2008 Antworten in diesem Thema

[dragonflight288]

That discussion was fun to watch in any case. Nice to see it end civilly.

[Lynata]

 

Silfren wrote...
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.

*nods* I can respect this, even though I don't agree with it.
The entire debate comes down to this decision, I think - how many lives are you willing to risk etc.

Silfren wrote... 

You do realize that the Circle system fits several of the legal, real-world definitions of genocide?

The Circle system does not attempt the "deliberate and systematic destruction" of mages but their containment, which is quite a difference - just like the prison system does not qualify as "genocide of criminals".

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

Actually, I was in error regarding this aspect - after flipping through my books I found a passage detailing that Tevinter apparently never truly adopted Andrastean teachings:

"Despite having martyred Andraste in the first place, the Tevinters were eventually swayed and finally converted to the Chantry of Andraste. Even so, the tenets of their faith were never in strict accordance with the teachings of the Divine in Val Royeaux. In particular, followers of the Chantry in the Imperium looked more favorably on magic and mages than their co-religionists elsewhere in Thedas.

More than two centuries of drift came to a head in 3:87 Towers. The Imperial Chantry arose in schism from the Andrastean Chantry. Among their many disagreements with Val Royeaux's orthodoxy was the question of whether Andraste was divine or mortal. Members of the Tevinter faction argued that she had been mortal, albeit a powerful mage, and that even her ascension to the Maker's side on her death did not change this fundamental aspect of her nature. The Imperial Chantry, furthermore, allowed male priests and stood by their ancient conviction that mages could rule as long as they abstained from using blood magic.

The Chantry of Andraste censured the Imperial Chantry. The Imperial Chantry responded by electing its own Divine, a man named Valhail who was also a prominent member of the Circle of Magi. This 'Black Divine' (as the Andrastians called him) was instated in Minrathous, and some years later called for celebrations and a holiday on the occasion of the death of Andrastian Divine Joyous II. The infuriated Chantry of Andraste declared a new Black Age that would see the false chantry and their schismatic Divine cleansed from Thedas. Four Exalted Marches and a century of warfare failed to unseat the 'pretender' Divine and his successors, and these efforts finally ended with the coming of the Fourth Blight.

Since the Schism, the Imperial Chantry's orthodoxy has diverged considerably from the Andrastian Chantry's. The most obvious facets are the instatement of male priests, priests who are mages, and the general acceptance of magic in society. The modern Chantry of Andraste has formally given up on subdueing the Imperial Chantry, reckoning that their efforts are better spent elsewhere. The Imperial Chantry's power has been bolstered by their acceptance of mages, many of whom flee to Tevinter from prosecution in the south. [...]"
-- DARPG Set 2 Player's Guide, Religon and Beliefs in Thedas

So the aspect of "magic not ruling over man" apparently never did take hold in Tevinter. For some time at least they did preach against blood magic (which is probably why men like Lambert were willing to give mage freedom a try), but in contemporary times they are using it again.

Doesn't change that the first Magisters must have "gone bad" without Tevinter culture (as it did not exist at this point in time), and it is quite interesting to see that Tevinter's Chantry seemed to preach exactly what a lot of pro-mage posters regard as the ideal solution (with the known results), but still I wanted to correct myself in regards to the schism. Regardless of my own convictions regarding the setting's nature, the truth comes first!

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
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.

That's a decree directed at the human cities, not the elves they're supposed to allow in.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
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.

And the lack of any official armies pursueing the Dalish doesn't tell you anything?
That, and: http://dragonage.wik..._to_the_Militia 

Note how it says "order them to leave", not "order them to accompany us to [insert random city]".

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

Then you're not "proving" anything as you had first claimed, though.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...  
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?

Nope. I do, however, claim that Orsino's personality and behavior IS part of the problem, regardless of how many people want to dismiss his involvement.


I'm going to follow the example of Always Alice now and take some "time off" from this thread now. Maybe we all get together again some point in the future, but for now "agreeing to disagree" seems like the smartest solution to this cycle (see the top of this post).

Bearbeitet von Lynata, 13 April 2012 - 02:59 .

[TEWR]

Lynata wrote...

That's a decree directed at the human cities, not the elves they're supposed to allow in.

It's irrelevant who it's directed at. The Elves aren't allowed to make the choice to live the way they want to, because Andrastian Thedas will kill them for what they believe. They're not even allowed to live their nomadic ways, considering that militia group was pissed that Velanna's group returned there after a few months.

The Templars and Chantry of Kirkwall threatened the Elves of the Sabrae clan, telling them to either convert or die. The Templars tortured and killed a Dalish child for information on Feynriel, and the woman in charge of the group said she didn't give a **** about the Elves.

So you saying they were allowed to choose how to live holds no water. They aren't allowed, because those Elves that do choose to live a different way are told by Andrastian Thedas that their way is wrong and they have two options: Convert and live or die for what they believe.

And considering the Dalish were driven out of their new homeland that the monarch of Ferelden provided them, that's all the more evidence that the Elves are never welcome in Thedas as equals. It's either be an Andrastian peasant and live or die because they want to live their lives their way.

There is only one place where the Dalish are treated as equals. That's in Rivain IIRC, where they have a semi-permanent settlement there.

Notice the lack of any official armies pursueing the Dalish?
That, and: http://dragonage.wik..._to_the_Militia

Note how it says "order them to leave", not "order them to accompany us to [insert random city]".

And you honestly think an armed militia group wouldn't have fought them? That the Elves wouldn't have been killed?

Then you're not "proving" anything as you had first claimed, though.

I find it interesting that you've been avoiding what I was making an illustrative example of. You haven't even answered the question. All you've done is just take an illustrative example to pretty literal extremes. It was incredibly obvious that it was an illustrative example.

I asked "If the Chantry helps 1 orphan but leaves 10 to die, can it truly be said they're helping the people?"

Instead of responding to the question, you avoided the question entirely.

Nope. I do, however, claim that Orsino's personality and behavior IS part of the problem, regardless of how many people want to dismiss his involvement.

If you go over what's said in-game and in codexes, you'll find that Meredith ascended to the position of Knight-Commander prior to Orsino becoming First Enchanter. And that she immediately instituted anti-mage friendly policies that began the whole thing.

Orsino's attitude was the right one during those years. Anyone thinking he was too "lax" on his charges is wrong, because he tells a pro-mage Hawke that though he didn't want to think it, his mind did believe that blood magic was involved with the anti-Meredith rebellion, simply because of the suspicious nature of what was happening.

He even offers to help Meredith root out the blood mages so long as she doesn't punish them for an act they didn't commit -- and considering he would do anything for his charges, I know he would've given himself up had he been a practicing blood mage, which he wasn't until the endgame.

Interesting bit of information: First Enchanter Casamira had the same exact attitude towards the Templars Orsino had and it was because of that attitude that the Mages of the then-formed Kirkwall Circle weren't slaughtered by an RoA.

The facts state that Meredith's measures happened prior to Orsino's rise to the station of First Enchanter. And that in 9:29 Dragon, he started fighting back.

He was First Enchanter three years prior though, but Meredith was Knight-Commander long before then due to what happened to Perrin Threnhold.

So no, his attitude wasn't part of the problem. It was part of the solution.

The Circle system does not attempt the "deliberate and systematic destruction" of mages but their containment, which is quite a difference - just like the prison system does not qualify as "genocide of criminals".

1) Prisons exist to punish people for what they chose to do, not for what they were born as. Prisons exist not only to punish them for what they did, but also to allow them to reform and atone for what they did.
2) The Mages are extremely discouraged from having relationships. They're looked upon with scorn if they do such a thing -- Gregoir's "two of their kind have been breeding" in the comics -- and if they produce a child it's ripped away from them.

I went over this on page 71 actually.

What the Circles do -- discouraging the mages from being with other mages, taking their children away, etc. -- well that's almost like they want magic to be wiped off the face of the planet.

They're trying to keep them from reproducing and possibly giving birth to more mages and punishing them if they do happen to have a chid. That is an attempt at genocide. They want to weed out mages and magic, whether they realize it or not.

Even if they're unaware of what they're doing -- which I highly doubt -- they are engaging in a genocidal act on the Mages. The RoA is also a case of genocide. What the New Inquisition is doing is probably going to turn into a case of genocide, depending on how DAIII handles the Mage-Templar situation and what the New Inquisition does.

Bearbeitet von The Ethereal Writer Redux, 13 April 2012 - 03:50 .

[LobselVith8]

DPSSOC wrote...

Silfren wrote...

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. 

If that was the case, then why do we see numerous examples of societies with free mages not trying to emulate the brutal, slave-driven economy of Tevinter? The Avvar tribes and the Chasind Wilders have free mages in their societies, and they aren't trying to emulate Tevinter. The Dalish clans have mages among them, and they aren't trying to replicate Tevinter. The Kingdom of Rivain has free mages - the seers and the witches - and it isn't replicating what transpired at the Imperium. I'm not certain how you can seriously claim that free mages will lead to another Tevinter, when we see numerous examples of how this isn't the case.

DPSSOC wrote...

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? 

Are you seriously trying to say that the Keeper of a Dalish clan is the same as a Magister from the Imperium? They aren't the same thing. Magisters are known for crossing moral lines in order to consolidate power, while Keepers serve as guides for the clan, and even their authority is limited. Velanna and Merrill are two examples of elves who are free to leave the clans of the People, while I doubt the slaves of the Magisters can say the same (simply see Fenris as an example).
 

DPSSOC wrote...

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.

So anyone who works hard is the same as the Tevinter Magisters? Does that mean that a templar who works hard to become Knight-Commander is no different than the Tevinter Magisters? I don't think your comparison works. Tevinter Magisters are said to cross a lot of moral lines to maintain their political power, while the Keepers of the clans are focused on trying to maintain a culture that was lost because of slavery and oppression. I don't see how you can compare the two simply because the two teach their apprentices on how to use their abilities, when there are so many differences between the two. Simply because the Dalish value magic - because their lore teaches that all elves used to be mages in Arlathan - doesn't make them the same as Tevinter.

DPSSOC wrote...

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.

You realize the nation of the Dales had mages in leadership? And it wasn't like Tevinter. The Dalish lore on Arlathan says that all elves were mages there, and there's no indication that it was like Tevinter. We know Arlathan elves had mages from Witch Hunt. Again, I don't think your comparison has any merit.

DPSSOC wrote...

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.

Considering that the examples of Decimus, Grace, and Tahrohne provide us with mages who are mentally unstable, I don't think they merit comparison with the rebel leader Uldred (who made the mistake of summoning too many demons through his knowledge of demonology and became possessed), or even Idunna, who seemed sane (despite her stupidity in following a woman who was clearly mentally ill).

That said, I don't see how oppressing mages is the same as policing them. Mages don't have the same rights that other people do. Hundreds of mages were ordered to be executed because of the actions of one single apostate. Mages can be made tranquil, and can't even contest the Rite of Tranquility. The fact that templars have "divine right" over mages (according to Cullen) informs us that the relationship between the Circle mages and the Order of Templars leaves them effectively powerless, especially in a society where mages are viewed with disdain because of how the Chantry preaches its monstrous view of mages.

DPSSOC wrote...

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? 

Considering that Connor didn't even realize that the "bad lady" was a demon until The Warden addresses it, you can't claim that everything would have gone the same if he had proper training.

[LobselVith8]

Lynata wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

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

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.

Meredith talks about how she's going to enjoy killing the Circle of Kirkwall, so I don't think her refusal at Orsino's offer had to do with any suspicions about his character.

Lynata wrote...

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.

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.

First, it's a section of Kirkwall. It's housed by the disenfranchised, true, but considering that the Amell manor runs all the way down into Darktown, I don't see why you think it isn't a valid part of Kirkwall. Second, I already provided a quote from Aveline that indicates the City Guard does patrol Darktown, but not enough (in her opinion, at least). As she already said the guards do go there, but that they don't go often enough, I don't see why you think that the guards don't patrol the area. Third, it's not simply criminals and illegal immigrants who live there.

Lynata wrote...

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.

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.

What's suspicious about the fact that multiple people are addressing that the Chantry supported the Orlesian occupation? I actually find it strange that you are so resistent to this information, because this topic has been brought up for years, and I've never seen someone contest it as heavily as you are. This isn't new information, after all.

You can actually find the threads about this being addressed. IanPolaris, in particular, has brought this issue up numerous times in many discussions about the Orlesian occupation of Ferelden (when he addressed Loghain and Maric discussing what to do about the Ferelden Chantry). It was the basis for why he speculated that Alistair might contemplate something (his "Church of England" proposal), given how the mages and templars were going to war with one another.

Lynata wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

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

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.

The Dalish had their own nation. The Arlathan elves had their own kingdom, and possessed the advanced technology of the Eluvians that serve as a gateway "beyond this world, and beyond the Fade."

Lynata wrote...

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.

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.

I have the opposite reaction: I really have no interest in restoring the status quo. Rather than asking for a wealth or a title, my ethnically Antivan, culturally Ferelden Surana Warden asked for the Circle of Ferelden to be given its independence, and that was pretty much handwaved for the expansion Awakening (for the Anders plot), the DLC Witch Hunt (for the Finn plot), and for the demands of the plot in Dragon Age II (for the schism between mages and templars). I say it was handwaved because we see the Epilogue in Origins addressed that no independent Circle of Orzammar rises up if the new ruler declares that mages have earned the right to govern themselves.

If the entire premise of Dragon Age III is to put all the pieces back in their place and restore the status quo, I wouldn't bother with it. People should have a choice in deciding whether to support the mages or the templars, but if there's no choice, then I see no reason to invest my time or effort in it.

[Lynata]

Didn't plan to post here again so quickly, but since you called me out I'm feeling the need to address one more thing.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote... 
I find it interesting that you've been avoiding what I was making an illustrative example of. You haven't even answered the question. All you've done is just take an illustrative example to pretty literal extremes. It was incredibly obvious that it was an illustrative example. 

Because there is nothing to address or answer? You're coming up with some BS numbers conjured out of thin air to "prove a point", presenting your biased opinion as fact - this is about as constructive as if I were to turn your question around and ask you something like "if 10 Chasind mages go berzerk but 1 doesn't, can it truly be said that containment isn't the better option?"

Which I won't, because I don't have these numbers. And neither do you. Of course we can throw hypothetical assumptions at each other all day long, but I don't see what good this would do for the debate, so I am surrendering the field for now.

But let me call you out in return:

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
And you honestly think an armed militia group wouldn't have fought them? That the Elves wouldn't have been killed?

Nice way of dodging the responsibility of your initial claim. I suppose to you "asking them to leave because the village mayor is worried" must be totally equal to "forcing them to live in a human city or exterminating the entire tribe to the last toddler because the Chantry told them to do that".

Farewell.

[Silfren]

Lynata wrote...

 

Silfren wrote...
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.

*nods* I can respect this, even though I don't agree with it.
The entire debate comes down to this decision, I think - how many lives are you willing to risk etc.

Silfren wrote... 

You do realize that the Circle system fits several of the legal, real-world definitions of genocide?

The Circle system does not attempt the "deliberate and systematic destruction" of mages but their containment, which is quite a difference - just like the prison system does not qualify as "genocide of criminals".

Nevertheless, the Circle system does fit several qualities of the practice of genocide.  http://www.hawaii.ed...NOCIDE.ENCY.HTM  Take note of Section 2 "What is Genocide" just a short bit down the page.

Lynata wrote...

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

Actually, I was in error regarding this aspect - after flipping through my books I found a passage detailing that Tevinter apparently never truly adopted Andrastean teachings:

Lore on the history of Andrastianism within the Tevinter Imperium, snipped for brevity's sake
-- DARPG Set 2 Player's Guide, Religon and Beliefs in Thedas

So the aspect of "magic not ruling over man" apparently never did take hold in Tevinter. For some time at least they did preach against blood magic (which is probably why men like Lambert were willing to give mage freedom a try), but in contemporary times they are using it again.

Doesn't change that the first Magisters must have "gone bad" without Tevinter culture (as it did not exist at this point in time), and it is quite interesting to see that Tevinter's Chantry seemed to preach exactly what a lot of pro-mage posters regard as the ideal solution (with the known results), but still I wanted to correct myself in regards to the schism. Regardless of my own convictions regarding the setting's nature, the truth comes first!

People can go bad, sure, with or without a cultural basis.  But that a few magisters in the past were corrupt, doesn't mean that all mages everywhere will be.  And a culture with a dominant religion that teaches against magical corruption is going to be populated predominantly by people who take this belief to heart.  That it will contain a minority that could give a crap about moderation and basic decency and all that stuff doesn't change this.

Bearbeitet von Silfren, 14 April 2012 - 01:42 .

[DPSSOC]

[quote]Silfren wrote...

[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]

Apologies, typed that up before work, long schpiel, needed to revise, no time.  Egypt, Persia, Greece, Rome, Britain, France.  6 Empires separated by geography and time.  All of them, at their height, exhibitted slavery, oppression, and decadence among the upper class.  A is followed by B.  I made the analogy to lighting gasoline because it's natural, predictable, and inevitable.

The nature of empires, their drive to expand, inevitably leads to the demand for a cheap, disposable work force (slaves).  As their territory expands so must their military might and it eventually becomes easier to put down complaints rather than address them (oppression).  Finally with more territory comes more wealth for the ruling class that they have no obligation to share ,which leads to decadence and oppulance.

Here's the progression from free mages to Tevinter.  Once mages are freed to compete with normal people they will dominate in all fields because they have access to a powerful resource the mundanes don't.  A mage farmer will be able to magic up rain for their crops in a drought, a mage blacksmith can magically control the heat of their forge keeping it more regular and producing better work, etc.  In any field a mage of equivalent skill will rapidly outpace mundane competition.  Now even if mages are denied acting in politics their dominance of any other occupation will see rapid profit to the point they have enough wealth they are defacto lords (see Hawke).

Here' where the blood magic comes in; with only each other to really compete with a mage's success will boil down to skill and power.  Skill is a maleable quantity, you can learn more to become better, but power is finite.  They can boost their power with lyrium but this becomes expensive since once this kind of competition kicks up demand for it shoots through the roof.  Furthermore this is a resource that anyone with sufficient funds can and will use so the benefit is short lived once your competition realizes what you're doing.  What everyone won't be willing to turn to is blood magic which offers far more bang for your buck.

Now there's the question of where you get the blood.  Well your own would be sufficient at first for outpacing those not using blood magic since they need to pay for what you're getting for free.  It's not difficult to hide what you're doing either just claim to have a means of further refining lyrium or some such nonsense that you keep very secret and make sure your cuts aren't visible.

So you've outpaced the mundanes and the moral mages now you've got real power cause not only can you overpower you're competition you can out manouever them too.  You can use mind control to gain contracts or make competitors sell out to you for far cheaper than they normally would and again so long as you're careful you can do this with minimal risk of getting caught.

So we come to the point where the blood mages are competing with each other, and since through normal means or mind control they're running the show they can start using other people as sacrifices to fuel their power.  A beggar here, a peasant their, a few bribes to keep the authorities from asking questions and you're in the clear to gather up people who can easily be written off and won't warrant extensive investigation.  Which gives you the makings of your first magisters.

[quote]Silfren wrote...
[quote]
[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.[/quote]

Sure, hunt for where I heard it and be back.  Also no it's not too vague.  I'll address this a bit more in your next point but it's the same behaviour with only environmental factors (population as I mentioned) altering degree.

[quote]Silfren wrote...


[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]

Because they don't matter.  If culture and community had any meaningful impact on behaviour psychology, as a science, wouldn't work.  A student of psychology would only be qualified to practice within a couple hundred miles of where they were taught, at most within the same province/state.  Psychology works because it applies universally, no matter where you go the same principles apply.  Culture is an environmental response, it's a survival tactic.  Hunter gatherer communities like the Dalish exhibit greater cooperation because their environment demands greater co-dependance.  Build them up to a farming village and their dependence on the other individuals of their community lessens, but is still greater than in a town or city.

Yes the Dalish culture, as it stands now, wouldn't behave like that (demonstrated by the fact that they don't), but that culture wouldn't survive the evolution to a large city much less a nation or empire.

Real world example, the amish/menonnites vs urban/metropolitan.  In these communities you see a great deal of cooperation because their life style demands it.  You'll see multiple families, dozens of people, voluntarily work together for nothing to help each other.  I on the other hand live in the city and I couldn't convince my own friends and family, much less my neighbours, to help me move a couch.  Larger population, less inter-dependence, less cooperation.

[quote]Silfren wrote...
[quote]
[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.[/quote]

And yet Hawke is never suspected, Anders and Merril go unnoticed, and Morrigan can walk right up to and converse with at least 3 Templars who don't notice a thing.  If they can sense magic it's not accurate enough to pin point individuals.

[quote]Silfren wrote...
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. 
[/quote]

Connor?  Slaughters all of Redcliffe (castle guards, servants, villagers) in weeks, a month tops, and that's without getting directly involved.  I actually wasn't talking about abominations though.  From what we're presented abominations are more or less mindless; seized by the same singular obsession as the demon possessing them.  This focus prevents them from being especially dangerous on a grand scale because they lack the broader mental capacities for planning or scheming.

I was just talking about the damage a single mage with a bad attitude could pull off.  We see from Hawke and the Warden just how powerful a single mage can become, both of them easily dispatch literal hordes of human beings, qunari, darkspawn, etc. with only a few allies.  Levelling a village would be realtively simple.

As for mage hunters keep in mind it takes a considerable number of Templars to overpower a mage. The odd mage hunter among a group of guards won't be sufficient.

[quote]Silfren wrote...
[quote]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? [/quote]

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.[/quote]

A child, with the powers of a god, is not going to sit by and do nothing while their loved one dies. They are not going to wait calmly while attempt after attempt to save them fails. They'll do everything in their power to save them.

[Silfren]

DPSSOC wrote...

And yet Hawke is never suspected, Anders and Merril go unnoticed, and Morrigan can walk right up to and converse with at least 3 Templars who don't notice a thing.  If they can sense magic it's not accurate enough to pin point individuals.

*eyeroll*  It is well-established that the instances of Hawke's use of magic being utterly ignored were egregiously bad cases of gameplay/lore segregation, first off.  After all, this isn't a case of a templar not "sensing" magic, but of templars being deaf, blind, and outright stupid to the fact that Hawke is nonchalantly hurling a six-foot tall staff about and casting fireballs with reckless abandon. 

As for Anders and Merrill, AND Hawke, where the game chooses to recognize her mage-ness, the story DOES recognize them.  There are several points in the story where this is addressed.  Meredith herself makes a comment about Hawke being tolerated as a free apostate because of her prominence in the city.  Grand Cleric Elthina pointedly states that it is well-known that Hawke keeps company with apostates.  And I believe that Cullen makes some comments to this effect as well.  

All which has little to do with whether a templar can sense an individual mage, but the point is that the setting of DA2 doesn't hold water as evidence for anything to do with this.  More's the pity, because the game COULD have handled this issue so much better than it did.  Oy.

But we do have evidence that the templars can sense magic in individual mages.  Morrigan herself makes it clear that the templars have suspected her, on several occasions.  While in Lothering, one of the templars in the Chantry even regards her with suspicion.  And Ser Bryant of the Lothering Chantry recognizes a Mage Warden for what she is, stating "I would be a poor templar if I could not tell even that much."  I may well be wrong on this, but I vaguely remember the novel Asunder suggesting it as well.  But I might actually have dreamed that last bit.  It also stands to reason that templars would have this ability in order to be able to hunt for apostates.  Phylacteries are not always ready to hand, after all. 

DPSSOC wrote...

Silfren wrote...
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. 

Connor?  Slaughters all of Redcliffe (castle guards, servants, villagers) in weeks, a month tops, and that's without getting directly involved.  I actually wasn't talking about abominations though.  From what we're presented abominations are more or less mindless; seized by the same singular obsession as the demon possessing them.  This focus prevents them from being especially dangerous on a grand scale because they lack the broader mental capacities for planning or scheming.

I was just talking about the damage a single mage with a bad attitude could pull off.  We see from Hawke and the Warden just how powerful a single mage can become, both of them easily dispatch literal hordes of human beings, qunari, darkspawn, etc. with only a few allies.  Levelling a village would be realtively simple.

As for mage hunters keep in mind it takes a considerable number of Templars to overpower a mage. The odd mage hunter among a group of guards won't be sufficient.

Granted, Connor, although I think there were several other factors at play.  Had Ferelden not been in the throes of a civil war, such that nobody was available to respond to Bann Teagan's pleas for help, I don't think that would have gone on as long as it did.  It was less that the demon was exceptionally powerful such that it overwhelmed wave after wave after wave of forces sent against it, but was allowed to ravage the village unchecked for a while.  We don't actually know how long it went on, though I'll concede it likely could not have been that many weeks.  Also, the demon wasn't out there doing all that killing, but rather after it killed a handful of people, it set their corpses to killing, and then the people those corpses killed were reanimated and set to killling, and so on, so that it was at least in part a question of ever-increasing numbers.

And of course, it only took a team of four people to organize a sufficient defense, and another team of four people to counteract the demon itself.  One, if you wanna be really technical.  Though this, also, could be dismissed as gameplay mechanics.  The Warden, after all, is the ultimate bad-ass.

DPSSOC wrote...

Silfren wrote...

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.

A child, with the powers of a god, is not going to sit by and do nothing while their loved one dies. They are not going to wait calmly while attempt after attempt to save them fails. They'll do everything in their power to save them.

*sigh*  Nice way to over-generalize.  Connor didn't HAVE the powers of a god, and there ARE children who wouldn't have taken the same action, even with access to the same power.  Individual personalities matter here, and you can't just assume that all children, everywhere, will act in exactly the same way.  Many children would simply be too afraid, however much they loved their father.  I would argue that any child who had been raised by a woman who dested magic as an accursed evil would likely be too afraid to try it, having internalized her fear.  And others would possibly even be smart enough to understand and accept the inherent danger. 

So no, your personal belief that all children, everywhere, would have done exactly what Connor did, no matter what the circumstances, doesn't actually do a thing to counter my assertion that things may very well have turned out differently if Connor had been tutored by a competent teacher.

Bearbeitet von Silfren, 14 April 2012 - 02:16 .