GavrielKay wrote...
JSlither wrote...
The mundanes cannot win. The only solution is to work with the mages to the betterment of all. Opposing them is self destructive. Being unable to lock them up makes this conclusion even more obvious.
The mundanes could only win if they really organized and trained for it. A bunch of farmers with pitchforks is not going to do it.
On the other hand, why would they? I still believe that gameplay supports my claim that mages aren't really as much "exploding kittens" as the Chantry wants folks to believe. We've got cultures that don't restrict their mages nearly as much. We've got Tevinter where mages rule. We've got the fact that even the Chantry took a hundred years to come around to the idea of segregating the mages. None of those situations has lead to civilization wrecking problems.
I know we see a lot of mages turn into abominations in DA2, but they appear to do so "willingly" as a last ditch go-out-with-a-bang strategy. We do not see mages calmly walking to the local robe merchant and suddenly going "RAWR, kill them all!!!" It apparently is a rare occurrence that mages will just poof! get possessed. If it is a decision to give up one's person to a demon, then everyone would be safer if mages had less reason to do so.
Which means that treating them better, integrating them into society and generally raising them to be well adjusted and resposible adults ought to work. People who have felt the joys of family, friends and community have a lot more reason to try to preserve them.
People who've been raised as caged monsters - never trusted or loved - have less motive to care about the masses.
This. Always this. Even without Rivaini and the Chasind tribes and Tevinter, you've got the fact of the Mages Collective, and random individuals like Wilhelm's son (and possibly granddaughter) Morrigan and Flemeth (who DO stand as an example I say, because they haven't reduced the Korcari Wilds to a smoking ruin), and mages among the wandering Dalish, and Malcolm Hawke and one or two of his children...there are free individual mages all over the place, and there always will be, because there will always be persons who prefer tangible freedom over perceived security, who will maintain that freedom at any cost.
People talk about mages like Wynne or the Mage Warden, who "prove" their ability to be trustworthy, but we're supposed to believe that the danger is more potent and ever-present than whether mages are of the proper moral alignment to be trusted not to muck with people's free will, etc. We're supposed to accept that the risk of demonic possession, or flat-out loss of control, is always there, and always very, very high, no matter the intent of the mage. If that were actually true, then it would not make sense for the Chantry to allow for certain mages to be given dispensation, because that risk wouldn't diminish just because your family has a few thousand sovereigns to bribe Chantry coffers with, or because you gained renown by helping the Hero of Ferelden slaughter the archdemon. Also, if it were true, than we'd be seeing and hearing more accounts of chaos created by all those freely wandering mages.
So...either the danger just ain't that great, or the Chantry is more interested in maintaining its powerbase...and doesn't at all mind putting the general populace at risk of demons wreaking havoc if a mage has money enough to keep the templars away.
Retour en haut
