629 réponses à ce sujet

[GavrielKay]

Vormaerin wrote...
"Get thee to a nunnery" is not denying them basic rights and treating them as criminals, if the Circle/Monastery is managed properly. 

If they cannot leave of their own free will, have relationships, keep their children, visit their families etc...  then it is a prison.  A gilded cage is still a cage and I woudn't be happy in one either.

[Silfren]

Vormaerin wrote...


There are cultures that don't distinguish between mother and maternal aunt.   There are cultures that don't consider the biological mother and biological father to be equally related to the child.  The child might not even be part of the mother's family.

Which cultures would those be?  I'm genuinely interested, if you'd mind giving me a heads up so I can do some reading.

[Silfren]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

Silfren wrote...
I don't think Justice could have turned into a Spirit of Faith or a Demon of Fanaticism  if Anders had been, say, more like Wynne in his personality

Yet you claimed this :

Silfren wrote...

Once again, Anders' spirit of Justice became a DEMON of Vengeance..

Reading comprehension is your frend.  The thrust of my point dealt with the nature of the emotion.  I was saying that since the spirt in question started out as Justice, I didn't think it would have warped into a spirit of faith or a demon of fanaticism, or a spirit of compassion or honor or valor or a demon of desire, sloth, pride, etc.  I was stating that I thought the basic nature of the spirit would remain, and express itself as one of the two extremes of whatever vice or virtue it represented.  I.E., Justice would always be either Justice or Vengeance, and wouldn't turn into Compassion or Fanaticism or Pride or anything else.

Of course, I take it all back now, given Evil Writer Redux's cites from David Gaider on the subject.  It appears that indeed spirits are extremely mutable and can take on whatever dominant vice or virtue their host exhibits, even if it is something altogether different from what the spirit (or demon) originally was.

You make no effort to edit your response to me and blame my reading  comprehension
for your contradictory statement?

Twisting your words to suit  your agenda , is not going to help your case. 

Edit: Spelling Error. 

.....I did clarify.  In the post you're quoting.  I also think that the problem lies less in the wording of my original post and more in the language barrier going on. But I'm not going to go back and re-edit my post when I can just as easily clarify the point of confusion in another one.

Modifié par Silfren, 11 mai 2012 - 04:48 .

[GavrielKay]

Silfren wrote...

Vormaerin wrote...


There are cultures that don't distinguish between mother and maternal aunt.   There are cultures that don't consider the biological mother and biological father to be equally related to the child.  The child might not even be part of the mother's family.

Which cultures would those be?  I'm genuinely interested, if you'd mind giving me a heads up so I can do some reading.

I have heard of cultures that have communal child rearing and that sort of thing.  Perhaps Vormaerin can provide some other examples.

I think the original point still stands though:  some sort of loving and nurturing home is required for children to grow up resilient and well adjusted.  I don't recall any society that  raises their children using scare tactics and domination while still expecting them to come out self reliant.  African warlords may do this to turn children into soldiers, but then they are expecting to get submissive children, not strong willed ones.

[Silfren]

GavrielKay wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Vormaerin wrote...


There are cultures that don't distinguish between mother and maternal aunt.   There are cultures that don't consider the biological mother and biological father to be equally related to the child.  The child might not even be part of the mother's family.

Which cultures would those be?  I'm genuinely interested, if you'd mind giving me a heads up so I can do some reading.

I have heard of cultures that have communal child rearing and that sort of thing.  Perhaps Vormaerin can provide some other examples.

I think the original point still stands though:  some sort of loving and nurturing home is required for children to grow up resilient and well adjusted.  I don't recall any society that  raises their children using scare tactics and domination while still expecting them to come out self reliant.  African warlords may do this to turn children into soldiers, but then they are expecting to get submissive children, not strong willed ones.

Right.  It's really irrelevant as to how many people are involved in the child-rearing process or how they are related.  The point is that people raised in environments where they are affirmed as decent, worthwhile, and capable...those are the people who will grow up equipped with the emotional stability they need to be capable, functioning adults.  Spending someone's childhood telling them they're cursed, can never be fully trusted by society, can't even trust themselves, even, and having them live under a constant state of suspicion...that's practically guaranteed to produce an adult with several neurotic issues.

[GavrielKay]

Silfren wrote...
Spending someone's childhood telling them they're cursed, can never be fully trusted by society, can't even trust themselves, even, and having them live under a constant state of suspicion...that's practically guaranteed to produce an adult with several neurotic issues.

And the Chantry gets the added bonus of using all those generations of neurotic mages to then claim their own necessity as protectors....  Someone mentioned circular logic before...  we've got self fulfilling prophecy too

[Sacred_Fantasy]

Silfren wrote...
 
There is so, soooooo much more to the Chantry's position than just worrying about mages being possessed by demons,

If we are to talk about "Soooooo much more", then this discussion will never end. We already talked about blood magic alone for  pages.

Silfren wrote...

and even if it were only possession that the Chantry was concerned about, we nevertheless have lore that the Chantry is equally suspicious of mages who have dealings with benign spirits.  It is NOT just a concern over demons, whatever you want to claim to the contrary.

I take back on this matter after I read Reznore57's assertion. There is no way for the chantry could differentiate each possession without proper documentation and investigation.

Silfren wrote...

As to the rest, maybe you should scroll up a few posts and read what TEWR quotes from Gaider about spirits being change-able beings whose nature stems from the emotion that they feed on.  I was not aware of that, and had assumed that spirits and demons only expressed some degree of a specific emotion, but it now appears that spirits (including demons) express whatever emotion they predominantly FEED ON.

Weren't you the one who just recently asserted that Anders' spirit became Justice because of Kristoff, and that Wynne's spirit became faith because of Wynne?  Now you're claiming that spirits cannot change? ]

Again, I suggest you re-visit the posts TEWR quoted from Gaider.  Demons are TYPES OF spirits. The difference between the two comes from what they feed upon, if I'm interpreting Gaider correctly.

 I acknowlege spirit changes. I don't acknowledge demon changes. I view demon as seperate form/species/race/class/whatever ... from spirit even though (benign?)spirit and demon are basically both spirits. And I maintain such position.  

Silfren wrote...

We do not know that there are ONLY demons of sloth, pride, etc.  Those are the known demons.  At any rate, we also know that there are ranks within each of those categories: the demon, Torpor, is called by Justice a demon of sloth.  We see a desire demon who is called Allure.  And Merrill's Pride Demon is called...crap, I can't remember.  Vengeance could easily be classed as a rage demon or a pride demon, depending on one's view of vengeance, so you cannot claim that there is no such thing.

We do know demonic possession always ends in tragic. We have no evidence that demon would melded into a person's personality. Abomination codex's literally state than when unholy union between a demon and mage take place, abomination is created.   Therefore it does not make sense if Vengence or Justic melded into Anders's personality and not turning him into abomination. 

Silfren wrote...


Also, demons actually can leave a body.  The problem is that they tend not to want to.  But the fact is, they DO have the ABILITY to do so.  The desire demon who attached herself to Connor can be made to leave him through intimidation.  She may be going under duress, but the physical action of leaving is hers alone.  

I have stated already a demon leaves a body by force either through ritual or some other mean. There is no evidence whatsoever that support demon would release a host peacefully.  Even if demon melded into a mage's body, it would turn the mage into twsited monster. 

Silfren wrote...



At least I draw my my interpretations and conclusions from the lore, and I adjust them where new information requires it.  You just seem to be making sh*t up.

You draw your interpretation and conclusion from lore?   You conclusion never agree with the reason behind the establishment of the Circle of Magi despite so many codex entries.  You even ignore the cold hard fact about the danger of abomination as stated in abomination's codex entry. 
Your  "educated guess" about the Chasind and Rivaini society are making **** up do you know that? 

[Sacred_Fantasy]

[quote]GavrielKay wrote...

[quote]Demon is twisted evil spirit. They cannot simply leave Anders.[/quote]

I don't believe that statement meant that Justice/Vengeance had left, but rather merged so closely with Anders' own personality that they were no longer two separate entities. (As Silfren said while I was typing away )[/quote]
Well.. I do. I believe spirit could merged with a host but I don't believe it happen to Anders - mainly because I killed Anders.



[quote]GavrielKay wrote...

[quote]They cannot simply leave Connor[/quote]

Connor suffers from a different sort of possession.  More like his mind is under control of the desire demon even though she remains in the Fade and his body remains unharmed.  Once we kill her in the Fade (for those who chose to do so), Conner is free of any sign that it ever happened.  I believe it is even stated that he doesn't remember any of it.[/quote]
Nevertheless the demon didn't leave Connor peacefully.


[quote]GavrielKay wrote..

[quote]Demon always attracted to a mage because non-mage are boring passive dreamer when they sleep.[/quote]

Demons are drawn to mages but can possess other people and other things.[/quote]
Only if the demon manage to escape the viel. And that's very rare.

[quote]GavrielKay wrote..


[quote]A mage turn into twisted abomination will always result the death of the mage and many other people.[/quote]

You can say the mage is dead once his mind is wiped out by the demon, but whether anyone else dies depends on circumstances.  Several mages turned into abominations right in front of my Hawke, and I can assure you they killed no one before meeting the pointy end of her daggers.[/quote]
Yup, provided, there's someone capable enough to prevent such outbreak, who happen to be nearby. Like your Hawke. I don't expect a lot of people would be lucky tho.
 [quote]GavrielKay wrote..

 
[quote]That is why mage is at risk of demonic possession and a risk to society at large whether you accept it or not [/quote].

Except even the Chantry didn't say so at first.  Please please please read the posts and codices that point out the mages went into seclusion for their own reasons, with the idea that the Chantry would protect them and allow them to study magic.  Sometime after this voluntary seclusion, it warped into the Chantry rounding up all mages and telling everyone that it was necessary.


Read the history.  Mages were NOT rounded up into circles due to lots of them becoming abominations or mind controlling anyone.  They went peacefully into what they thought was protected seclusion to study magic.

[/quote]
I read.. The divine order exalted march at her own cathedral. If if wasn't due the templar who advised her not to, all those mages would had been slain. It was more a compromise to let the mages to live and practise their magic. 

So  GavrielKay, would you please be more objective with your assessment? 


 [quote]GavrielKay wrote..

 

It isn't necessary - we have several societies who function without it.  It wasn't necessary to the Chantry, just more convenient than dealing with grumpy mages who wanted to do more than dust rafters. [/quote]
But we know next to nothing about those several societies. No report on magic abuses, abominations etc.. do not equal there isn't any.  


[quote]GavrielKay wrote..

Edit:  I just wanted to note that the codex on the history of the circle was written by Sister Petrine, a Chantry historian, so I would be quite sure that had the reason for Circle formation been uncontrolled rampaging mages, it would have said so.
[/quote]
So? It is a codex after all and still better than just "educated guess"

The reason behind  the Circle formation was written in Abomination codex entry too and not just at the history of the circle.

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 11 mai 2012 - 06:50 .

[GavrielKay]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
You draw your interpretation and conclusion from lore?   You conclusion never agree with the reason behind the establishment of the Circle of Magi despite so many codex entries.  You even ignore the cold hard fact about the danger of abomination as stated in abomination's codex entry. 
Your  "educated guess" about the Chasind and Rivaini society are making **** up do you know that? 

They'll shut down the thread unless we all keep it civil and on topic.

The establishment of the circle is detailed in a codex I've posted in this thread.  It was not created to stop rampaging mages.  It was not created because blood magic was out of control.  It was not created immediately after Andraste and her army broke the Tevinter empire.

See:  http://dragonage.wik...y_of_the_Circle

It was, according to a Chantry scholar, created as a compromise between the Chantry and mages of the time.

In the game world time frame that we play in, the Chantry now enforces this bargain and claims it is necessary, but it was a bargain.  It was not necessary for the protection of the people, only a negotiated deal to allow mages to practice more magic but not around normal people.

Surely a Chantry scholar would write that it was a result of something awful if that were the case.

Silfren mentioned the Nevarran Accord in one post...  I think that's probably how things turned bad for the mages who'd just agreed to live in seclusion...  suddenly that seclusion was overseen by former Inquisitors, now joined forces with the Chantry to watch the mages and make the circles official and mandatory.

1:1 Divine (1st year of the 1st Divine Age): The first Divine of the Chantry, Justinia I, is instated at Val Royeaux. The free use of magic is declared illegal in Orlais except by those mages operating under the direct auspices of the Chantry.
...
1:20 Divine: The Nevarran Accord is signed: the Seekers of Truth agree to serve the Chantry. The Circle of Magi is then born from this agreement.

[GavrielKay]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote..
Well.. I do. I believe spirit could merged with a host but I don't believe it happen to Anders - mainly because I killed Anders.

Well, if it were true, it would have happened before your Hawke met him.  We know that's what Anders thinks happened to him.  I don't know if any dev or writer has confirmed that it is possible and some interesting feature of Anders' possession.

Nevertheless the demon didn't leave Connor peacefully.

True enough.  But it didn't destroy him either.

Only if the demon manage to escape the viel. And that's very rare.

There were zillions of possessed corpses, trees and even a few suits of armor in the game.  Plus demons just plain attacking us.

I read.. The divine order exalted march at her own cathedral. If if wasn't due the templar who advised her not to, all those mages would had been slain. It was more a compromise to let the mages to live and practise their magic.

The Divine was wanting to launch an Exalted March on her own cathedral because some mages snuffed out a fire.  The mages were non-violent.  Non-possessed.  Non blood magic mind controlling evil tyrants.  They wanted to do more than light fires and dust cathedrals and for that, the Divine was going to send an army after them.  And you think I'm not objective??

So? It is a codex after all and still better than just "educated guess"

I'm not sure what you mean by this.

[TEWR]

Considering Sister Petrine makes a note of how she believes the truth should always be revealed and that it enhances belief rather then diminishes it -- or something along those lines -- I'm willing to take the codex she penned herself as having more validity over some codex penned by someone else.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 11 mai 2012 - 07:05 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

GavrielKay wrote...
And the Chantry gets the added bonus of using all those generations of neurotic mages to then claim their own necessity as protectors....  Someone mentioned circular logic before...  we've got self fulfilling prophecy too

Spare me the psychological mumbo-jumbo.

Mages are locked up because it is necessary. The Chantry didn't create that necessity. The mages were always dangerous and feared.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Silfren wrote...
No, that isn't circular logic.  Many mages will resent being placed into Circles--the reason for their being put there is irrelevant to whether mages will WANT to go--and will be willing to resort to blood magic in order to resist efforts to imprison them.  That's not circular logic, it's human nature.  People who are dead set against losing their freedom will often resort to any and all means at their disposal to maintain said freedom, including the forbidden. 

And weather mages want to go is irrelevant. They have to.
Guess what - poepelo dtn' want to go to jail or quarantene either. And there's always selfish spricks among them who make a fuss and try to escape.
Deos that mean the prison/quarantene system doesn't work and should be abolished? No.

Those system aren't made to make those contained by them happy. That was never the point. And that will never be possible.

What's circular is putting mages into Circles on the grounds that they're dangerous, and claiming that their desperate attempts to free themselves from Circles proves the necessity of the Circle in the first place.  You can't make any claims about what mages will do in an environment where they are free and not oppressed when your evidence is based on how they behave when they are imprisoned.  And no, Tevinter is not a counter-point to this, because it is ONE example with a specific set of cultural conditions that are not true in the rest of Thedas. 

No circular logic. Mages are dangeros. Mages outside of cricle lead to more death and destruction.
Mages are resopnsible for some of the biggest cataclysims in history. FACT.
Mages roaming around resulted in many more deaths and destruction of entire villages or towns. FACT.
Mages cannot be fully trusted, because they can turn against their own will. No matter how nice a mage is. FACT.


You can dance around the isse, shift goalposts, nitpick and debate side-issues (that really don't affect the problem in a meaningfull way) all day long - it's poinltess.

The Circels are 100000000% justified.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 11 mai 2012 - 08:22 .

[Sacred_Fantasy]

@ GavrielKay, Your points are messing up, it's hard to understand. It seem you didn't arrange your points in chronology order. But I'll try to answer it case by case.

GavrielKay wrote...
The establishment of the circle is detailed in a codex I've posted in this thread.  It was not created to stop rampaging mages.  It was not created because blood magic was out of control.

Yes it was.  Refer to my last answer.

GavrielKay wrote...
 
It was not created immediately after Andraste and her army broke the Tevinter empire.

True.  The Circle of Magi was created 190 years after Andraste died, 

GavrielKay wrote...
 

In the game world time frame that we play in, the Chantry now enforces this bargain and claims it is necessary, but it was a bargain.  It was not necessary for the protection of the people, only a negotiated deal to allow mages to practice more magic but not around normal people.

This is where I get lost. The term and condition for the Circle of Magi were already drafted and agreed upon the establishment of the Circle of Magin in 1:1 Divine. That was hundred of years ago before the Warden timeframe. So where do you get that idea?

.
 

GavrielKay wrote...
  
Silfren mentioned the Nevarran Accord in one post...  I think that's probably how things turned bad for the mages who'd just agreed to live in seclusion...  suddenly that seclusion was overseen by former Inquisitors, now joined forces with the Chantry to watch the mages and make the circles official and mandatory.

1:1 Divine (1st year of the 1st Divine Age): The first Divine of the Chantry, Justinia I, is instated at Val Royeaux. The free use of magic is declared illegal in Orlais except by those mages operating under the direct auspices of the Chantry.
...
1:20 Divine: The Nevarran Accord is signed: the Seekers of Truth agree to serve the Chantry. The Circle of Magi is then born from this agreement.

True and False. There was no Circle of Magi prior to 1:20 Divine. The use of magic was outlawed in 1:1 Divine. except to lighting the candles and lamps in every chantry..The mages agreed to live in seclusion under the watchful eye of the Templars and a council of their own elder magi when they signed Nevarran Accord. This is the compromisation

The mages went cheerily into exile in a remote fortress outside of the capital, where they would be kept under the watchful eye of the Templars and a council of their own elder magi. Outside of normal society, and outside of the Chantry, the mages would form their own closed society, the Circle, separated for the first time in human history.

Refer to Codex Entry: History of the Circle..
 

GavrielKay wrote...
  
Surely a Chantry scholar would write that it was a result of something awful if that were the case.

Yes there was something awful happen that lead to the Nevarran Accord and the creation of the Circle of Magi. 

Divine Ambrosia II, who was outraged and attempted to order an Exalted March upon her own cathedral. Even her most devout Templars discouraged that idea. For 21 days, the fires remained unlit while negotiations were conducted, legend tells us, by shouting back and forth from the loft.

But I think it's more than just shouting back and forth.. I think Divine Ambrosia II  knew  her templars could not overcome the mages who turn into abomination during those 21 days of negotiation. 

Abominations have been responsible for some of the worst cataclysms in history, and the notion that some mage in a remote tower could turn into such a creature unbeknownst to any was the driving force behind the creation of the Circle of Magi.

Refer to codex entry: Abomination

PS. I hate Chantry's Lore. 

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 11 mai 2012 - 12:00 .

[Sacred_Fantasy]

GavrielKay wrote...

Nevertheless the demon didn't leave Connor peacefully.

True enough.  But it didn't destroy him either.

The demon didn't take over Connor's body .She merely controlled him from the Fade. She need to sustain  Eamon's life in the fade's remember? It's part of her bargain with Connor. PLUS it's Connor who summon her.

GavrielKay wrote...

Only if the demon manage to escape the viel. And that's very rare.

There were zillions of possessed corpses, trees and even a few suits of armor in the game.  Plus demons just plain attacking us.

And still it required the demon to enter human's world first which was either possessioning an individual or summoning. As long as the viel is not torn, the demon cannot possess zillions of corpses, tree and even a few suit of armor. So don't be ridiculous. 

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 11 mai 2012 - 12:36 .

[Urzon]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

And still it required the demon to enter human's world first which was either possessioning an individual or summoning. As long as the viel is not torn, the demon cannot possess zillions of corpses, tree and even a few suit of armor. So don't be ridiculous. 

I'd hate to be ridiculous, but i'm about to burst your bubble.

Taken from the Wild Sylvan codex...

For demons crossing over into our world, mankind is not always the preferred prey. Possessing humans means risking encounters with powerful mages and templars, as well as other complications. Some demons find it far easier to seek out animals or even plants, assuming that these will make as suitable a host as a human. Those that possess trees are known as wild sylvans.

And taken from the Corpse codex...


The walking dead are not, as superstition would lead you to believe, the living come back for revenge. They are, rather, corpses possessed by demons.
The shambling corpse, controlled by a demon of sloth, causes its enemies to become weak and fatigued. Corpses possessed by rage demons go berserk and simply wade into their opponents mindlessly. Devouring corpses are held by hunger demons and feed upon the living. The more powerful demons rarely deign to possess a dead host.

Demons don't need a mage or a tear in the Veil to cross over. All a demon needs to cross over is the Veil to be thin. This usually occurs where great battles have taken place.

Modifié par Urzon, 11 mai 2012 - 12:57 .

[Sacred_Fantasy]

Urzon wrote...

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

And still it required the demon to enter human's world first which was either possessioning an individual or summoning. As long as the viel is not torn, the demon cannot possess zillions of corpses, tree and even a few suit of armor. So don't be ridiculous. 

I'd hate to be ridiculous, but i'm about to burst your bubble.

You are missing the point. I said,  "And still it required the demon to enter human's world first ,"

 

Urzon wrote...

Taken from the Wild Sylvan codex...

For demons crossing over into our world, mankind is not always the preferred prey. Possessing humans means risking encounters with powerful mages and templars, as well as other complications. Some demons find it far easier to seek out animals or even plants, assuming that these will make as suitable a host as a human. Those that possess trees are known as wild sylvans.

I underline the italic word because that is my point. It need to enter our world first.

Urzon wrote...


And taken from the Corpse codex...


The walking dead are not, as superstition would lead you to believe, the living come back for revenge. They are, rather, corpses possessed by demons.
The shambling corpse, controlled by a demon of sloth, causes its enemies to become weak and fatigued. Corpses possessed by rage demons go berserk and simply wade into their opponents mindlessly. Devouring corpses are held by hunger demons and feed upon the living. The more powerful demons rarely deign to possess a dead host.

Demons don't need a mage or a tear in the Veil to cross over.

I said, "an individual".  Not mage.

Urzon wrote...

All a demon needs to cross over is the Veil to be thin. This usually occurs where great battles have taken place.

You mean like Sundermount?
Strange, it's only limited in Sundermount and not spread out to Kirkwall and all over the globe. Am I missing something here?

Edit:
I suggest you better check your fact. Brecilian Forest is one of the place where the viel was torn. Your Leliana's account is unreliable. She only heard from rumors.
And Sundermount has it own reason why there's possessed corpses.

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 11 mai 2012 - 02:21 .

[DKJaigen]

Mages are resopnsible for some of the biggest cataclysims in history. FACT.

Why dont you list them. Or are you ready to accept that the this is mere propaganda of the chantry.

[GavrielKay]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
This is where I get lost. The term and condition for the Circle of Magi were already drafted and agreed upon the establishment of the Circle of Magin in 1:1 Divine. That was hundred of years ago before the Warden timeframe. So where do you get that idea?

I get that idea from the codex which provides the timeline.  The Nevarran accord and deal with the mages happened in 1:20 Divine.  Not 1:1 Divine.  In 1:1 Divine, magic was forbidden except at the will of the Chantry but the mages were not locked away in towers.  They were stationed in various Chantries to do the bidding of the Chantry.  I posted the excerpt which states this.  Where did you find anything that said it happened in 1:1 Divine?

But I think it's more than just shouting back and forth.. I think Divine Ambrosia II  knew  her templars could not overcome the mages who turn into abomination during those 21 days of negotiation.

In a case where there is an actual codex by a Chantry Sister, I'm afraid your opinion isn't persuasive.  It would hardly be the first time that a ruler pitched a fit and tried something drastic.  And I wouldn't expect the Templars to talk her out of it if there really were something more.

Abominations have been responsible for some of the worst cataclysms in history, and the notion that some mage in a remote tower could turn into such a creature unbeknownst to any was the driving force behind the creation of the Circle of Magi.

Refer to codex entry: Abomination

That may have been part of the Chantry's motivation in forbidding all magic or expending their own energy to support the mages in circles, but the other codex makes it clear how and under what conditiions it happened.

[GavrielKay]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Mages are locked up because it is necessary. The Chantry didn't create that necessity. The mages were always dangerous and feared.

Except for all the cultures where it isn't and they aren't.

[GavrielKay]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
And still it required the demon to enter human's world first which was either possessioning an individual or summoning. As long as the viel is not torn, the demon cannot possess zillions of corpses, tree and even a few suit of armor. So don't be ridiculous.

Any time you want to stop calling people ridiculous would be lovely.  It's a debate, use game play and lore to make your point, not personal insults.

You said it was rare.  I pointed out many many instances of it in gameplay between Origins and DA2.  So, whatever you think it takes to create a possessed *anything* it obviously happens often enough.

[Sacred_Fantasy]

GavrielKay wrote...

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
This is where I get lost. The term and condition for the Circle of Magi were already drafted and agreed upon the establishment of the Circle of Magin in 1:1 Divine. That was hundred of years ago before the Warden timeframe. So where do you get that idea?

 
 I get that idea from the codex which provides the timeline.  The Nevarran accord and deal with the mages happened in 1:20 Divine.  Not 1:1 Divine.  In 1:1 Divine, magic was forbidden except at the will of the Chantry but the mages were not locked away in towers.  They were stationed in various Chantries to do the bidding of the Chantry.  I posted the excerpt which states this.  Where did you find anything that said it happened in 1:1 Divine?

 1:20 Divine is correct. I make careless mistake. This the first time I use Thedas's date. It's weird format date..
They're were lockup after Nevarran Accord as part of agreement to allow them use magiic.

GavrielKay wrote... 

Abominations have been responsible for some of the worst cataclysms in history, and the notion that some mage in a remote tower could turn into such a creature unbeknownst to any was the driving force behind the creation of the Circle of Magi.

Refer to codex entry: Abomination

That may have been part of the Chantry's motivation in forbidding all magic or expending their own energy to support the mages in circles, but the other codex makes it clear how and under what conditiions it happened.

Chantry motivation? This is one thing I don't understand.  It's a creature codex entry using a templar's transcription.  There is no one else who wrote it other than Bioware's writer. I take it as part of game lore. Are you suggesting it's BioWare's motivation in forbidding all magic?  Because that makes no sense. 

The other codex is taken from a history book authored by Sister Petrine, the chantry scholar  So it make sense if you suspcisious of the writer's motivation.

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 11 mai 2012 - 05:24 .

[Sacred_Fantasy]

GavrielKay wrote...

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
And still it required the demon to enter human's world first which was either possessioning an individual or summoning. As long as the viel is not torn, the demon cannot possess zillions of corpses, tree and even a few suit of armor. So don't be ridiculous.

Any time you want to stop calling people ridiculous would be lovely.  It's a debate, use game play and lore to make your point, not personal insults.

You said it was rare.  I pointed out many many instances of it in gameplay between Origins and DA2.  So, whatever you think it takes to create a possessed *anything* it obviously happens often enough.

Is that what you define as "happens often enough?" 

What you see happen at rare location under rare conditions. What hapened at Redcliff was caused by Connor through a demon who control him. The Brecilian Forest was where the Veil was torn. The Sundermount was where both Elves and Tervinters unleashed horrible power that cause their spirits to fight for eternity.

You won't see anything like than happen in Loitering, Orzammar or Denerim or most other places.  Just because Sundermound is a massive battlefield in ancient time, doesn't mean every place also the same. Kirkwall has some dark history if I'm not  mistaken.   I couldn't immerse myself with DA2's story. Therefore,  I can't remember much.

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 11 mai 2012 - 05:20 .

[Reznore57]

Yeah Kirkwall veil has been put thru a lot...
Used to be a time where sewers were filled with slave blood .
Kirkwall is kinda of a hell mouth , having a circle there was like putting explosive upon a flame.
Now the thing is there have been a lot of slaughtering place in Thedas , from the Blight , exalted marches , qunari war etc...
Now i haven't read much about possession of non mage , so i won't comment about it .
Possession , for me , still ain't a clear thing .There's so much we have no clue about ...

[GavrielKay]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
The other codex is taken from a history book authored by Sister Petrine, the chantry scholar  So it make sense if you suspcisious of the writer's motivation.

One is a Templar account, the other from a Chantry scholar.  I believe we've been told by the devs that the codex is the opinion of the author, so sometmes the author can be mistaken.  Anyway, I would be suspicious of both sources, but in the case of Petrine's account, I would think if she were to skew it, it would be in favor of the Chantry.  Thus, I would expect her to include any wrong doing by the mages that had led directly to the stand-off or resulted from it.  If one of more of those mages had turned into abominations and threatened the Templars I would expect a Chantry sister to say so.  As she doesn't, I take it as written.