part of Kirkwall, which has the City Guard. Genitivi's codex about Darktown makes no indication that its sovereign from the rest of the city-state.

Lynata wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

The Chantry's support of the Orlesian occupation of Ferelden is addressed in The Stolen Throne, which is why Maric and Loghain contemplate what to do about Ferelden's Chantry.

As mentioned in a previous post, I would like some more information rather than a vague remark. You can also name the chapter in which this occurs; I do have the novel here, just didn't get around reading it yet.

How is it vague to address that the narrative of The Stolen Throne makes it clear that the Chantry supports the Orlesian occupation? It's not some isolated incident - it's part of the story.

Also, I don't own the book, and I'm not certain if it's still in the library, so I can't cite specific pages at the moment, but you could PM someone who currently owns a copy.

Lynata wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

When the Andrastian Chantry is the source of the negative view on mages and magic, it's not simply "individual zealots."

I would argue that it is the mages of Tevinter who are the source of the negative view on mages and magic, having influenced the perception of the general populace - and with it the Chantry. The latter was merely a reaction, after all.

If that was the case, why don't the Dalish have a negative view of magic and mages?

Lynata wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

There will likely be a great deal to debate in the future. What are you hoping to accomplish in Dragon Age III? I assume you are going to side with the templars.

That might depend on what kind of templars we'd be allowed to ally with, if any. After reading Asunder, I can only hope that there are any templars left loyal to the Chantry instead of the Seekers.

It puts me in a tight spot, actually. The templar faction as commanded by Lambert seems to represent the worst of their order(s) - conviction clouded by fear, and sheer brutality instead of stern yet compassionate vigilance. The current mages definitively have the more charismatic position, yet they already have a couple bad eggs in the casket and overall I am convinced that on the long run it can only lead to trouble. Even so, they seem to be the better option, given the alternative.

I'll probably just play a character who doesn't care for "later" but only for the "now", like my City Elf rogue in Origins. The characters we play don't have to conform to what we as players believe, anyways. They only have to feel entertaining. That's the whole point of roleplaying.

All in all, I'm still going to miss the Circle system. It was deliciously controversial. The best thing that could happen (imho) would be a "forced reset" back to its original ideals rather than the abomination it had become in the recent years. The current split definitively has the potential to basically serve as a "purifying" event separating the corrupt templars from those believing in the order's official purpose. Yet this is likely too much to hope for.
Even though a surprisingly large number of mages was willing to submit to Chantry authority after their violent escape, I don't think as a faction they will go back just like that anymore. Unless the mages are going to splinter into two groups as well - those willing to use all necessary means to preserve their freedom (and, potentially, their superiority), and those who will draw the line somewhere - with the latter group reuniting with the Chantry and whatever remains of its templars.

The Divine having direcly helped the mages to escape certainly will count for something, and Evangeline would make an excellent leader of a reformed templar order. Alas - that would probably be too much of a happy end. At least an "all out fight" that will end with one side having complete dominance over the other has a lot of potential for the future of the setting.

While it's unlikely to happen, I would actually like to have a chance to help one side achieve victory over the other, similar to how the protagonist in Skyrim can help resolve the civil war, or how one could side with certain factions in The Witcher 2. I would like to be able to change the status quo.

[Always Alice]

DKJaigen wrote...

And this is truly tragic. But while there is a definite tendency to
twist the Chant to reflect a negative opinion of magic, there is also
room for hope as well. For a poor widow who is at her wit's end, knowing
that "All men are the Work of our Maker's Hands, / From the lowest
slaves / To the highest kings" could be enough to get her going another
day. People are encouraged to live just lives, as "Those who steal from
their brothers and sisters / Do harm to their livelihood and to their
peace of mind. / Our Maker sees this with a heavy heart." This notion
could also give a person whose family was killed by bandits or something
comfort. And then there's this:  "The one who repents, who has faith/
Unshaken by the darkness of the world,/ She shall know true peace."
Given the generally shoddy quality of life in Thedas, you can see how
keeping these words close to heart can be important.

You just described the very foundation of religious slavery.  If people take comfort from a few words they will accept their lot. And as long they accept the longer any injustice can continue. Why do you think the elves have it so bad? because they accept it. Why do you think mages have it bad? because they untill recently accept it. Why do the peasants of orlais have it bad? because they accept it. And in all 3 cases the chantry is to blame.

You're falsely equating comfort with passivity. The whole religion centers around this idea that a woman fought against an unjust and tyrannical empire. We see plenty of cases throughout the series where those who believe in Andraste and the Chantry try to change their lot in life: the peasant revolts, the alienage riots,and heck, even the whole war with Orlais is evidence that Andrastians don't just sit back and take what they are given.The phrase "blessed are the peacekeeprs, chamoions of the just" implies that those who take actions against injustice are worthy of praise.

Modifié par Always Alice, 12 avril 2012 - 07:29 .

[Lynata]

[quote]Silfren wrote...
My point was only that Tevinter's example does not stand as evidence that mages INEVITABLY become corrupt and evil merely for being mages, without the Circle system in its present incarnation.[/quote]Not all mages, mind you - but the ones who want to attain power (and you can bet there will be some, because all these mages are still humans growing up in a dog-eat-dog society) have the means to do so. And just like in Tevinter, blood magic will give them more power and influence than "normal" magic.

The Magisters made Tevinter and its culture --> the Magisters have been there before.

[quote]Silfren wrote...
Orlais DOES have access to the same option, but has not taken it.[/quote]Right - because its ruling classes do not consist of mages.
Sorry if my explanation went a bit confusing there.

[quote]Silfren wrote...
This is why there should be an independent organization whose purpose is to keep guard against magical abuses and (immoral) uses of blood magic. There is absolutely no reason at all why there could not be a templar-like police force created as a safeguard against rogue mages, but that wouldn't involve taking mage children away from their families to be locked away in prisons until they "prove" that they can be trusted to walk about freely.  [/quote]So you'd basically wait until it's too late and a wild mage has burned down a village? Or until someone actually notices that a power-hungry mage has been using blood magic to influence a powerful noble for 20 years? And you are convince that this option is truly better for the people as a whole than the Circle "quarantine"?

[quote]The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
And had Divine Renata I not decreed that the Elves of the Dales be forced to live in Alienages, the Elves wouldn't be abused.[/quote]Actually, I think she decreed that the elves should be allowed to live in the human cities, not forced. At least this is what it says in both the Chantry archives and in the stories of the City Elves, whereas the Dalish accounts only mention confusion at why their brethren apparently prefer to live with the humans.

http://dragonage.wik..._The_City_Elves

[quote]The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
[quote]Lynata wrote...
Yet where do you take this ratio from?[/quote]
....it's an illustrative example to prove a point.[/quote]In other words: you've made it all up.

[quote]The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
No it hasn't.[/quote]Looking at First Enchanter Orsino and the things he was hiding, I find that hard to believe.

[quote]Koire wrote...
Tevinter looks a lot like the Byzantine Empire. The foundations of the latter didn't change for 1,000 years. If that
happens in the real life, why can't it happen in a game?[/quote]Mhm, but the Byzantine Empire was never conquered by an outside force coupled with a slave uprising, followed by the establishment of a state-religion preaching the exact opposite of what the old nation was about. I think that a few generations under Andrastean teachings should have had a profound effect on what kind of mindset people are growing up with.

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
If that was the case, why she Meredith repeatedly claim that she will kill the Circle of Kirkwall to appease the people?[/quote]Because showcasing her prejudice would look unprofessional? Public demand (which does exist) is a perfect way to avoid personal responsibility, or at least act like it.
Although she also claims "too little, too late" in return to Orsino's offer, hence my suspicion that she was perfectly aware of him hiding something from her. Which he did, as we all know.

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
Darktown is part of Kirkwall, which has the City Guard. Genitivi's codex about Darktown makes no indication that
its sovereign from the rest of the city-state.[/quote]It's the sewers.

This has nothing to do with being sovereign territory. Nobody but criminals and illegal immigrants goes there. It's a lost cause, and when the city guard doesn't go there, why do you insist the Chantry should? To get robbed? I'm pretty sure there's enough poor people on the surface already.

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
How is it vague to address that the narrative of The Stolen Throne makes it clear that the Chantry supports the Orlesian occupation? It's not some isolated incident - it's part of the story.[/quote]Because "support" can mean anything and often hinges on individual perception. And really, the more people hesitate from giving me a straight answer to this detail, the more suspicious it gets.

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
If that was the case, why don't the Dalish have a negative view of magic and mages?[/quote]Because Dalish communal society prevents their mages from becoming corrupted or possessed as often as the humans. They lack the same amount of temptation - as is evident from their culture's Codex entry, and as I've been saying for days now. Or maybe it's because their magic is somehow different; keep in mind that their lifespan is directly affected by proximity to "modern" human culture.

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
While it's unlikely to happen, I would actually like to have a chance to help one side achieve victory over the other, similar to how the protagonist in Skyrim can help resolve the civil war, or how one could side with certain factions in The Witcher 2. I would like to be able to change the status quo.[/quote]I like the status quo due to the controversy it provides; I'm somewhat "scared" of whether the writers will be able to replace it with something as interesting.

I understand why it's tempting, though, and ... who knows, maybe they'll surprise us.

[quote]Always Alice wrote...
You're falsely equating comfort with passivity. The whole religion centers around this idea that a woman fought against an unjust and tyrannical empire. We see plenty of cases throughout the series where those who believe in Andraste and the Chantry try to change their lot in life: the peasant revolts, the alienage riots,and heck, even the whole war with Orlais is evidence that Andrastians don't just sit back and take what they are given.The phrase "blessed are the peacekeeprs, chamoions of the just" implies that those who take actions against injustice are worthy of praise.[/quote]Quite true.

"Broadly speaking, the Chant advocates that the strong are charged to protect the weak and succor the needy. However, many of its stanzas suggest that the weak and needy who strive on their own behalf are often blessed by the Maker. It is understood by most of the faithful that the Maker’s blessings are enacted by His human agents in the world, rather than arising through miracles, magic, or blessed happenstance. Also of note, the Chant admonishes that magic must serve mankind rather than rule it. This is the injunction that has led to the Chantry’s strict laws regarding the use of magic and the conduct of the Circle of Magi, as enforced in contemporary times by the Chantry’s Templars."
-- excerpt from the DARPG Set 2 Player's Guide: Religion and Beliefs in Thedas, The Chantry, The Chant of Light

Modifié par Lynata, 12 avril 2012 - 08:03 .

[Silfren]

[quote]DPSSOC wrote...

[quote]Silfren wrote...
[quote]DPSSOC wrote...
And the on-going practices of the Tevinter Imperium in the present day.  You know all that slavery and blood magic and oppression that Andraste lead a rebellion against?  Yeah that never stopped.  The Chantry's stance is justified by the mere existence of the Imperium because, in the one nation mages were allowed freedom, they've established an oppressive, brutal mageocracy.

Not to mention every society that has free mages has them in positions of authority (Dalish Keepers, Chasind Shamans, Rivani Seers), so it's not hard for the Chantry to justify the stance; if mages are free they will put themselves in charge (because they have everywhere) and they're going to be evil and corrupt (Tevinter, the closest parallel to White Andrastian society).

You also ignore that there are mages like Decimus, Grace, Idunna, Tarohne, Uldred, Connor, etc. who justify the Chantry's stance on a more day by day basis.[/quote]

No, it is not justified.  Tevinter is a separate place with a different culture and history.  It does not follow that because the Tevinter Imperium had, and later returned to, an oppressive, slave-driven magocracy, that any other society with free mages will inevitably follow suit.[/quote] 

Well yeah it does.  Just like it follows that if I put flame (or even heat) to gasoline it will catch fire. 
[/quote]

Not a valid comparison.  Again, it does not follow that because one society ended up a particular way, that all other societies will inevitably follow suit.  Instead of just countering with "yes it does mean that", I'd like to see an actually coherent argument defending that position, not just "well yeah it does," followed by a completely illogical analogy that doesn't have anything to do with the price of tea in China.

[quote]Silfren wrote...
Mages being in positions of authority does not equate to mages being oppressive, slave-owning, blood-magic using, dictatorial tyrants.  Unless you can provide evidence that the Dalish, Chasind, and Rivaini peoples all have societies comparable to the aforementioned slave-owning, blood-magic using, oppressive society of Tevinter, this is a ridiculous non-argument.[/quote]

Well let's look at the Dalish the only one we're given a really good look at.  Paraphrasing Lanaya from DA:O Dalish Keepers train numerous apprentices who compete amongst themselves for the position of First.  Those who can't trace their heritage back to Dalish nobility have to work harder to prove themselves.  Sound familliar?  Tevinter magisters have numerous apprentices serving and learning under them who compete amongst themselves in order to become the magister's apprentice.  Those who aren't members of Tevinter nobility have to work harder to achieve this position.
[/quote]

I'm not aware of numerous apprentices competing amongst themselves.  As I recall it, the lore indicates that mage-born Dalish are rare, and so they get passed around from one clan to the other, each Keeper having exactly one apprentice to follow in their footsteps.  Could you cite the bit about Dalish "nobility" please?  And also, no, this "similarity", even if true, is much too vague for it to have any relationship to Tevinter.  You might as well say that apples can be compared to tomatoes simply because both have red skin.

At any rate, it doesn't matter, because we have in-game evidence that the Dalish clans do NOT operate with blood magic, the institution of slavery, or anything else.

[quote]The only difference between the two is that the Dalish don't have the population to support Tevinter's brand of competition.  There aren't enough mages among the elves to afford them killing one another off.  Similarly this applies to the behaviour of the Keepers; they don't resort to the same kind of behaviour as the magisters because they don't have the numbers for it.  If the Elves were ever to reach the level of Tevinter their leadership would become just as corrupt, self serving, and decadent and competition among mages would be just as fierce.[/quote]

And the entirely different culture and history has nothing to do with it at all?  Ridiculous.  You're categorically stating that the ONLY reason the Dalish aren't just like the Tevinter is for no other reason than lack of sufficient numbers, and completely discounting the role of culture and community.

[quote]Silfren wrote...
Decimus, Grace, Idunna, Tarohne, and Uldred do not justify the Chantry's stance.  They justify the need for a well-trained and readily positioned magi police force in every major settlement, but they do NOT justify locking mages away under the current system.[/quote] 

And how, pray tell, do you effectively police a non-visible minority across an entire continent?  You don't, you can't, even with our level of technology it's not possible.  People slip through, and when a mage does they destroy villages.  If it wasn't possible for one mage to level a decent size town you'd have a point, but the destructive potential of mages means they need to be monitored and the only effective means of doing that is keeping all of them you can find in one place.
[/quote]

Bull.  You can.  Templars are able to sense magic, for one, and pick a mage out of a crowd.  Even if they can't sense blood magic, they would damn well be able to follow the evidence left by corpses, abominations, and general destruction, the very same way that any policing force follows a trail of evidence.

I have NEVER intimated that having a special force on hand to deal with rogue mages would entirely eliminate the problem and prevent any blood mages from ever killing anyone, or any mage ever from becoming an abomination.  But guess what?  You don't, and can't, achieve that level of exactitude with the Circle system, either.  We see this very, very clearly in both DA games.  No system will be entirely perfect and never, ever let even a single blood mage or abomination loose.  

As far as I know, we have exactly one codex that discusses the havoc an abomination can wreak.  And it killed a grand total of seventy people over the course of a year.  Sorry, but that doesn't strike me as apocalyptic-scale danger.  Any non-mage could kill that many people over the course of a year if they had a skillful means of eluding capture.  Show me a bit of lore where an abomination killed seventy people in a day, or a week, or slaughtered hundreds or even a few thousand people in a year's time, and I'll believe that the inherent danger of a mage, any mage, is sufficiently apocalyptic that pre-emptive imprisonment is more necessary than simply placing trained mage hunters with every village's troop of guards.  But seventy people in a year does NOT warrant OMG LEAVING MAGES ALONE WILL RESULT IN TOTAL WORLD ANNHILATION OMG. 

Modifié par Silfren, 12 avril 2012 - 08:14 .

[Silfren]

DPSSOC wrote...

I brought up Connor as an example of what mages will do, the young in particular, when exposed to the day to day emotional interactions we take for granted.  Let's say Connor was receiving proper Circle training at home when his father became deathly ill.  You really think things would have gone differently?  You really think a young boy wouldn't leap at any chance to save his father regardless of knowing the dangers? 

It is NOT an absolute given that he would have.   You are treating it as a foregone conclusion, whereas I insist that there are other, equally reasonable and likely outcomes.

Had he been trained by competent teachers, it is entirely reasonable to believe that Connor might have been disinclined to contact demons if he had been warned of the danger.  Even if he had acted otherwise, it remains likely, however, that a trained mage would have recognized what was happening if Connor, accidentally or intentionally, tore the Veil, and taken steps to prevent further danger. 

[Silfren]

Lynata wrote...

Silfren wrote...
This is why there should be an independent organization whose purpose is to keep guard against magical abuses and (immoral) uses of blood magic. There is absolutely no reason at all why there could not be a templar-like police force created as a safeguard against rogue mages, but that wouldn't involve taking mage children away from their families to be locked away in prisons until they "prove" that they can be trusted to walk about freely. 

So you'd basically wait until it's too late and a wild mage has burned down a village? Or until someone actually notices that a power-hungry mage has been using blood magic to influence a powerful noble for 20 years? And you are convince that this option is truly better for the people as a whole than the Circle "quarantine"?

Yes, I do.  I do not believe that it is acceptable or just to strip away the freedoms of a minority in order to provide security for the majority.  You do realize that the Circle system fits several of the legal, real-world definitions of genocide?

There are ALWAYS going to be crimes that happen, no matter what kind of protection you have in place.  The Circle system itself does not eradicate criminal mages in their entirety--although we do have evidence that its existence CREATES the rogue mages and thus the disasters it purports to exist to prevent.  Better to have a police force that exists to hunt down criminal mages than to lock all mages away.  You simply CANNOT eradicate all crime, everywhere.  Far better to have a system in place to deal with it when it does happen, than to have a system that locks mages away not for actual crimes, but only potential ones.

Lynata wrote...

Mhm, but the Byzantine Empire was never conquered by an outside force coupled with a slave uprising, followed by the establishment of a state-religion preaching the exact opposite of what the old nation was about. I think that a few generations under Andrastean teachings should have had a profound effect on what kind of mindset people are growing up with.

Those Andrastian teachings didn't exist within a vacuum, though.  It isn't as though the population of Tevinter was magically teleported to an uninhabited island when Andrastianism was introduced and, centuries later, plopped back down into its original locale.  Even immediately following Andraste's execution, those teachings took place within the mileu--the cultural center--of old Tevinter.  And as far as we know, we have no evidence, and thus no reason to believe, that Andrastianism within Tevinter was ever identical to Andrastianism taught elsewhere.  

To go off-topic and risk mod-slapping, Christianity is a good example: early Christianity did not and NEVER had one singular, cohesive, belief structure.  Even in its earliest stages, there were scores of fundamentally different doctrinal systems, all of which were called Christianity, no matter how much one varied from or contradicted the doctrines of another.  So it is with that understanding that I insist that it is fallacious to assume that at any point Tevinter Andrastianism was ever indentical to Andastianism elsewhere, and one day just up and split off.  It may well have been similar at one point, but having similarities is a far, far cry from being identical.  Again, though, even early Andrastianism existed within the pre-existing culture of Tevinter's magocracy and slavery system.  

Do we even have any lore that explicitly states just how long it was before Tevinter reverted back to its original systems? 

Lynata wrote...
It's the sewers.

This has nothing to do with being sovereign territory. Nobody but criminals and illegal immigrants goes there. It's a lost cause, and when the city guard doesn't go there, why do you insist the Chantry should? To get robbed? I'm pretty sure there's enough poor people on the surface already.

That's beside the point. Darktown IS a part of Kirkwall, politically and geographically.  I'm confused as to why you insist otherwise.  

Modifié par Silfren, 12 avril 2012 - 08:38 .

[TEWR]

Lynata wrote...

Actually, I think she decreed that the elves should be allowed to live in the human cities, not forced. At least this is what it says in both the Chantry archives and in the stories of the City Elves, whereas the Dalish accounts only mention confusion at why their brethren apparently prefer to live with the humans.

Uh, no Divine Renata says that the human cities have to have elves living there. If they were "allowed" to make the choice, then the Dalish wouldn't be persecuted. The Dalish chose to live freely, and for that choice they are now hunted -- told to convert to the Andrastian faith or die for their beliefs, which you can be informed of in Act 3 when talking to the Elven woman named Visell on Sundermount. They're tortured for information on mages by people that don't care about them and are reviled by the populus so much that mobs will form against them.

In DAO, the nearby village bands together to fight against the Sabrae clan and in Awakening Velanna's group of like-minded Elves was hunted by a militia group.

No, if they were "allowed" to live there, the Dalish wouldn't be persecuted for their beliefs and their stance on mages. The condition for living in the Alienages was forsaking the Elven religion. If they were allowed to choose, then it would make sense.

"If you want to live in human cities rather then be homeless, you can. You just need to drop your beliefs"

"Okay"

But instead it's...

"All of you have to either live in our cities and believe our religion or otherwise die."

In other words: you've made it all up.

Uh... yea? That's why I said it's an illustrative example. It's meant to showcase a point, not to be a fact.

Looking at First Enchanter Orsino and the things he was hiding, I find that hard to believe.

Oh god not this dead horse again....

You're blaming hundreds of mages for what one mage does, when his entire Circle was being blamed for the actions of what an apostate did?

Brilliant logic there!

I'm not getting into this discussion again, for two reasons: 1) the logic behind it is flimsy at best and 2) I'm exhausted.

People already know how I feel about the Orsino issue aside from how I despise it and see it as not canon, until DA3 comes along and says "Yea, that happened". At the moment, I chalk it up to Varric's exaggeration.

But ignoring how I don't see it as canon, his actions -- while horrific -- are not crimes to hold the Circle liable for.

And seeing that this also encompasses how he was hiding information about Quentin, let me just say that we don't know how he was handling the situation other then "Don't tell Meredith".

And considering we know for a fact that she fell under the idol's influence immediately in Act 2, Orsino hiding that information from the Templars is justifiable.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 12 avril 2012 - 09:33 .

[Always Alice]

Silfren wrote...
Irrelevant. My point was hypothesizing that many families known to carry magic in their bloodline may, due to Chantry-instilled fear and hate of mages, be strongly against having children lest those children be mages. And of course there are those people who may refrain from having children not out of fear of those chidlren being mages, but because they don't want to face the prospect of having any children ripped away from them and raised in a prison cell. Calling it a valid life choice completely disregards my point that this mindset exists specifically because of the Chantry's fearmongering doctrine, not because the families in question are genuinely not interested in having children. It's just another example of the implicit, as well as explicit, harm that the Chantry causes by virtue of teaching that mages are inherently cursed.

If this hypothetical couple is willing to despise their child because it has magic, then they’re not fit to be parents in the first place, imo. It doesn’t matter if Andraste herself shows up at your door and tells you that your child’s cursed; part of being a good parent is unconditional love and acceptance regardless of how he/she turns out. It’s for the good of everyone that this couple chooses not to reproduce.
If a couple chooses not to have kids because they don’t want to face the prospect of having their kids taken away, then that’s their choice. If genetic predisposition leaves you with the risk that a child is going to have a certain condition, then you and your partner have to discuss all the possibilities and if one seriously bothers you then you have to make the decision accordingly.
Either way this is a bit of a moot point since we have never seen any cases in-game (iirc) where a couple refuses to have kids because of the possibility of magic (the Amells, for example, have kids despite their magical bloodline) . Since this is a society that is based on the middle ages I would assume that most families would want to have kids, either to have a helping hand around the home or to continue their bloodline.

You are also overlooking the evidence we seem from Kirkwall that the Chantry is not always as altruistic as you seem to think. Lobselvith, I believe, has pointed out there are ambient dialogues with NPCs that stress this.

I am under no illusion that the Chantry is some ultra-benevolent force that makes sure that every single individual in Thedas has food, clothing, shelter etc. Despite its religious foundation, it is still comprised of fallible humans that have their own flaws and prejudices. This does not change the fact that it is currently the largest widespread charitable organization in Thedas, nor does it mitigate those it has helped.

And I simply think that the question of spiritual guidance warrants a separate discussion from the concrete, physical side of the debate. I admit this is personal bias on my part. Work on fulfilling basic needs of survival, such as sustenance, shelter, and the like, and worry about the spirit once those other things are assured. When the bulk of the discussion has to do with the real, physical, tangible things the Chantry is responsible for, I really don't think spiritual guidance should weigh in on the equation.

Fair enough.

[Silfren]

Always Alice wrote...

If this hypothetical couple is willing to despise their child because it has magic, then they’re not fit to be parents in the first place, imo. It doesn’t matter if Andraste herself shows up at your door and tells you that your child’s cursed; part of being a good parent is unconditional love and acceptance regardless of how he/she turns out. It’s for the good of everyone that this couple chooses not to reproduce.
If a couple chooses not to have kids because they don’t want to face the prospect of having their kids taken away, then that’s their choice. If genetic predisposition leaves you with the risk that a child is going to have a certain condition, then you and your partner have to discuss all the possibilities and if one seriously bothers you then you have to make the decision accordingly.
Either way this is a bit of a moot point since we have never seen any cases in-game (iirc) where a couple refuses to have kids because of the possibility of magic (the Amells, for example, have kids despite their magical bloodline) . Since this is a society that is based on the middle ages I would assume that most families would want to have kids, either to have a helping hand around the home or to continue their bloodline.

No, it isn't featured in game, but I assert that it is an entirely reasonable assumption, because we DO see examples in game of parents despising their children who turn out to be mages.  We also see evidence that among the nobility, being known to carry magic in your blood is a source of shame and embarrassment.  Even without that, we know that many people among the general populace fear or hate mages out of hand.  Against all that, I find it completely acceptable to assume that there are going to be people who refuse to have children because they have magical heritage and have grown up in an environment that considers this a disgraceful condition, and other people who would be willing to outright kill any children they had who turned out to be mages.  No, against the lore, and the concrete examples we have, this is a totally reasonable scenario.  

Again, though, whether the parents are fit, or it's a valid choice...it is irrelevant and insisting on divorcing this fitness or choice-validity from the reality that these mindsets are direct result of Chantry indoctrination is really starting to ****** me off.

I completely agree that a parent who would kill their child is totally unfit to be a parent.  But in the context we are discussing, I am NOT going to ignore the fact that it is the fault of the Chantry that these parents feel this way.  I'm not talking about mentally unbalanced people who use religion as an excuse, but a culture in which the dominant religion of the entire world specifically indoctrinates hatred and fear of mages within its population of adherents to the extent that it is inevitable that at least some people are going to believe that murdering their child is the appropriate thing to do.  

Same thing with the question of whether a choice is valid.  I'm childfree, and I totally embrace the belief that a person has the right to make a reproductive choice on whatever grounds they choose.  But again, you are attempting to completely ignore the role the Chantry plays here.  I'm not talking about a scenario in which people willingly choose not to have kids because of a biological condition beyond anyone's control, but one in which a couple are AFRAID to have children because they are afraid of giving birth to a mage child at all, or aren't afraid of magic itself but terrified of the prospect of having a child that could be taken away from them because it is likely to be born a mage.  You're talking about how these choices are valid.  I'm trying to make the point that these are not freely made choices, but choices made specifically because of Chantry-instilled fear, and/or hate.  Wasting time pontificating about how these are totally valid choices disregards the harm the institution causes by instilling so much fear or hate in people that they make choices not based on what they want but because of what they are afraid might happen.

Let me spell it out in clearer, real world terms:  imagine a Jewish community in which many women refuse to have children because they live in an environment where a pogrom could be instigated at any moment.  This isn't a freely made choice, this is a choice made out of abject fear as a result of institutionalised racism.  Are you STILL going to talk about valid choices instead of focusing on the harm caused by the cultural problem of anti-semitism?

Getting back on-topic because I absolutely do not want to get into a real world discussion of racism but sincerely hope that I illustrated my point more clearly.  That is what I mean, and why I am more than a little disgusted that you keep going about valid life choices and unfit parents.  It's as if you're deliberately trying to ignore the larger problem of institutionalized hatred the Chantry foments.

[Koire]

Lynata wrote...

Koire wrote...
Tevinter looks a lot like the Byzantine Empire. The foundations of the latter didn't change for 1,000 years. If that
happens in the real life, why can't it happen in a game?

Mhm, but the Byzantine Empire was never conquered by an outside force coupled with a slave uprising, followed by the establishment of a state-religion preaching the exact opposite of what the old nation was about. I think that a few generations under Andrastean teachings should have had a profound effect on what kind of mindset people are growing up with.

Surely it was. Byzantine Empire is the remains of the Roman Empire, which was exactly conquered by an outside force (barbarian tribes) coupled with a slave uprising, followed by the establishment of a state-religion (christianity) preaching the exact opposite of what the old nation (politeism) was about Old Tevinter is modelled after the Roman Empire, new Tevinter - after Byzantium, or so it seems. By the way, "Byzantine Empire" is how the modern historians call it, its inhabitants thought they still live in the Roman Empire and called themselves romans.

What is more, in the DA lore there is a schism between the Andrastian and the Imperial Chantries which resembles the schism between the Catholic Church in the West and the Orthodox Church in Bizantium in 1054. Instead of "magic must serve.." they were arguing over filioque, but in fact the reason for the split was that the eastern church wanted to maintain its independance and was more closely allied with the state (Bizantium) and its rulers.

And finally, Bizantium was locked in constant wars with the invaders who had a completely different culture and conquered a good chunk of its lands - arabs and turks, just like Tevinter - with the Qunari who have Qun and conquered Seheron.

Modifié par Koire, 12 avril 2012 - 11:07 .

[CrimsonZephyr]

Guys, clearly the mages are oppressed because it is the word of the Maker that mages be oppressed. The Chantry should take the next step and officially sanction mage abuse. Whip them, scourge them, flay them in the streets. Turn it into a spectacle. Make the mages see suicide as the only way out. Encourage mages to turn on each other too, before betraying collaborators.

[Always Alice]

Silfren wrote…
No, it isn't featured in game, but I assert that it is an entirely reasonable assumption, because we DO see examples in game of parents despising their children who turn out to be mages. We also see evidence that among the nobility, being known to carry magic in your blood is a source of shame and embarrassment. Even without that, we know that many people among the general populace fear or hate mages out of hand. Against all that, I find it completely acceptable to assume that there are going to be people who refuse to have children because they have magical heritage and have grown up in an environment that considers this a disgraceful condition, and other people who would be willing to outright kill any children they had who turned out to be mages. No, against the lore, and the concrete examples we have, this is a totally reasonable scenario.

Again, though, whether the parents are fit, or it's a valid choice...it is irrelevant and insisting on divorcing this fitness or choice-validity from the reality that these mindsets are direct result of Chantry indoctrination is really starting to ****** me off.

I completely agree that a parent who would kill their child is totally unfit to be a parent. But in the context we are discussing, I am NOT going to ignore the fact that it is the fault of the Chantry that these parents feel this way. I'm not talking about mentally unbalanced people who use religion as an excuse, but a culture in which the dominant religion of the entire world specifically indoctrinates hatred and fear of mages within its population of adherents to the extent that it is inevitable that at least some people are going to believe that murdering their child is the appropriate thing to do.

Same thing with the question of whether a choice is valid. I'm childfree, and I totally embrace the belief that a person has the right to make a reproductive choice on whatever grounds they choose. But again, you are attempting to completely ignore the role the Chantry plays here. I'm not talking about a scenario in which people willingly choose not to have kids because of a biological condition beyond anyone's control, but one in which a couple are AFRAID to have children because they are afraid of giving birth to a mage child at all, or aren't afraid of magic itself but terrified of the prospect of having a child that could be taken away from them because it is likely to be born a mage. You're talking about how these choices are valid. I'm trying to make the point that these are not freely made choices, but choices made specifically because of Chantry-instilled fear, and/or hate. Wasting time pontificating about how these are totally valid choices disregards the harm the institution causes by instilling so much fear or hate in people that they make choices not based on what they want but because of what they are afraid might happen.

Let me spell it out in clearer, real world terms: imagine a Jewish community in which many women refuse to have children because they live in an environment where a pogrom could be instigated at any moment. This isn't a freely made choice, this is a choice made out of abject fear as a result of institutionalised racism. Are you STILL going to talk about valid choices instead of focusing on the harm caused by the cultural problem of anti-semitism?

Getting back on-topic because I absolutely do not want to get into a real world discussion of racism but sincerely hope that I illustrated my point more clearly. That is what I mean, and why I am more than a little disgusted that you keep going about valid life choices and unfit parents. It's as if you're deliberately trying to ignore the larger problem of institutionalized hatred the Chantry foments.

Okay, first off it was not my intent to imply that institutionalized hatred of mages does not exist. Anyone who’s played the game can come to that conclusion. If I said anything to suggest otherwise then I’m not conveying what I want to say properly. Second, I don’t mean to make you upset or “****** you off.” If this provokes a deep RL reaction for you then I’ll drop this conversation, as video games are not supposed to be a source of stress.

Saying the decision not to have kids was a “valid choice” was a poor choice of wording on my part. What I meant to say was that conceiving a mage child can be a considerable burden on the parents emotionally (for reasons you already explained), and that not having a child may the best course of action to take given the cultural context of the society due to Chantry presence. Because of the current system, I view this decision as simply prudent, particularly if they have a magical bloodline. They would have to take into consideration the fact that they might never see their child again, or would forever live with the shame of having a mage child. And yes, those things are perpetuated by the Chantry and I don’t believe I said otherwise…? I don’t entirely support the current Circle system as forced separation from parents (particularly at an early age) can cause severe emotional and mental damage (I do strongly believe in an educational system, however). But even if the current Circle system was not in place, having a mage child can be taxing, and is worth discussing with your partner before making a decision. If you remain with the child, you have to worry about the child losing control of his/her powers, and/or demonic influence. The entire scenario is heartbreaking, and my original comment was not to support taking away children, but to point out that out of the options available, this course of action is not necessarily a bad one. Because it can be a preventative measure, it stuck out to me on your list so I commented on it. I wasn’t trying to distract you or anything like that. It was simply an offhand comment.

As for my second comment, well, what can I say? I have really strong maternal instincts, and your comment brought those out in me. I see now that it was tangential to the topic at hand, but when I was writing my reply I just wrote down my immediate response to your comment, which was anger at the idea that a parent would treat their child as subhuman because of the way they were born. I also see that I may have been projecting my own RL experiences into my comment during the bit about genetic predisposition and considering future effects; while they do and should apply to the decision on whether or not a couple should conceive, your main focus is on the Chantry’s involvement in the decision. Unlike RL situations where there is no way to make things right no matter what you do, there are ways to fix the current Circle system in Thedas that would make a parent’s worry about not seeing her child again negligible.

Again, I did not intend to make it seem like I’m minimizing the Chantry’s involvement in the current Circle system. I clearly do not share the same hatred for the Chantry as you do, but the mage issue is something that is a big source of conflict for me, and a cause I sympathize greatly with. I hope reading this gives you some peace of mind, as I hate being the cause of such negative emotions. As I said before, video games are supposed to be fun, and not stress-inducing.

Modifié par Always Alice, 13 avril 2012 - 12:27 .

[Silfren]

Always Alice wrote...

Silfren wrote…
No, it isn't featured in game, but I assert that it is an entirely reasonable assumption, because we DO see examples in game of parents despising their children who turn out to be mages. We also see evidence that among the nobility, being known to carry magic in your blood is a source of shame and embarrassment. Even without that, we know that many people among the general populace fear or hate mages out of hand. Against all that, I find it completely acceptable to assume that there are going to be people who refuse to have children because they have magical heritage and have grown up in an environment that considers this a disgraceful condition, and other people who would be willing to outright kill any children they had who turned out to be mages. No, against the lore, and the concrete examples we have, this is a totally reasonable scenario.

Again, though, whether the parents are fit, or it's a valid choice...it is irrelevant and insisting on divorcing this fitness or choice-validity from the reality that these mindsets are direct result of Chantry indoctrination is really starting to ****** me off.

I completely agree that a parent who would kill their child is totally unfit to be a parent. But in the context we are discussing, I am NOT going to ignore the fact that it is the fault of the Chantry that these parents feel this way. I'm not talking about mentally unbalanced people who use religion as an excuse, but a culture in which the dominant religion of the entire world specifically indoctrinates hatred and fear of mages within its population of adherents to the extent that it is inevitable that at least some people are going to believe that murdering their child is the appropriate thing to do.

Same thing with the question of whether a choice is valid. I'm childfree, and I totally embrace the belief that a person has the right to make a reproductive choice on whatever grounds they choose. But again, you are attempting to completely ignore the role the Chantry plays here. I'm not talking about a scenario in which people willingly choose not to have kids because of a biological condition beyond anyone's control, but one in which a couple are AFRAID to have children because they are afraid of giving birth to a mage child at all, or aren't afraid of magic itself but terrified of the prospect of having a child that could be taken away from them because it is likely to be born a mage. You're talking about how these choices are valid. I'm trying to make the point that these are not freely made choices, but choices made specifically because of Chantry-instilled fear, and/or hate. Wasting time pontificating about how these are totally valid choices disregards the harm the institution causes by instilling so much fear or hate in people that they make choices not based on what they want but because of what they are afraid might happen.

Let me spell it out in clearer, real world terms: imagine a Jewish community in which many women refuse to have children because they live in an environment where a pogrom could be instigated at any moment. This isn't a freely made choice, this is a choice made out of abject fear as a result of institutionalised racism. Are you STILL going to talk about valid choices instead of focusing on the harm caused by the cultural problem of anti-semitism?

Getting back on-topic because I absolutely do not want to get into a real world discussion of racism but sincerely hope that I illustrated my point more clearly. That is what I mean, and why I am more than a little disgusted that you keep going about valid life choices and unfit parents. It's as if you're deliberately trying to ignore the larger problem of institutionalized hatred the Chantry foments.

Okay, first off it was not my intent to imply that institutionalized hatred of mages does not exist. Anyone who’s played the game can come to that conclusion. If I said anything to suggest otherwise then I’m not conveying what I want to say properly. Second, I don’t mean to make you upset or “****** you off.” If this provokes a deep RL reaction for you then I’ll drop this conversation, as video games are not supposed to be a source of stress.

Saying the decision not to have kids was a “valid choice” was a poor choice of wording on my part. What I meant to say was that conceiving a mage child can be a considerable burden on the parents emotionally (for reasons you already explained), and that not having a child may the best course of action to take given the cultural context of the society due to Chantry presence. Because of the current system, I view this decision as simply prudent, particularly if they have a magical bloodline. They would have to take into consideration the fact that they might never see their child again, or would forever live with the shame of having a mage child. And yes, those things are perpetuated by the Chantry and I don’t believe I said otherwise…? I don’t entirely support the current Circle system as forced separation from parents (particularly at an early age) can cause severe emotional and mental damage (I do strongly believe in an educational system, however). But even if the current Circle system was not in place, having a mage child can be taxing, and is worth discussing with your partner before making a decision. If you remain with the child, you have to worry about the child losing control of his/her powers, and/or demonic influence. The entire scenario is heartbreaking, and my original comment was not to support taking away children, but to point out that out of the options available, this course of action is not necessarily a bad one. Because it can be a preventative measure, it stuck out to me on your list so I commented on it. I wasn’t trying to distract you or anything like that. It was simply an offhand comment.

As for my second comment, well, what can I say? I have really strong maternal instincts, and your comment brought those out in me. I see now that it was tangential to the topic at hand, but when I was writing my reply I just wrote down my immediate response to your comment, which was anger at the idea that a parent would treat their child as subhuman because of the way they were born. I also see that I may have been projecting my own RL experiences into my comment during the bit about genetic predisposition and considering future effects; while they do and should apply to the decision on whether or not a couple should conceive, your main focus is on the Chantry’s involvement in the decision. Unlike RL situations where there is no way to make things right no matter what you do, there are ways to fix the current Circle system in Thedas that would make a parent’s worry about not seeing her child again negligible.

Again, I did not intend to make it seem like I’m minimizing the Chantry’s involvement in the current Circle system. I clearly do not share the same hatred for the Chantry as you do, but the mage issue is something that is a big source of conflict for me, and a cause I sympathize greatly with. I hope reading this gives you some peace of mind, as I hate being the cause of such negative emotions. As I said before, video games are supposed to be fun, and not stress-inducing.

Firstly, let me apologize.  I was in a pissy mood earlier and let a lot of that bleed into this discussion.  Let me readily say that no, I was not at all impressed with what read to me like a deliberate attempt to derail the subject of the harm the Chantry causes, and I'm still not.  But I unfortunately let a completely unrelated bad mood affect my response.  Sorry about that. 

Now back to the topic at hand, I suppose.  Obviously, I strongly dislike the Chantry.  I simply do not think that any of its good qualities mitiate the harm it causes.  It does some degree of good, yes, but rather than there being a balance, it strikes me that its good deeds are exceptionally minor in comparison.

[Always Alice]

Silfren wrote...

Firstly, let me apologize.  I was in a pissy mood earlier and let a lot of that bleed into this discussion.  Let me readily say that no, I was not at all impressed with what read to me like a deliberate attempt to derail the subject of the harm the Chantry causes, and I'm still not.  But I unfortunately let a completely unrelated bad mood affect my response.  Sorry about that. 

It's fine; these things happen. And again, there was no deliberate conspiracy on my part to derail or deflect the topic, but whether you choose to believe that or not is up to you. And now that that's out of the way...

Now back to the topic at hand, I suppose.  Obviously, I strongly dislike the Chantry.  I simply do not think that any of its good qualities mitiate the harm it causes.  It does some degree of good, yes, but rather than there being a balance, it strikes me that its good deeds are exceptionally minor in comparison.

I respect your opinion, and it was one I used to share until recently (believe it or not). I think at this point it's probably best to agree to disagree, though. There are so many threads dedicated to this topic that we've probably heard all the arguments from both sides, and these discussions tend to go in circles (pun partially intended).