629 réponses à ce sujet

[GavrielKay]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
How do you know none of this was already attempted?
How do you know it is even possible to "modify" the right of tranquility.
You simply assume the Chantry and everyone else never tried anything else.

I assume that because there is no evidence of anything else.  I would expect at least one person to try to defend the Chantry abuses by saying that they tried everything else and none of it worked.  I don't have to know any of it is possible to start a thread about ideas.

And no, there are not a zillion options because it's a fantasy wrold. Even a fantasy world has rules and constraints.

Well, if we have the Litany of Adralla, dweomre runes, glyphs of neutralization, mana clash, the Rite of Tranquility etc it does seem that there are other possibilities.  If you prefer to believe that it all would have been tried, then I respect that as an opinion.  However I don't see evidence of it.

No, Connor was in position to do harm because he was a mage. Are you saiyng that he wouldnt' have made a deal with a demon if there were no Chantry? Don't be redicolous.

I'm saying his mother might have sent him to proper training and not brought a traitor into their home as a secret tutor had she not been ashamed and afraid of her son being a mage.  The events at Redcliife were a perfect storm of misdeeds.  If Jowan hadn't been a weakling, Loghain not paranoid, Isolde not humiliated and Connor not born a mage, none of it would have happened.  But, of all of it, Connor was the only one with any excuse.  He coudnl't help how he was born, or that his mother was an idiot or that a traitor would try to poison his dad or that lack of training made him unable to resist a demon.  And yet, he's the one you blame.

And no, Tevinter is not operating fine, unless you consider rampat slavery, sacrifices and opression fine.

No one said it was a good place to be.  But it is operating as they intend it to.  It has not been wiped out by abominations.  I think you are purposely missing a point that's been said at least a dozen times.  No one thinks Tevinter is a great place.  No one thinks it is a haven of goodness and light.  But, given the blood magic practised there, if the Chantry claims that blood magic leads inevitably to demon possession were true, then Tevinter would have to be a bloody wasteland by now.  As it isn't, then the Chantry must be wrong.

Modifié par GavrielKay, 08 mai 2012 - 06:04 .

[GavrielKay]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
Every common NPCs believes that "magic should serve man, not rule over him." This is what the Chantry teaches them. hence the Circle was establised.

Actually there is a codex on why the circle was established and it isn't that line.

Also, that statement can be interpreted many ways.  And by itself says nothing about how mages are unfit to live in society and must be locked away.  I could just as easily interpret it to mean that mages should be scattered across Thedas running healing clinics and clearing fields for planting and defending against raiders.  Locked up in a tower, their magic isn't much service to anyone.

I have try to point out that people in Thedas don't think like you do. Their have different way of viewing their society.

You mostly have been saying the characters can't be right because in the Middle Ages people didn't act that way.  This is not a persuasive argument when talking about a fantasy game.

[Sacred_Fantasy]

[quote]GavrielKay wrote...

[quote]Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
The nobles don't hate the Orlesian as much as you think it is.[/quote]

None of that matters to the basic claim that people in Thedas understand the concepts of freedom and oppression.  Only in Tevinter is slavery legal and it is rejected by other nations.  At the Landsmeet the other notbles are surprised and unhappy that Loghain has been selling elves to pay for his efforts.  You simply cannot decide that the characters in this game have the same knowledge and morality as the Earth's Middle Ages.  It isn't true and doesn't need to be true.  Where the writers leave gaps in the story we can try to fill in with what we think people would be like in that setting, but where the writers provide us actual dialogue and lore, it must be taken as true whether it reflects real history or not.[/quote]
How do you suggest to fill such gap when inconsistencyy arise? 

[quote]GavrielKay wrote...

[quote]It never said anything about  Aequitarians felt oppresed by Chantry Law.  They are just moderate mages who couldn't care less about the Chantry Law.[/quote]

It sounded as though you were trying to make a point that they didn't feel oppressed.  There is a big difference in thinking that you have an obligation to do good no matter what and wanting a group of religious zealots watching your every move.[/quote]
I made it sound the way it sound. There is no indication that the Aequitarian felt they're oppressed or otherwise. You try to sugget there is. 
 

[quote]GavrielKay wrote...


[quote]None of mages convinced me that they are truly capable to resist blood magic temptation and demon possesion.[/quote]

Which is lovely given you met only a handfull out of hundreds and most of them only when they were being cut down arbitrarily by a crazy woman and her goons.[/quote]
Without ingame evidence,  you are just speculating. The game tells what it need to tell. And that is what I based on.

[quote]GavrielKay wrote...



[quote]There is one scenario where I came across group of Templars abusing a mage girl only to find out this mage turn into abomination. If the mages don't help themselves then who else can help them?. Forbidden art is forbidden. No amount of excuse could make it right. Abomination doesn't has any reasoning. They just attack you.[/quote]

You see this scene and your take home lesson from it is that mages are bad?  Not that Templars have been given so much authority over mages for so long that they now have a hard time resisting the urge to rape and abuse mages.  And then when the mages decide to take in a demon and go out with a roar instead of a whimper, you want to fault the mage?[/quote]
Both parties are to be blamed. But you are taking my quote out of context. I was referring to mage incapability to resist blood magic's temptation which you acknowlodge.  

[quote]GavrielKay wrote...




[quote]One question to you. Why do religion exist in the first place? Why do so many people embrace faith blindly in dark age?  What happen if there is no christianity or any religion at all? What would happen to Earth back then and now?[/quote]

Those questions are both off topic and irrelevant.[/quote]
You ask earlier what IF the Chantry doesn't functional as decision maker. So I asked you back what if the Chantry doesn't exist and it's consequences to the populace. Perhaps I didn't make it clear as I was using real life comparison. I believe you can't answer it without refering to  real life events because the chantry is fantasy. You can't make any sense with fantasy without refering to real world events. If you don't feel it's relevant, then I'm fine with it..


[quote]GavrielKay wrote..

[quote]That why Kirkwall's sitution is nonsense to me.[/quote]

And finally we agree on something.  You have to wonder why Hawke or anyone else would stay in that crazy place.

[/quote]
I don't. My Hawke doesn't exist. My Hawke would leave Kirkwall after the expedition. But it's BioWare's Hawke so I leave that reasoning to BioWare.

[Sacred_Fantasy]

GavrielKay wrote...

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
Every common NPCs believes that "magic should serve man, not rule over him." This is what the Chantry teaches them. hence the Circle was establised.

Actually there is a codex on why the circle was established and it isn't that line.

Also, that statement can be interpreted many ways.  And by itself says nothing about how mages are unfit to live in society and must be locked away.  I could just as easily interpret it to mean that mages should be scattered across Thedas running healing clinics and clearing fields for planting and defending against raiders.  Locked up in a tower, their magic isn't much service to anyone.

Sure, You can do anything you like as long as you don't kill your patient and the person you protect by turning into abomination.  It still doesn't change how the Chantry, The Circle and The Templar work.

GavrielKay wrote...

I have try to point out that people in Thedas don't think like you do. Their have different way of viewing their society.

You mostly have been saying the characters can't be right because in the Middle Ages people didn't act that way.  This is not a persuasive argument when talking about a fantasy game.

It setup a rule and it breaks it because of some characters. So yes I maintain the characters can't be right. I'm not the one who create the world that condemn mages out of their freedom. In fact I think it's a big mistake. But the game do that. And now the writers come up with character that  disagree with what define the rule just because it's fantasy. 

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 08 mai 2012 - 05:38 .

[GavrielKay]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
How do you suggest to fill such gap when inconsistencyy arise?

Depends on what you mean by inconsistency.  The game always wins where something is actually said or done.  Where there's nothing, then we have to fill in with what each of us thinks would happen.  However the framework of the game is the fantasy world of Thedas, not the Middle Ages of Earth.

Both parties are to be blamed. But you are taking my quote out of context. I was referring to mage incapability to resist blood magic's temptation which you acknowlodge.

I have no problem with a mage resorting to blood magic or any other resistance available to them when they are being attacked and molested.  If the Templars don't want to be attacked by blood magic, they are welcome to treat mages with respect and dignity.

You ask earlier what IF the Chantry doesn't functional as decision maker.

Actually I only asked what if the Chantry couldn't lock up the mages.  If you assume the only power the Chantry could possibly have is imprisonment, then i guess that's one viewpoint.  

I never said they couldn't try to teach mages to be good members of society.  Or to offer circles as voluntary places or learning and safety.  I never said the Chantry shouldn't continue to spread their ideals and influence the mages.  I only asked if players think that other solutions might have been invented had they been necessary.  Do you think that the Chantry's easy expedient of the circle system short circuited other possible solutions.

I'm a bit at a loss honesly that some posters simply believe mages would have to die.  Why not say instead "mages might have to die" if a, b, or c can't happen.  I could understand "we'd have to kill the mages if we can't strengthen dweomer runes to protect villages" but to just flat out say there can't be a solution, mages must submit or die is baffling to me.

I don't. My Hawke doesn't exist. My Hawke would leave Kirkwall after the expedition. But it's BioWare's Hawke so I leave that reasoning to BioWare.

That's pretty much how I felt.  Except, my Hawke would have gotten back on the boat once she figured out the Templars were running the show.

[GavrielKay]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
It setup a rule and it breaks it because of some characters. So yes I maintain the characters can't be right. I'm not the one who create the world that condemn mages out of their freedom. In fact I think it's a big mistake. But the game do that. And now the writers come up with character that  disagree with what define the rule just because it's fantasy. 

But they never set up a rule that Thedas was the Middle Ages.  It is a construct out of their imagination which draws some ideas from Earth history but doesn't follow it or recreate it.  The characters can have whatever thoughts, motives and beliefs the writers feel like giving them.

[Ryzaki]

GavrielKay wrote...

This is a hypothetical question I'd like to pose:  Imagine that it simply were not possible to imprison mages in Circles.  What if they could teleport or walk through walls or become undetectable such that they could easily sneak out from under a guard's nose?

If mages could not be forcibly gathered up and held by the Chantry and Templars what do you think would happen?  Do you think they would be killed or that society would find a way to co-exist with them?  Or something else entirely?

Mass slaughter, maybe a seperation into a mage country and non-mage country, wars and the like before everyone eventually settled down.

If mages attempted to make non-mages slave though...it would get ugly (can't exactly do the reverse).

If they can't be imprisoned I doubt most of them would allow themselves to be tranquiled. The best case scenario would be the two groups living seperately. The worse one side would nearly wipe the other out and it'd go around in a cycle.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 08 mai 2012 - 06:03 .

[Sacred_Fantasy]

GavrielKay wrote...

I have no problem with a mage resorting to blood magic or any other resistance available to them when they are being attacked and molested.  If the Templars don't want to be attacked by blood magic, they are welcome to treat mages with respect and dignity.

The mage attack me when I tried to help her. Orsino attack me when I'm his only ally . I have a serious problem with that, It's not just about the Templar. It's about sanity. 
 

GavrielKay wrote.. 

You ask earlier what IF the Chantry doesn't functional as decision maker.

Actually I only asked what if the Chantry couldn't lock up the mages.  If you assume the only power the Chantry could possibly have is imprisonment, then i guess that's one viewpoint.  

I never said they couldn't try to teach mages to be good members of society.  Or to offer circles as voluntary places or learning and safety.  I never said the Chantry shouldn't continue to spread their ideals and influence the mages.  I only asked if players think that other solutions might have been invented had they been necessary.  Do you think that the Chantry's easy expedient of the circle system short circuited other possible solutions.

TBH, I'm not sure about it. I do play as mage sometime but my favorite character is neutral lawful knight/warrior. As neutral character I rarely question the Chantry's motive and I do believe the Circle or individual mages conduct some ongoing expriement like you mentioned earlier, the Lithany. Whether the nature of such conduct conflict with the Chantry's interest is unknown to me. Anyway, if you felt the chantry doesn't react accordingly, you could always find the answers through neutral organization such as the warden. Avernus is an expert on this. As well as the Tervinter. Sadly we don't know much about the Tervinter. I believe they have some major breakthroughs which could help the mages but are not willing to share due to their past history with the chantry and the countries under chantry's domain.  First Enchanter Irving could easily send someone like Wynne or Finn on behalf of the mages to find out. Hmm.... this remind me of Finn. Isn't the templar allow Finn to leave the Circle to do some research outside the Circle in Witch Hunt?. 

[Sacred_Fantasy]

GavrielKay wrote...

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
It setup a rule and it breaks it because of some characters. So yes I maintain the characters can't be right. I'm not the one who create the world that condemn mages out of their freedom. In fact I think it's a big mistake. But the game do that. And now the writers come up with character that  disagree with what define the rule just because it's fantasy. 

But they never set up a rule that Thedas was the Middle Ages.  It is a construct out of their imagination which draws some ideas from Earth history but doesn't follow it or recreate it.  The characters can have whatever thoughts, motives and beliefs the writers feel like giving them.

And I use my imagination base on this construct to rationalize the action of mass people of Thedas since the writers focus only the characters tied to the narrative. The nature of BioWare story-driven RPG however it focus too much on plot yet it leaves too much vague information on the world itself. And this where we usually argue. I have a lot of question marks regarding the world and never get answered even after 2 Dragon Age series. One of the question is the society itself. Anyway, let's not derail too much on this matter. 

[Lotion Soronarr]

GavrielKay wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
How do you know none of this was already attempted?
How do you know it is even possible to "modify" the right of tranquility.
You simply assume the Chantry and everyone else never tried anything else.

I assume that because there is no evidence of anything else.  I would expect at least one person to try to defend the Chantry abuses by saying that they tried everything else and none of it worked.  I don't have to know any of it is possible to start a thread about ideas.

At least you admit it's a UNSUBSTANTIATED assumption, and therefore, it's not a valid accusation agaisnt the system or the Chantry.

Well, if we have the Litany of Adralla, dweomre runes, glyphs of neutralization, mana clash, the Rite of Tranquility etc it does seem that there are other possibilities.  If you prefer to believe that it all would have been tried, then I respect that as an opinion.  However I don't see evidence of it.

No. Again. You keep thinking magic = everthing is possible. This is not true.

And how the hell does mana clash help?
Also, the right of Tranquility IS used. Obviously someone came up with it at some point. So if anything, that proves someone looked for another option other than "kill the mage". Otehrwise it would not exist.

I'm saying his mother might have sent him to proper training and not brought a traitor into their home as a secret tutor had she not been ashamed and afraid of her son being a mage.

And you still assume that he wouldn't have made a deal with a demon. "Proper training" does not make you demon-proof. 

The events at Redcliife were a perfect storm of misdeeds.  If Jowan hadn't been a weakling, Loghain not paranoid, Isolde not humiliated and Connor not born a mage, none of it would have happened.  But, of all of it, Connor was the only one with any excuse.  He coudnl't help how he was born, or that his mother was an idiot or that a traitor would try to poison his dad or that lack of training made him unable to resist a demon.  And yet, he's the one you blame.

Excuses are irrelevant. At the end of the day, no matter what precaution or changes you make, Connor could have been just as easily possesed.
"Guilt" is irrelevant.
I don't have to think a deseased man guility of anything shoot him. Is it his fault he is deseased? No. That doesn't change the fact he is dangerous.
Yet if he came close to your family, you'd shoot him.

As long as there is a mage, and he is in public, he is a danger to everyoen around him. Period. This is a fact.

No one said it was a good place to be.  But it is operating as they intend it to.  It has not been wiped out by abominations. I think you are purposely missing a point that's been said at least a dozen times.

And hurricanes, tornados, floods, landslides and tsunamis haven't wiped out a country yet. "Just" killed thousands and caused untold damage.

It is you who are missing the point. The kingdom doesn't have to fall for thousands of innocents to die.
The Chantry isn't wrong.

[GavrielKay]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
No. Again. You keep thinking magic = everthing is possible. This is not true.

Not everything possible, but a lot more than "submit or die" is possible.  The point was to speculate using actual game lore as a basis. 

And how the hell does mana clash help?

It counts as a way that mana can be manipulated.  As a bit of knowledge of how to turn mana against a mage.  As a starting point for further research into how to control magic rather than stamp it out.

Also, the right of Tranquility IS used. Obviously someone came up with it at some point. So if anything, that proves someone looked for another option other than "kill the mage". Otehrwise it would not exist.

Yep, and did they keep trying to make it less drastic once they figured it out?  We'll never know unless the writers say something, but my point was that if there is a way to alter the mages' link to the fade, then perhaps there are variations on the severity of that alteration.

And you still assume that he wouldn't have made a deal with a demon. "Proper training" does not make you demon-proof.

I make only the assumption that he was the least guilty of those involved.  The one least in control of the circumstances.  My assumption is that the situation could have been made better in several ways, only one of which was locking Connor up for life.

I don't have to think a deseased man guility of anything shoot him. Is it his fault he is deseased? No. That doesn't change the fact he is dangerous.
Yet if he came close to your family, you'd shoot him.

That's a very bad assumption.  I'd get inside, lock the doors and call the authorities.  Why on Earth would you assume I'd go for the most violent and final option?

As long as there is a mage, and he is in public, he is a danger to everyoen around him. Period. This is a fact.

That's no more true than it would be about any random person.  Anyone can snap or be a hidden threat.

It is you who are missing the point. The kingdom doesn't have to fall for thousands of innocents to die.
The Chantry isn't wrong.

The Chantry is wrong that all mages drunk on power and blood magic will turn to demons and wind up destroying everything.  Because Tevinter is that, and isn't destroyed.

[Silfren]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

I don't read The Stolen Throne. It's not in the game. 
The nobles don't hate the Orlesian as much as you think it is. Loghain and Rendon Howe just used anti-Orlesian as their propaganda to draw support. You cannot trust anything come out from Rendon Howe. He wanted power for himself. Not freedom for his people. See how he twisted the story behind his murder of Cousland family? He used the Orlesian as the excuse. Loghain has his own agenda but I doubt it's about people freedom.  Common people just follow their leaders whether their leaders are right or wrong. 
 

The canon set up by The Stolen Throne is part of the overall canon lore of Dragon Age:Origins whether you accept it as such or not.  Even were that not the case,  It is well-documented within the game of Origins that the common people did indeed hate Orlais and the Orlesian people, so even if you're going to go by the game and exclude the books, you still  cannot dismiss generalized Ferelden resentment toward Orlais just because it doesn't suit you.  It is mentioned in several codices, and there are references to it from various NPCs--and not just Loghain and Howe.  

General widespread resentment of and distrust of Orlais on the part of most Ferelden folk is part of the narrative.  The common people didn't rally behind Maric merely because they thought he was the better ruler, but because he was their RIGHTFUL ruler.  Orlais invaded Ferelden and conquered it by force.  Even had Meghren not been a hateful, incompetent ruler, that doesn't change the fact that the people of Ferelden didn't want to be part of the Orlesian Empire and rebelled against their foreign masters from the beginning.

[Silfren]

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]Silfren wrote...

That said, speaking as someone who actually does work in the mental health industry, in a western nation, the mentally ill DO have rights, those rights ARE legally recognized, and in most cases ARE legally upheld.  It is NOT legal to simply declare someone dangerously insane and throw them behind bars.  Not only do you have to legally prove that someone is unstable, you also have to prove whether they are so unstable as to be dangerous around other people, and to what extent.  There are other options available besides merely locking them away and throwing away the key, and those options are legally required to be explored.[/quote]

In case of mages, ti's an open and shut case.[/quote]

Because you say so?  Naw, but it ain't.  However certain you may be, we have evidence that directly contradicts it.  It is not a foregone conclusion that mages are inherently dangerous to such an extent that the Circle system in its present incarnation is the only possible method to contain the alleged problem.


[quote]
You appear to be suggesting that we can simply point to someone, declare them dangerous, and on that basis have them thrown in a prison cell for life, and that ain't so.
[/quote]

Actually, we can..depending on which country you're in.[/quote]

I did clearly state that I was speaking from the point of view of ONE western nation.  The U.S., to be specific, and I'd wager that a majority of the people who play DA2 can say the same.  You cannot categorically say that we can do this, because it is demonstrably false.  Quite a few nations have laws in place to protect the rights of the clinically insane, and enforce them reliably.  They DO have rights, which in some cases are assumed to be self-evident because these people are human beings, NOT because "we" so magnanimously handed "them" rights (see my previous statement about the question of whether rights are granted or assumed being largely a case of semantics, however, before we get into an argument on this trivial front).



[quote]

How do you know none of this was already attempted?
How do you know it is even possible to "modify" the right of tranquility.
You simply assume the Chantry and everyone else never tried anything else.
[/quote]

Firstly, we DO have lore from various characters directly stating that the Chantry outright forbids research into certain areas, regardless of any potential benefit, so that alone carries implication aplenty that there have been few attempts, and any there have been have been conducted outside the purview of the (white) Chantry.  Though granted it is not absolutely conclusive, it is still not unreasonable to assume from the existing lore that these methods have not been attempted.  No one in any DA title has EVER suggested that other methods have been explored only to end in categorical failure.  If this were the case, templars like Cullen and Meredith would be VERY quick to point it out, because it would only lend credence to their position that the current system of imprisoning mages is the only known viable method.  

Spoiler:  Asunder tells us that, at long last, we have a Divine in place who is actually interested in progressive reform and was seeking a means of modifying the Tranquility Rite.  That would strongly suggest that it has never been done before, for whatever reason, given the revelation that comes from it.  But prior to that, the lore we have indicates that any research conducted must be done in secret, and that right there would go a long way toward crippling the extent of what can be explored.  

[quote]
No, Connor was in position to do harm because he was a mage. Are you saiyng that he wouldnt' have made a deal with a demon if there were no Chantry? Don't be redicolous.[/quote]

It is not ridiculous.  Redcliffe happened because Isolde was afraid of losing her son, and because the thought of his being a mage humiliated and shamed her.  Were it a tradition to send a mage child to the Circle for training WITHOUT the added effect of his not being able to come home again, ever, and his effectively being stripped of his rights as the heir to the Redcliffe arling, it is very likely things would have been different.  Trying to pretend that Isolde's sheer terror over losing her son to the Circle forever had no role in what took place...that is what's ridiculous.  

[quote]And no, Tevinter is not operating fine, unless you consider rampat slavery, sacrifices and opression fine.[/quote]

Yes, Tevinter actually is operating just fine.  I specifically referred to its being a viable civilization with an operating structure.  I don't think slavery, blood sacrifice, and such, are fine.  But they are completely separate issues from the question of whether Tevinter is able to operate as a functioning, stable society.  Tevinter clearly is not overrun with abominations.  It clearly is able to deal with an extraordinarily thin Veil.  We do not have demons or abominations raining down onto the rest of Thedas from the Imperium.  

[Silfren]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
There is one scenario where I came across group of Templars abusing a mage girl only to find out this mage turn into abomination. If the mages don't help themselves then who else can help them?. Forbidden art is forbidden. No amount of excuse could make it right. Abomination doesn't has any reasoning. They just attack you.

Wait, what?  Templars were ABUSING the girl and you blame her for turning into an abomination?  

Any number of people will resort to methods that under any other circumstance they would consider abhorrent.  There are precious few people in the world who love their morals more than their life.  Basic survival instinct will push just about anyone to do vicious things in defense of their own life.  I won't claim that there aren't people strong-willed enough to die for their beliefs, but the reality is that most people prefer to live.  

Especially when other people's well-being is dependent on their own continued existence.  

Yet you actually think the girl turning into an abomination EVEN THOUGH SHE IS BEING ABUSED AND HER LIFE IS IN DANGER proves something about her previous moral standing.  

What's hilarious is that you wrote some silly thing about mages not helping themselves...but most reasonable people would argue that by resorting to allowing herself to be possessed was a classic textbook example of the mage girl in question going to extreme lengths to help herself.

[Pappi]

Either someone would find a way to kill all magic (buffy style?) or they would wear collars so their heads exploded or something...or have control and open the veil and make the world meld and chaos befall the world...

[GavrielKay]

From the codex "History of the Circle"

It is a truth universally acknowledged that nothing is more successful at inspiring a person to mischief as being told not to do something. Unfortunately, the Chantry of the Divine Age had some trouble with obvious truths. Although it did not outlaw magic-quite the contrary, as the Chantry relied upon magic to kindle the eternal flame which burns in every brazier in every chantry-it relegated mages to lighting candles and lamps. Perhaps occasional dusting of rafters and eaves.

I will give my readers a moment to contemplate how well such a role satisfied the mages of the time.

It surprised absolutely no one when the mages of Val Royeaux, in protest, snuffed the sacred flames of the cathedral and barricaded themselves inside the choir loft. No one, that is, but 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.

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.

So it appears even the Chantry was not always convinced that mages had to be separated from everyone else. And at that time, the defeat of Tevinter would have been a lot fresher.

Edit:  Also note which side staged a peaceful protest and which side threatened violence...

Modifié par GavrielKay, 08 mai 2012 - 10:00 .

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

GavrielKay wrote...

This is a hypothetical question I'd like to pose:  Imagine that it simply were not possible to imprison mages in Circles.  What if they could teleport or walk through walls or become undetectable such that they could easily sneak out from under a guard's nose?

If mages could not be forcibly gathered up and held by the Chantry and Templars what do you think would happen?  Do you think they would be killed or that society would find a way to co-exist with them?  Or something else entirely?

Well, given their history, I think Tevinter would have conquered Thedas a long time ago and actually held on to the land they had taken. When the qunari or darkspawn etc invade they could just teleport all their mages to the staging area and win, since the qunari didn't start using their own mages in battle until coming up against the Imperium.

Alternatively, the darkspawn would have conquered Thedas long ago, as sending their mages anywhere they please and pulling them back, hit-and-run tactics could spread the Taint absolutely everywhere without restriction, and walking through walls could mean no one would be able to hide.

Or, again, demons/spirits conquered Thedas long ago. Given the power of possessing a mage who can't be bound and can go anywhere combined with a natural link to the demon's Fade powers, it could walk invisibly in the world, blowing up all the Chantries, people, and anything else. And that's just one demon.

[TEWR]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

The elves insist on taking back their land even after independance. The elves believed the land rightly belong to them alone. No other races should stay in their land. Therefore, they received the worst treatment of all. Had they submitted peacefully I doubt the Orlesian treated them badly.

Um....okay.... just what are you going on about? You truly don't know what Orlais did and you're trying to paint them as in the right for their actions, saying the Elves should've just accepted it?

Fact: People did accept it. For seventy years. That didn't stop Orlais from abusing their power over Ferelden.

The occupation was a dark blot on Ferelden's history. Our people, who from time immemorial valued their freedom over all else, were forced to bow to Orlesian rule. The Empire declared our elves property and sold them like cattle. Chevaliers routinely plundered freeholds of coin, food, and even women and children, and excused it as "taxation." And for 70 years no Landsmeets were held, for the Imperial throne had declared our ancient laws a form of treason.

King Brandel was one of those who escaped. He tried to organize the other fugive lords to retake their land, but Brandel was neither clever nor persuasive, and the nobles preferred to take their chances alone. Ferelden might still be little more than a territory of the Empire were it not for the fact that his daughter had all the charisma that her royal father lacked. The Rebel Queen's rule began with a midnight attack on the imperial armory at Lothering. It was swift and successful, and with their pilfered arms the rebels began a campaign against the Orlesians in earnest.

But the turning point of the war came when a young freeholder joined the queen's army. The lad, Loghain Mac Tir, possessed a remarkable talent for strategy, and quickly became the favorite advisor of young Prince Maric. The queen finally died at the hands of Orlesian sympathizers anxious to curry favor with their painted masters, and Maric took her place as the leader of the rebellion. Loghain became Maric's right hand. Maric and Loghain led the rebels in a new campaign against their Orlesian oppressors, culminating in the battle of River Dane, where the last Chevaliers in Denerim were crushed. With the capital once more in the hands of Fereldans, the battle to free our people was finally over. But the battle to rebuild what had been lost had only just begun.

--From Ferelden: Folklore and History, by Sister Petrine, Chantry scholar

It was an Imperial decree that the Elves should be considered property. Despite Orlais' claims to the contrary, they are practicing slavery. It's prettied up just a tad so they can deny that it's slavery, but it's slavery nonetheless.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 08 mai 2012 - 10:05 .

[TEWR]

GavrielKay wrote...

So it appears even the Chantry was not always convinced that mages had to be separated from everyone else. And at that time, the defeat of Tevinter would have been a lot fresher.

That's one of my favorite codexes because it shows that Mages were free for decades when you look at the Timeline of Thedas -- maybe even a century or two -- and the world didn't fall into chaos.

And at one point after the horrors the Inquisition inflicted upon the populus, the Templar Order was at one point decent enough.

Although it makes me wonder something: Did the Templars say "Not a good idea" to the notion that the mages should be killed or that the cathedral must remain?

Meaning, what did they value more? A building or the lives of the mages?

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

They were only free in body. How would you feel having the talent to cast vast magical miracles yet only being allowed to light small fires and dust rafters? It's like being a gourmet chef that's only permitted to cook sausages and mashed potato.

So they picked a physical prison so their minds could theoretically be more free.

[GavrielKay]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

They were only free in body. How would you feel having the talent to cast vast magical miracles yet only being allowed to light small fires and dust rafters? It's like being a gourmet chef that's only permitted to cook sausages and mashed potato.

So they picked a physical prison so their minds could theoretically be more free.

I didn't mean to imply that I thought they should be happy lighting candles.  It was merely an attempt to show that the current Chantry dogma is in opposition to their past behavior.

The mages weren't rounded up and forced into circles because abominations were running wild and blood mages were mind controlling the city council.  They were allowed to segregate themselves in a naive attempt to gain more freedom in their art. 

In fact it was the  Divine who threatened war, the mages merely locked themselves in a building and refused to keep the fire burning.

[GavrielKay]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
That's one of my favorite codexes because it shows that Mages were free for decades when you look at the Timeline of Thedas -- maybe even a century or two -- and the world didn't fall into chaos.

Indeed.  It refutes any idea that the mages were locked up as a direct result of the atrocities in Tevinter.

The ZOMG!! free mages will destroy the world! attitude appears to have developed in the 900 years since the mages were sequestered.  It was probably easier to slowly convince the people that mages were cursed and dangerous once they were out of sight. 

After all, seeing a mage in each Cathedral peacefully keeping the eternal flame lit wouldn't be nearly as scary as thinking of this dark tower where hundreds of mages are watched over by dedicated Templars.

[Silfren]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

GavrielKay wrote...

So it appears even the Chantry was not always convinced that mages had to be separated from everyone else. And at that time, the defeat of Tevinter would have been a lot fresher.

That's one of my favorite codexes because it shows that Mages were free for decades when you look at the Timeline of Thedas -- maybe even a century or two -- and the world didn't fall into chaos.

And at one point after the horrors the Inquisition inflicted upon the populus, the Templar Order was at one point decent enough.

Although it makes me wonder something: Did the Templars say "Not a good idea" to the notion that the mages should be killed or that the cathedral must remain?

Meaning, what did they value more? A building or the lives of the mages?

I'm a little confused.  That quoted codex is the one I'm familiar on the formation of the Circle, but there's also lore that indicates the Circles were created during the Nevarran Accord.  That had to do with the Seekers of Truth and the Templar Order coming under Chantry authority, though, and I'm not certain there is any lore specifying exactly how this version of the formation of Circles came about.  I do have to say, though, that it makes more sense that the Circles were formed per Chantry and templar collaboration with no regard given to the opinion of any group of mages, since I don't think the mages who went "cheerily into exile" willingly walked into a system of imprisonment and dissolution of basic human rights.

[GavrielKay]

Silfren wrote...
I'm a little confused.  That quoted codex is the one I'm familiar on the formation of the Circle, but there's also lore that indicates the Circles were created during the Nevarran Accord.  That had to do with the Seekers of Truth and the Templar Order coming under Chantry authority, though, and I'm not certain there is any lore specifying exactly how this version of the formation of Circles came about.  I do have to say, though, that it makes more sense that the Circles were formed per Chantry and templar collaboration with no regard given to the opinion of any group of mages, since I don't think the mages who went "cheerily into exile" willingly walked into a system of imprisonment and dissolution of basic human rights.

Perhaps you're thinking of the College of Magi?  Another codex says the college routinely meets in Nevarra.

I think a group of bored, short sighted mages might have thought it was a good idea to segregate themselves in return for freedom to practice magic.  Minus the 900 years of oppression that followed, they might have believed the Chantry would keep its word and leave them to study and practice in relative peace.

The codex was written by Sister Petrine (like so many are) so I suppose it is possible things weren't as rosy and she represents. 

In any case, the timing of it looks odd for the Chantry.  If mages were so incapable of control, why would they be allowed free access to Chantries (complete with all the women, children and beggars everyone says were killed by Anders in the game era Chantry) for 100 years before forming the circles?

[Sacred_Fantasy]

Silfren wrote...

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
There is one scenario where I came across group of Templars abusing a mage girl only to find out this mage turn into abomination. If the mages don't help themselves then who else can help them?. Forbidden art is forbidden. No amount of excuse could make it right. Abomination doesn't has any reasoning. They just attack you.

Wait, what?  Templars were ABUSING the girl and you blame her for turning into an abomination?
 . 
Any number of people will resort to methods that under any other circumstance they would consider abhorrent.  There are precious few people in the world who love their morals more than their life.  Basic survival instinct will push just about anyone to do vicious things in defense of their own life.  I won't claim that there aren't people strong-willed enough to die for their beliefs, but the reality is that most people prefer to live.  

Especially when other people's well-being is dependent on their own continued existence.  

Yet you actually think the girl turning into an abomination EVEN THOUGH SHE IS BEING ABUSED AND HER LIFE IS IN DANGER proves something about her previous moral standing.  

What's hilarious is that you wrote some silly thing about mages not helping themselves...but most reasonable people would argue that by resorting to allowing herself to be possessed was a classic textbook example of the mage girl in question going to extreme lengths to help herself.

Perhaps you miss my reply to it.  I repeat again.

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

GavrielKay wrote...

There is one scenario where I came across group of Templars abusing a mage girl only to find out this mage turn into abomination. If the mages don't help themselves then who else can help them?. Forbidden art is forbidden. No amount of excuse could make it right. Abomination doesn't has any reasoning. They just attack you.

You see this scene and your take home lesson from it is that mages are bad?  Not that Templars have been given so much authority over mages for so long that they now have a hard time resisting the urge to rape and abuse mages.  And then when the mages decide to take in a demon and go out with a roar instead of a whimper, you want to fault the mage?

Both parties are to be blamed. But you are taking my quote out of context. I was referring to mage incapability to resist blood magic's temptation which you acknowlodge.  

Silfren wrote...
.

 Any number of people will resort to methods that under any other circumstance they would consider abhorrent.  There are precious few people in the world who love their morals more than their life.  Basic survival instinct will push just about anyone to do vicious things in defense of their own life.  I won't claim that there aren't people strong-willed enough to die for their beliefs, but the reality is that most people prefer to live.

That is why the mages cannot be trusted with magic. For the same  reason that you have stated. The temptation to use blood magic is too great. I purposely use that scenario to show how easy it is for people to resort to powerful illegal method. 

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 09 mai 2012 - 12:01 .