269 réponses à ce sujet

[Cultist]

I say down with the Templars and down with the Circles. Blood Magic allowed human civilization to dominae Thedas, so stick with it. Tevinter Imperium pacticed it thoiusand of years and they are not consumed consumed by demons to date.

[Silfren]

LobselVith8 wrote...

They live under a monarchy, but the people have freedoms that virtually no Circle mage will ever know. I'm certain that the mages who abandon the free food, education, and shelter care more about their freedom than they do about the few privledges afforded to them under the Chantry controlled Circles, along with the many risks that come from being a mage in Andrastian society.

Tsk, tsk.  Lob, haven't you figured out by now that of course mages are totally going to believe that free food*, education, and shelter mean more to them than the fact that they cannot leave the Circle walls unless permitted to do so, according to the whim of the Knight Commander, cannot marry without permission, and rarely get that permission, absolutely cannot have children even if they are permitted to marry, and live under the constant threat of Annulment for the duration of their lives.

*Free food.  We don't actually know much about this.  We don't know how much food mages are allotted, how meals are distributed, etc.  We also have no reason at all to believe that the customs are the same at every Circle.  After all, Ferelden's Circle was far better than Kirkwalls', though it was still aprison.

I'm bloody sick of "the peasants don't have it any better" used to defend or justify the Circle.  Yes, we do know from Asunder that mages do tend to have more and better access to education.  At least, we know that from Rhys's experience of HIS Circle.  By no means do we have any reason to believe it's like that at all Circles.  I would suspect, especially, that mages were not particularly educated under Meredith's rule.  After all, I'm sure it was not lost on Meredith that an educated mage was more dangerous than an ignorant one.

We know from the lore that mages are specifically denied the assumed right of marriage.  The fact that this is made explicit, that mages have to ask permission to marry and can only hope that the Knight Commander is willing to allow it, is proof that this is unique to mages.  After all, if it were a problem faced by everyone, mages wouldn't feel particularly affected by it in contrast.  And of course, children, same deal.  With the obvious--and related--example of people who give birth to mage children, no other group faces the prospect, as Circle mages do, of having their children taken from them as a matter of legal tradition. 

And, of course, only mages live with the knowledge that at any moment, mere suspicion could result in the entire Circle population being executed.

[Dave of Canada]

Nobles and Guardsman also slaughter common-folk, elves were slaughtered twice in quick succession in Denerim for protesting the rape of their women and food shortage. The Warden can basically order the slaughter of more people in Awakening, they don't need to answer for anything because they're in a position of power.

Something similar to the Knight-Commander, except the Knight-Commander is one individual while the common-folk have to deal with noble families and their guardsman.

The marriage thing is silly, Gaider has stated before that most mages don't desire to marry due to the lifestyle they're raised in the Circle (basically they're not old fashioned at all). Sillier yet is the mage children, Tevinter doesn't allow mages to keep their children either, it's stupid and reckless. Does this mean Tevinter is oppressive to mages?

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 12 avril 2012 - 07:56 .

[esper]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Nobles and Guardsman also slaughter common-folk, elves were slaughtered twice in quick succession in Denerim for protesting the rape of their women and food shortage. The Warden can basically order the slaughter of more people in Awakening, they don't need to answer for anything because they're in a position of power.

Something similar to the Knight-Commander, except the Knight-Commander is one individual while the common-folk have to deal with noble families and their guardsman.

The marriage thing is silly, Gaider has stated before that most mages don't desire to marry due to the lifestyle they're raised in the Circle (basically they're not old fashioned at all). Sillier yet is the mage children, Tevinter doesn't allow mages to keep their children either, it's stupid and reckless. Does this mean Tevinter is oppressive to mages?

Yes, it means. Tevinter is opressive to every mage and non-mage who is not a magister.

[Takamori The Templar]

Yep other thing that I would like to point out on DA2, made people forget what is the real deal with the Templars, but good to see other fellow templars showing up the facts.
Hope bioware show a green light aware of this issue.

[Silfren]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Nobles and Guardsman also slaughter common-folk, elves were slaughtered twice in quick succession in Denerim for protesting the rape of their women and food shortage. The Warden can basically order the slaughter of more people in Awakening, they don't need to answer for anything because they're in a position of power.

Something similar to the Knight-Commander, except the Knight-Commander is one individual while the common-folk have to deal with noble families and their guardsman.

The marriage thing is silly, Gaider has stated before that most mages don't desire to marry due to the lifestyle they're raised in the Circle (basically they're not old fashioned at all). Sillier yet is the mage children, Tevinter doesn't allow mages to keep their children either, it's stupid and reckless. Does this mean Tevinter is oppressive to mages?

It isn't silly, because how many mages do or don't want to marry is beside the point of the question of them being denied a right that others are free to take for granted.  And bringing up Tevinter is a non sequitur given that we are specifically discussing a system that operates outside of and separately from the Imperium.

It's just awesome how people try to counter arguments with obvious logical fallacies.

[Silfren]

Dave of Canada wrote...

The marriage thing is silly, Gaider has stated before that most mages don't desire to marry due to the lifestyle they're raised in the Circle (basically they're not old fashioned at all). Sillier yet is the mage children, Tevinter doesn't allow mages to keep their children either, it's stupid and reckless. Does this mean Tevinter is oppressive to mages?

Funnily enough, I'm familiar with that quote and I didn't at all take it to mean that mages aren't "not old-fashioned."  Rather I took it to mean that the Circle environment discouraged mages from wanting to have relationships at all because of the lack of privacy, knowledge that they would have their children stolen from them, etc.  I didn't at all take it to mean that the Circle encourages mages to just eschew conservative lifestyles in favor of sexual liberation as you imply.  

[the_one_54321]

Thedas is not an ideal, ethical world. If it were, mages would not need to be managed because they would self manage. There would be no poor and no nobility. There would be no need for armies to fight anything except the blight. What we have is a world in serfdom and divided nations, where mages are a physical threat. So it's no wonder that they are treated badly. Letting mages manage their own affairs would lead to abominations occurring.

And the occurrence of abominations is not about demons overrunning the world. That's not the threat. The threat is off the odd occurrence of an abomination leading to a massacre in some town or city, before it's put down. Because innocent people going about their business as laboring peasants don't need one more thing that might randomly kill them in some horrific way.

The fact that mages seem to so often value their own liberty over the safety of others causes me to become more and more sympathetic of the Qunarri approach to handling mages. They don't seem to ever have any major issues with mage uprisings or random abomination outbreaks.

Modifié par the_one_54321, 12 avril 2012 - 08:57 .

[Silfren]

the_one_54321 wrote...

The fact that mages seem to so often value their own liberty over the safety of others causes me to become more and more sympathetic of the Qunarri approach to handling mages. They don't seem to ever have any major issues with mage uprisings or random abomination outbreaks.

It stands to reason that mages are so adamant about their liberty specifically because they're pre-emptively locked up without question by a system that assumes them guilty by virtue of birth.  Perhaps if they were not forcibly locked into prisons that kept them separate from the rest of society, they would be a little more willing to consider other people's own needs. 

I don't understand why people can't see how treating mages this way actually leads to the problems it claims to exist to prevent.  The very structure of it forces mages into an us vs. them mindset.  Small wonder that many of them ultimately decide they'd sooner turn to blood magic and risk demonic possession--or even embrace the latter--if that's what it takes to be free.

[the_one_54321]

Silfren wrote...
I don't understand why people can't see how treating mages this way actually leads to the problems it claims to exist to prevent.

On the contrary, this very realization is what leads me to sympathize with the Qunari method.

The notion that leaving mages to their own devices would be a solution is ludicrous. Not educating or supervising mages is a guarantee of causing innocents to suffer. Apparently, an attempt at supervision and education is also such a guarantee. Therefore, kill them all.

[ianvillan]

the_one_54321 wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...
The controversy over the Chantry controlled Circles is much more than simple "supervision," but I take it we aren't going to have a serious discussion on this matter at all.

Supervision means that a possesed mage is put to death. Supervision means that a mage that uses blood magic is put to death. Supervision means that mages are watched so that these kinds of things can be tested and verified.

As I mentioned in the last post, compromise will mean that both sides give up something. Mages are required to give up their liberty, in some fashion, in order to be safe for the general populace.

You want the Chantry out of the picture? Understandable, but it's not out of the picture. The Chantry is the ruling body in this. So that creates one hell of a head-butting situation.

What exactly are the chantry and templars giving up in this arrangement, The Templars seem to be allowed to get married, have children and all the other thing mages are denied. Not to mention the chantry who have there own army of mages to use as they see fit in a war, but still preach hatred and persecution against the mages and will not hesitate to kill all of a circle if a few mages dont do as they want them too.

[the_one_54321]

The Templars are systematically addicted to lyrium. And have to hunt apostates that might, literally, turn them into bloody smears on the walls.

It's kind of funny that no one considers that both sides are likewise subjected to the possibility of violent death, and general daily discomfort.

[The Elder King]

ianvillan wrote...




What exactly are the chantry and templars giving up in this arrangement, The Templars seem to be allowed to get married, have children and all the other thing mages are denied. Not to mention the chantry who have there own army of mages to use as they see fit in a war, but still preach hatred and persecution against the mages and will not hesitate to kill all of a circle if a few mages dont do as they want them too.

Yeah, well, that's not true, considering what it's hinted in DA2 and what happened in Asunder. What you said happened after DA2, and yet the Templars left the Chantry to fight and kill mages. If the Chantry wanted to eradicate all the circles, why the Templars left the Chantry?
And I should remind you that Elthina always negated Meredith the Right of Annulment, saving a lot of mages to certain death. And she was repayed with death.
I'm not a great supporter of the Chantry, but we should be honest. There are good and evil people on both side.

Modifié par hhh89, 12 avril 2012 - 09:33 .

[joacho]

This thread is going slightly off topic, but I would just like to say that I view the Mage-Templar thing as a symbiotic relationship: one cannot succeed without the other. A nation like Tevinter provides evidence for the need of supervision, but the oppression of Circles like Kirkwall is the other extreme. I just feel that Bioware should explore further the need for companion templars to mages, as currently it is mostly free all mages messages. Many people want a happy medium where there is limited freedom for mage and templar alike (as with great power comes great responsibility) and both organisations grow together on equal footing, complementing each other as was perhaps originally intended.

[ianvillan]

the_one_54321 wrote...

The Templars are systematically addicted to lyrium. And have to hunt apostates that might, literally, turn them into bloody smears on the walls.

It's kind of funny that no one considers that both sides are likewise subjected to the possibility of violent death, and general daily discomfort.

True mage are addicted to lyrium but joining the templars is voluntary, and all mages must do the Harrowing where they face the fade and the demons, plus they also have templars with swords to there necks at the same time.

[the_one_54321]

Well, unfortunately being born a mage isn't voluntary. Otherwise it would be voluntary...

[Silfren]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Silfren wrote...
I don't understand why people can't see how treating mages this way actually leads to the problems it claims to exist to prevent.

On the contrary, this very realization is what leads me to sympathize with the Qunari method.

The notion that leaving mages to their own devices would be a solution is ludicrous. Not educating or supervising mages is a guarantee of causing innocents to suffer. Apparently, an attempt at supervision and education is also such a guarantee. Therefore, kill them all.

I didn't suggest leaving mages to their own devices with no education or supervision.  Never suggested any such thing at all.  I'm completely in favor of having a mage-specific police force, and of mandatory magical education for mages.  Just not the the crap about taking mage children away from their families to be locked away in de facto prisons for the rest of their life, and treated like pariahs.  You CAN do the one without the other.

[the_one_54321]

Silfren wrote...
You CAN do the one without the other.

How do you supervise a mage 24/7 without some version of the circle? 

There's no specific time of day, nor specific period in their life when are susceptible to possession, or alternate times when they are not.

Modifié par the_one_54321, 12 avril 2012 - 09:41 .

[Silfren]

the_one_54321 wrote...

The Templars are systematically addicted to lyrium. And have to hunt apostates that might, literally, turn them into bloody smears on the walls.

It's kind of funny that no one considers that both sides are likewise subjected to the possibility of violent death, and general daily discomfort.

A key factor here is that templars generally CHOOSE this lifestyle, whereas mages do not get any choice at all.  Nowhere do we see young children being taken from their parents at young ages and forced, under pain of death or emotional lobotomy, to become templars.

[Silfren]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Silfren wrote...
You CAN do the one without the other.

How do you supervise a mage 24/7 without some version of the circle? 

You don't supervise them 24/7.  I can see this discussion is going to go nowhere if you're entering the discussion with the atittude that 24/7 supervision is the only viable method.

[Silfren]

hhh89 wrote...

ianvillan wrote...




What exactly are the chantry and templars giving up in this arrangement, The Templars seem to be allowed to get married, have children and all the other thing mages are denied. Not to mention the chantry who have there own army of mages to use as they see fit in a war, but still preach hatred and persecution against the mages and will not hesitate to kill all of a circle if a few mages dont do as they want them too.

Yeah, well, that's not true, considering what it's hinted in DA2 and what happened in Asunder. What you said happened after DA2, and yet the Templars left the Chantry to fight and kill mages. If the Chantry wanted to eradicate all the circles, why the Templars left the Chantry?
And I should remind you that Elthina always negated Meredith the Right of Annulment, saving a lot of mages to certain death. And she was repayed with death.
I'm not a great supporter of the Chantry, but we should be honest. There are good and evil people on both side.

Meh.  Elthina wasn't "repayed with death" for her kindness in denying the Right of Annulment.  She was perpetuating the status quo.  That's why she was killed.

[the_one_54321]

Silfren wrote...
A key factor here is that templars generally CHOOSE this lifestyle,

Whose fault is it that a mage can't choose to not be a mage? That's the reality of the world in Thedas. Magic is dangerous. No one can choose or not choose it. Either you're stuck with it, or you aren't.

One person getting stuck with magic is unfair to everyone. It's unfair to the people that the mage might actually kill. It's unfair to the mage that didn't get to choose. It's just outright unfair.

I think that's the major conclusion of the whole mage issue; it's not fair.

It's not fair to anyone, at all. Someone get's screwed. It's a matter of choosing who gets screwed, and if you're the diplomatic rather than violent type, trying to minimize the volume of screwing that happens.

Silfren wrote...
You don't supervise them 24/7.  I can see this discussion is going to go nowhere if you're entering the discussion with the atittude that 24/7 supervision is the only viable method.

As I mentioned in my edit, there's no special time of day when they are more or less dangerous.

Modifié par the_one_54321, 12 avril 2012 - 09:45 .

[ianvillan]

hhh89 wrote...

ianvillan wrote...




What exactly are the chantry and templars giving up in this arrangement, The Templars seem to be allowed to get married, have children and all the other thing mages are denied. Not to mention the chantry who have there own army of mages to use as they see fit in a war, but still preach hatred and persecution against the mages and will not hesitate to kill all of a circle if a few mages dont do as they want them too.

Yeah, well, that's not true, considering what it's hinted in DA2 and what happened in Asunder. What you said happened after DA2, and yet the Templars left the Chantry to fight and kill mages. If the Chantry wanted to eradicate all the circles, why the Templars left the Chantry?
And I should remind you that Elthina always negated Meredith the Right of Annulment, saving a lot of mages to certain death. And she was repayed with death.
I'm not a great supporter of the Chantry, but we should be honest. There are good and evil people on both side.

Your right I probably did exagerate a bit but it just seems to be shown how the mages have all the hardship and loss of liberties and the templars have none of the problems compared to the mages yet still seem to hate them and are always asking for the right of annulment even if the mages responcible have been dealt with.

Like in Dragon Age Origins where after you have saved the circle all that was left was mages who hadn't been blood mages yet the right of annulment is still called for.

[The Elder King]

Silfren wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

ianvillan wrote...




What exactly are the chantry and templars giving up in this arrangement, The Templars seem to be allowed to get married, have children and all the other thing mages are denied. Not to mention the chantry who have there own army of mages to use as they see fit in a war, but still preach hatred and persecution against the mages and will not hesitate to kill all of a circle if a few mages dont do as they want them too.

Yeah, well, that's not true, considering what it's hinted in DA2 and what happened in Asunder. What you said happened after DA2, and yet the Templars left the Chantry to fight and kill mages. If the Chantry wanted to eradicate all the circles, why the Templars left the Chantry?
And I should remind you that Elthina always negated Meredith the Right of Annulment, saving a lot of mages to certain death. And she was repayed with death.
I'm not a great supporter of the Chantry, but we should be honest. There are good and evil people on both side.

Meh.  Elthina wasn't "repayed with death" for her kindness in denying the Right of Annulment.  She was perpetuating the status quo.  That's why she was killed.

Still better than approving the Right of Annulment, and I never said she was kind.
And I disagree, she wasn't killed because she was perpetuating the status quo. She was killed because as long as she was alive there wouldnt' be war between mages and templars  in Kirkwall. Ander killed her (along with a lot of innocent people) to start a war.
Regardless, she didn't deserve death. Orsino, Meredith and Anders deserved a lot more than her.

[Silfren]

hhh89 wrote...

Still better than approving the Right of Annulment, and I never said she was kind.
And I disagree, she wasn't killed because she was perpetuating the status quo. She was killed because as long as she was alive there wouldnt' be war between mages and templars  in Kirkwall. Ander killed her (along with a lot of innocent people) to start a war.
Regardless, she didn't deserve death. Orsino, Meredith and Anders deserved a lot more than her.

I think she did deserve death.  She allowed Meredith's tyranny to continue without even attempting to arrest it. 

I don't necessarily agree that she had to die for the mage/templar war to be sparked.  I'm fairly sure the blowing up of the Chantry would have ignited the smoldering powderkeg even if it had been completely empty.  But either way, given her utter negligence in the face of the ongoing abuses, I'm thrilled she got hers in the end.