[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
[quote]Plaintiff wrote...
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
It's not agaisnt the procedure to defend yourself.[/quote]
Shooting an unarmed person is not "defending yourself". It is called "excessive force" and it is a crime. [/quote]
Being a general after the battle much?
If you thought you were in danger you WERE defending yourself.
[/quote]
If the IA board believes you should have known or even that you overreacted, then you were not defending yourself legally, and you will be prosecuted. Even if they do, you will probably lose your job as being pyschologically unsuited for field police work.
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]Humans arne't perfect and neither are our perceptions.
The suspect in question had something in his hand that resembled a gun. The officer reacts. It turns out it wasn't a gun. Tragic, but understandable. If it was a gun and the officer hesitated, he would be dead.[/quote]
As a police officer, he is required to keep his cool in extreme circumstances. If he can't, then he should not be a police officer.[/quote]
There is a difference between keeping your cool and being stupid.
[/quote]
A police officer knows that his life and career are on the line before he (or she) even pulls his pistol. Threat recognition is ingrained in every police recruit from the start of the Academy, and people that lose their cool or are prone to make a snap judgement are weeded out of training.
The bottom line is that a policeman (and even a solider even in a combat zone) are strongly accountable for any deadly force. The Templars are not. The Chantry doesn't even bother to enforce it's own laws let alone respect the laws of the lands they are in (after all, it's not like mages are actual people now are they?)
[quote]
[quote]
Whether or not Thedas has media is irrelevent. I was pointing out that your analogy is completely stupid, because when policemen shoot innocents, people get pissed. [/quote]
[quote]
As for how you tell if a dead man is a mage or not? Gosh, I don't know, the Templars could try simply asking people who knew him. [/quote]
You mean, ask the locals who know nothing about magic or mages?
Aks about a maleficar who could have easily be hiding his magical powers? Because..you know.... mages advertise their presence.
[/quote]
There are ways you can tell if a person is a mage by sight. Shale could. So could the old man in the Brecilian forest. Perhaps the Templars might want to invest in something like that? Nah...kill em' all, and let the Maker sort them out seems to be the Templar watchword....and you wonder why the Templars are losing popularity?
[quote]
And then there is the question of the validity of the testimoty. It becomes a word agaisnt a word.
[quote]
When your job involves handling deadly weapons and any mistakes could result in the death of an innocent person? Yes, you had damn well better be perfect, or face the goddamn consequences! If you can't do that, then turn in your gun and your badge and find a job you're better suited for.[/quote]
There is no perfection. Are you that stupid?
[/quote]
There is accountability or at least ther is suposed to be and that is far from stupid.
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]You do realise that you would fail your own standards?[/quote]
Which is why I dont do any work that involves handling a weapon! Funny that![/quote]
Because you know you set impossible standards.....
[/quote]
Accountability is not an impossible standard especially when there ARE ways you can tell a mage on sight and you CAN use magic to compell truth.
[quote]
[quote][quote]
Frak legality. Everything can be made legal and illegal (depending on government). I don't care if it's legal or not, I care if its SENSIBLE or not.[/quote]
Is it "sensible" to give a gun to a trigger-happy twit with poor eyesight?
Is it "sensible" to give a mage-hunting position to a man who apparently doesn't know what magic looks like?[/quote]
Trigger hapy? Poor eyesight? Only in your head.
And magic? Tell me, what DOES magic look like? Have you ever in real life faced something that looks or sounds like something else?
[/quote]
There are many examples in game where people and creatures have the ability to identify both mage and magic by sight.
[quote]
[quote][quote]
Except you forget to take into account....EVERYTHNIG ELSE.
Like no forensics, witnesses and all the other stuff that actually leads to said soldier stepping into the courtroom.
Because I'm sure that was quite frequent in ancient times....[/quote]
Yeah, I'm sure nobody was there to witness the murder of a frightened Chasind man. Oh wait! Except for everyone in the market square!
Also, did you forget that Thedas has magic? Magic that can be used to locate missing persons and objects? Magic that can be used to force people to tell the truth?[/quote]
Nope. Don't work that way.
First of all, the witnesses don't know magic. So how can they know he wasn't a mage?
Secondly, you cannot use magic for force the truth out of someone who doesn't know the truth.
Thirdly, mind-control magic is forbidden and templar would be resistant to it anyway.
[/quote]
1. The witnesses might not know magic, but they might. A proper detective would at least ask.
2. You don't know if they know the truth or not until you ask, and compelling the truth is hardly the realm of magic. In fact Interrogation has a very long and thoroughly mundane history.
3. The Chantry only forbids mind-control and blood magic when it doesn't suit them. The Chantry uses bloodmagic all the time when it does (see Phylacteries and the Litany of Adralla both of which are bloodmagic).
-Polaris
Who here sides with the Templars and why?
Débuté par
Treacherous J Slither
, juin 17 2012 09:21
Retour en haut
#477
Posté 12 juillet 2012 - 08:48
Lotion Soronarr
-
- Members
- 14 481 messages
Nizaris1 wrote...
War on terror is justified by propaganda about Muslims...that give "right" for USA invading Iraq, Afghanistan and meddling with Middle East affairs...sent soldiers everywhere in Muslim countries.
Similar with the Chantry, using their Templar, an army to oppress mages, hunt down "apostates" everywhere in Thedas. They justify it with their propaganda about mages.
They use "Tevinter mage" as an excuse to kidnap children mages, put them into prison, tranquilize them if needed, hunting down mages whoever they are, kill if must, invoke Right of Annulment that is Right to Genocide when they feel the need
The old, women and children, all be Annulled/Genocide...no matter what because they are mages and they are subjected to be eliminated when the right is invoked
Anything that is said can only have one of 3 states.
It can be wrong, partially right and right.
In the case of mages the danger is real.
Your ramblings about Iraq and Afghanistant are pointless.
And so is debating with you apprently.
I see the smart people vacated these types of threads already. Might be the time for me to follow their example.
#478
Guest_Nizaris1_*
Posté 12 juillet 2012 - 08:50
Guest_Nizaris1_*
Guest_Nizaris1_*
-
- Guests
@Lotion Soronnar
I am arguing what the Chantry did, it is the same with fascists in real history in real world
if you failed to see that than you are blind
I am arguing what the Chantry did, it is the same with fascists in real history in real world
if you failed to see that than you are blind
#479
Posté 12 juillet 2012 - 08:55
IanPolaris
-
- Members
- 9 650 messages
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
Actually my numbers are very reasonable and if anything conservative.[/quote]
I'm sure you think that way.
I, and many others, disagree.
[/quote]
You are free to disagree. You're wrong of course, but you can still disagree all you like.
[quote]
Given that we are told that Thedas has population numbers like that of middle ages Europe, 1:100 mage to normal ratio is very reasonable and might be on the conservative low end.[/quote]
I disagree. We don't even know the toal population of the countreis in question.
[/quote]
Actually we have a fairly good idea. For the entire Fantasy/Midaeval feel of Thedas to work, we know that population numbers in cities have to be in the low thousands. Otherwise the feel and economy of the world simply can not function. We know (from DA; Awakening) that rural peasents outnumber city-dwellers many to one (I'd guess about 9:1) even if the wealth is concentrated in the cities. This was brought up when discussing who the warden should defend. Given the amount of acreage needed to produce food for everyone, and the limitations of middle-ages agri-tech (and we nothing not even magic that implies any improvement over nominal middle-ages agri-tech), then we know that major cities have a pretty hard cap in the low tens of thousands.
Given that and given the number of mages we see, 1:100 is a very conservative estimate for the ration of mages to non-mages.
Bottom line, we aren't talking about population sizes of millions because the technology we see can't support the lifestyles we see (even for peasents) if population sizes were that high.
[quote]
[quote][quote]
And you assume all of those mages live to become abominations? How many would die young (for a veriety of reasons)? How many would be killed or exiled the second they displayed magic? This also throws a BIG spanner in your mathworks.
[/quote]
Why would a mage die young any more than anyone else. Indeed given their magic, a mage child would have a greater chance of surviving the rough and tumble of growing up. Remember we are talking about primitive societies that don't (yet) have any ingrained attitudes against magical children. The beauty of my argument using ratios is that the effect cancels out (since mundane children can die young too). You are assuming the thing you are trying to prove when you make the above statement. That is a mistake.[/quote]
How does having magic increase early age survival? Magioc doesn't manifest untill later.
and magic = unknown. Plenty of reason to fear it. Especially for early, primitive societies.
So your argument doens't work. Sorry.
And I see you compeltely ignore the argument that mages may have started appearing later.
[/quote]
Mages have always been around. Indeed Tevinter was founded by mages and that was many many thousands of years ago, and once all elves were apparently mages as well. There seems to be an uptick in magical births in Kirkwall true, but that doesn't mean mages were very rare historically. In fact historical references suggest they were not.
Also my argument talks about DEVELOPING civilizations starting from tribes. You don't get to assume anti-magic prejudice in advance. Otherwise you are assuming the thing you are trying to justify and that is illogical. Also all the examples we see in Thedas of primitive socieites both current and past show that mages were not feared but indeed were honored members of the tribes often in leadership roles.
[quote]
[quote][quote]
You assume half the mages become abominations. We dont' have numbers of the ratio, but I postulate that it's smaller. If that many mages fall down regularly, then no one would bother with the Circles.
[/quote]
The Chantry would have you think that ANY unsupervised mage (and I mean trained mages) are liable to become abominations just by having a bad hair day. It's part and parcel of their fear mongering (sorry but that's what it is). If what the chantry says is true, then the ratio would be at least 1:2. The fact you say it has to be lower only supports the argument I am making....you do realize this, yes?[/quote]
Nope. Sorry, but 1 out of 3 or 1 out of 4 mages becoming abominatiosn is still a LOT.
That you want to assign a very specific ratio to some wording to justify your views is YOUR problem.
[/quote]
My argument still works even with 1:4 and the Chantry preaches that ANY unsupervised mage is a timebomb which argues for a 1:1 ratio (or close to it) which is plainly ridiculous. For my argument not to work, the rate would have to be much much lower.
-Polaris
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
Actually my numbers are very reasonable and if anything conservative.[/quote]
I'm sure you think that way.
I, and many others, disagree.
[/quote]
You are free to disagree. You're wrong of course, but you can still disagree all you like.
[quote]
Given that we are told that Thedas has population numbers like that of middle ages Europe, 1:100 mage to normal ratio is very reasonable and might be on the conservative low end.[/quote]
I disagree. We don't even know the toal population of the countreis in question.
[/quote]
Actually we have a fairly good idea. For the entire Fantasy/Midaeval feel of Thedas to work, we know that population numbers in cities have to be in the low thousands. Otherwise the feel and economy of the world simply can not function. We know (from DA; Awakening) that rural peasents outnumber city-dwellers many to one (I'd guess about 9:1) even if the wealth is concentrated in the cities. This was brought up when discussing who the warden should defend. Given the amount of acreage needed to produce food for everyone, and the limitations of middle-ages agri-tech (and we nothing not even magic that implies any improvement over nominal middle-ages agri-tech), then we know that major cities have a pretty hard cap in the low tens of thousands.
Given that and given the number of mages we see, 1:100 is a very conservative estimate for the ration of mages to non-mages.
Bottom line, we aren't talking about population sizes of millions because the technology we see can't support the lifestyles we see (even for peasents) if population sizes were that high.
[quote]
[quote][quote]
And you assume all of those mages live to become abominations? How many would die young (for a veriety of reasons)? How many would be killed or exiled the second they displayed magic? This also throws a BIG spanner in your mathworks.
[/quote]
Why would a mage die young any more than anyone else. Indeed given their magic, a mage child would have a greater chance of surviving the rough and tumble of growing up. Remember we are talking about primitive societies that don't (yet) have any ingrained attitudes against magical children. The beauty of my argument using ratios is that the effect cancels out (since mundane children can die young too). You are assuming the thing you are trying to prove when you make the above statement. That is a mistake.[/quote]
How does having magic increase early age survival? Magioc doesn't manifest untill later.
and magic = unknown. Plenty of reason to fear it. Especially for early, primitive societies.
So your argument doens't work. Sorry.
And I see you compeltely ignore the argument that mages may have started appearing later.
[/quote]
Mages have always been around. Indeed Tevinter was founded by mages and that was many many thousands of years ago, and once all elves were apparently mages as well. There seems to be an uptick in magical births in Kirkwall true, but that doesn't mean mages were very rare historically. In fact historical references suggest they were not.
Also my argument talks about DEVELOPING civilizations starting from tribes. You don't get to assume anti-magic prejudice in advance. Otherwise you are assuming the thing you are trying to justify and that is illogical. Also all the examples we see in Thedas of primitive socieites both current and past show that mages were not feared but indeed were honored members of the tribes often in leadership roles.
[quote]
[quote][quote]
You assume half the mages become abominations. We dont' have numbers of the ratio, but I postulate that it's smaller. If that many mages fall down regularly, then no one would bother with the Circles.
[/quote]
The Chantry would have you think that ANY unsupervised mage (and I mean trained mages) are liable to become abominations just by having a bad hair day. It's part and parcel of their fear mongering (sorry but that's what it is). If what the chantry says is true, then the ratio would be at least 1:2. The fact you say it has to be lower only supports the argument I am making....you do realize this, yes?[/quote]
Nope. Sorry, but 1 out of 3 or 1 out of 4 mages becoming abominatiosn is still a LOT.
That you want to assign a very specific ratio to some wording to justify your views is YOUR problem.
[/quote]
My argument still works even with 1:4 and the Chantry preaches that ANY unsupervised mage is a timebomb which argues for a 1:1 ratio (or close to it) which is plainly ridiculous. For my argument not to work, the rate would have to be much much lower.
-Polaris
#480
Posté 12 juillet 2012 - 08:59
Lotion Soronarr
-
- Members
- 14 481 messages
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
If the IA board believes you should have known or even that you overreacted, then you were not defending yourself legally, and you will be prosecuted. Even if they do, you will probably lose your job as being pyschologically unsuited for field police work.
A police officer knows that his life and career are on the line before he (or she) even pulls his pistol. Threat recognition is ingrained in every police recruit from the start of the Academy, and people that lose their cool or are prone to make a snap judgement are weeded out of training.[/quote]
Snap judgment is exactly what field officers often HAVE to make.
And what the IA board believes is up to the IA board.
[quote]
There are ways you can tell if a person is a mage by sight. Shale could. So could the old man in the Brecilian forest. Perhaps the Templars might want to invest in something like that? Nah...kill em' all, and let the Maker sort them out seems to be the Templar watchword....and you wonder why the Templars are losing popularity?[/quote]
Just because Shale could you assume everyone can? Seriously?
[quote][quote]
When your job involves handling deadly weapons and any mistakes could result in the death of an innocent person? Yes, you had damn well better be perfect, or face the goddamn consequences! If you can't do that, then turn in your gun and your badge and find a job you're better suited for.[/quote]
There is no perfection. Are you that stupid?
[/quote]
There is accountability or at least ther is suposed to be and that is far from stupid.[/quote]
Within bounds of REASON.
[quote][quote]
Because you know you set impossible standards.....
[/quote]
Accountability is not an impossible standard especially when there ARE ways you can tell a mage on sight and you CAN use magic to compell truth.[/quote]
No there AREN'T.
Blod magic is forbidden and you can't tell a mage on sight (unless the plot dictates you do).
[quote][quote]
Nope. Don't work that way.
First of all, the witnesses don't know magic. So how can they know he wasn't a mage?
Secondly, you cannot use magic for force the truth out of someone who doesn't know the truth.
Thirdly, mind-control magic is forbidden and templar would be resistant to it anyway.
[/quote]
1. The witnesses might not know magic, but they might. A proper detective would at least ask.
2. You don't know if they know the truth or not until you ask, and compelling the truth is hardly the realm of magic. In fact Interrogation has a very long and thoroughly mundane history.
3. The Chantry only forbids mind-control and blood magic when it doesn't suit them. The Chantry uses bloodmagic all the time when it does (see Phylacteries and the Litany of Adralla both of which are bloodmagic).
[/quote]
1) How do you know no one did ask? And again, how much weight does a pesants word have?
2) you never know if they know the truth or not, or if what they said was truth or not.
3) Phylacateirs are comepltey different.
And do you REALLY want the Chatnry to start using mind-control magic? Seriously?
If the IA board believes you should have known or even that you overreacted, then you were not defending yourself legally, and you will be prosecuted. Even if they do, you will probably lose your job as being pyschologically unsuited for field police work.
A police officer knows that his life and career are on the line before he (or she) even pulls his pistol. Threat recognition is ingrained in every police recruit from the start of the Academy, and people that lose their cool or are prone to make a snap judgement are weeded out of training.[/quote]
Snap judgment is exactly what field officers often HAVE to make.
And what the IA board believes is up to the IA board.
[quote]
There are ways you can tell if a person is a mage by sight. Shale could. So could the old man in the Brecilian forest. Perhaps the Templars might want to invest in something like that? Nah...kill em' all, and let the Maker sort them out seems to be the Templar watchword....and you wonder why the Templars are losing popularity?[/quote]
Just because Shale could you assume everyone can? Seriously?
[quote][quote]
When your job involves handling deadly weapons and any mistakes could result in the death of an innocent person? Yes, you had damn well better be perfect, or face the goddamn consequences! If you can't do that, then turn in your gun and your badge and find a job you're better suited for.[/quote]
There is no perfection. Are you that stupid?
[/quote]
There is accountability or at least ther is suposed to be and that is far from stupid.[/quote]
Within bounds of REASON.
[quote][quote]
Because you know you set impossible standards.....
[/quote]
Accountability is not an impossible standard especially when there ARE ways you can tell a mage on sight and you CAN use magic to compell truth.[/quote]
No there AREN'T.
Blod magic is forbidden and you can't tell a mage on sight (unless the plot dictates you do).
[quote][quote]
Nope. Don't work that way.
First of all, the witnesses don't know magic. So how can they know he wasn't a mage?
Secondly, you cannot use magic for force the truth out of someone who doesn't know the truth.
Thirdly, mind-control magic is forbidden and templar would be resistant to it anyway.
[/quote]
1. The witnesses might not know magic, but they might. A proper detective would at least ask.
2. You don't know if they know the truth or not until you ask, and compelling the truth is hardly the realm of magic. In fact Interrogation has a very long and thoroughly mundane history.
3. The Chantry only forbids mind-control and blood magic when it doesn't suit them. The Chantry uses bloodmagic all the time when it does (see Phylacteries and the Litany of Adralla both of which are bloodmagic).
[/quote]
1) How do you know no one did ask? And again, how much weight does a pesants word have?
2) you never know if they know the truth or not, or if what they said was truth or not.
3) Phylacateirs are comepltey different.
And do you REALLY want the Chatnry to start using mind-control magic? Seriously?
#481
Posté 12 juillet 2012 - 09:04
Lotion Soronarr
-
- Members
- 14 481 messages
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
You are free to disagree. You're wrong of course, but you can still disagree all you like.[/quote]
Right back at you.
[quote]
Given that and given the number of mages we see, 1:100 is a very conservative estimate for the ration of mages to non-mages.[/quote]
Keep repeating that, I don't buy it.
[quote]
Also my argument talks about DEVELOPING civilizations starting from tribes. You don't get to assume anti-magic prejudice in advance. Otherwise you are assuming the thing you are trying to justify and that is illogical. Also all the examples we see in Thedas of primitive socieites both current and past show that mages were not feared but indeed were honored members of the tribes often in leadership roles.[/qutoe]
I get to assume whatever I want, just as you do.
The "primitive" societies of today have been in existance for thousands of years. Plenty of time for change.
And the first mages were hardly as in control or knew as much magic as later ones. Which makes it far more unlikely for them to have any revered position. Quite the contrary.
[quote][quote]
Nope. Sorry, but 1 out of 3 or 1 out of 4 mages becoming abominatiosn is still a LOT.
That you want to assign a very specific ratio to some wording to justify your views is YOUR problem.
[/quote]
My argument still works even with 1:4 and the Chantry preaches that ANY unsupervised mage is a timebomb which argues for a 1:1 ratio (or close to it) which is plainly ridiculous. For my argument not to work, the rate would have to be much much lower.
[/quote]
No, ti doesn't argue any specific ratio. Your argument does not work.
You are free to disagree. You're wrong of course, but you can still disagree all you like.[/quote]
Right back at you.
[quote]
Given that and given the number of mages we see, 1:100 is a very conservative estimate for the ration of mages to non-mages.[/quote]
Keep repeating that, I don't buy it.
[quote]
Also my argument talks about DEVELOPING civilizations starting from tribes. You don't get to assume anti-magic prejudice in advance. Otherwise you are assuming the thing you are trying to justify and that is illogical. Also all the examples we see in Thedas of primitive socieites both current and past show that mages were not feared but indeed were honored members of the tribes often in leadership roles.[/qutoe]
I get to assume whatever I want, just as you do.
The "primitive" societies of today have been in existance for thousands of years. Plenty of time for change.
And the first mages were hardly as in control or knew as much magic as later ones. Which makes it far more unlikely for them to have any revered position. Quite the contrary.
[quote][quote]
Nope. Sorry, but 1 out of 3 or 1 out of 4 mages becoming abominatiosn is still a LOT.
That you want to assign a very specific ratio to some wording to justify your views is YOUR problem.
[/quote]
My argument still works even with 1:4 and the Chantry preaches that ANY unsupervised mage is a timebomb which argues for a 1:1 ratio (or close to it) which is plainly ridiculous. For my argument not to work, the rate would have to be much much lower.
[/quote]
No, ti doesn't argue any specific ratio. Your argument does not work.
#482
Posté 12 juillet 2012 - 09:08
Lotion Soronarr
-
- Members
- 14 481 messages
Nizaris1 wrote...
@Lotion Soronnar
I am arguing what the Chantry did, it is the same with fascists in real history in real world
if you failed to see that than you are blind
Oh, I see what you're arguing.
It's just that your agument is worthless, pointless and wrong.
...
I'm getting tired arguing with several people at once.
#483
Posté 12 juillet 2012 - 09:36
Fallstar
-
- Members
- 1 519 messages
Lotion Soronnar wrote...
3) Phylacateirs are comepltey different.
And do you REALLY want the Chatnry to start using mind-control magic? Seriously?
Phylacteries are blood magic, plain and simple. They take the mages blood, and use it to track them down. If a mage took your blood and used it to power one of their spells, I doubt you'd argue that it was blood magic. But a templar couldn't possibly be a hypocrite, right.
Lotion Soronnar wrote...
I see the smart people vacated these types of threads already. Might be the time for me to follow their example.
No need to throw personal insults around.
#484
Posté 12 juillet 2012 - 10:14
IanPolaris
-
- Members
- 9 650 messages
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
If the IA board believes you should have known or even that you overreacted, then you were not defending yourself legally, and you will be prosecuted. Even if they do, you will probably lose your job as being pyschologically unsuited for field police work.
A police officer knows that his life and career are on the line before he (or she) even pulls his pistol. Threat recognition is ingrained in every police recruit from the start of the Academy, and people that lose their cool or are prone to make a snap judgement are weeded out of training.[/quote]
Snap judgment is exactly what field officers often HAVE to make.
And what the IA board believes is up to the IA board.
[/quote]
The police officer that makes a snap judgement undergoes extensive training to be right about that snap judgement and is held fully accountable if they are not. None of that seems to be true for the Templars.
[quote]
[quote]
There are ways you can tell if a person is a mage by sight. Shale could. So could the old man in the Brecilian forest. Perhaps the Templars might want to invest in something like that? Nah...kill em' all, and let the Maker sort them out seems to be the Templar watchword....and you wonder why the Templars are losing popularity?[/quote]
Just because Shale could you assume everyone can? Seriously?
[/quote]
The ability exists and it can be manufactured (Shale says it comes from the modification of her crystals by Wilhelm in her case). We also know the old hermit in the Brecilian forest could tell a mage by sight, AND both Morrigan and Wynne can tell that the old hermit is a mage by sight.
Given that the ability exists and given that normal people CAN aquire it, there is no excuse for the templars to misidentify a mage if they really were serious about being right....but they aren't. That apparently would take too much effort on their part. The claim that they 'can't tell' even though we know that they can (or they could if they wanted to invest the time, effort, and money to learn how).
[quote]
[quote][quote]
When your job involves handling deadly weapons and any mistakes could result in the death of an innocent person? Yes, you had damn well better be perfect, or face the goddamn consequences! If you can't do that, then turn in your gun and your badge and find a job you're better suited for.[/quote]
There is no perfection. Are you that stupid?
[/quote]
There is accountability or at least ther is suposed to be and that is far from stupid.[/quote]
Within bounds of REASON.
[/quote]
Which is determined by your supreriors AND by those outside your organization (i.e.civilian Judges and prosecutors). They key point you keep on neglecting is ACCOUNTABILITY.
[quote]
[quote][quote]
Because you know you set impossible standards.....
[/quote]
Accountability is not an impossible standard especially when there ARE ways you can tell a mage on sight and you CAN use magic to compell truth.[/quote]
No there AREN'T.
Blod magic is forbidden and you can't tell a mage on sight (unless the plot dictates you do).
[/quote]
But we have many instances where we can tell a mage by sight, so your entire argument fails. The Templars apparently can't be bothered to get it right.
[quote]
[quote][quote]
Nope. Don't work that way.
First of all, the witnesses don't know magic. So how can they know he wasn't a mage?
Secondly, you cannot use magic for force the truth out of someone who doesn't know the truth.
Thirdly, mind-control magic is forbidden and templar would be resistant to it anyway.
[/quote]
1. The witnesses might not know magic, but they might. A proper detective would at least ask.
2. You don't know if they know the truth or not until you ask, and compelling the truth is hardly the realm of magic. In fact Interrogation has a very long and thoroughly mundane history.
3. The Chantry only forbids mind-control and blood magic when it doesn't suit them. The Chantry uses bloodmagic all the time when it does (see Phylacteries and the Litany of Adralla both of which are bloodmagic).
[/quote]
1) How do you know no one did ask? And again, how much weight does a pesants word have?
2) you never know if they know the truth or not, or if what they said was truth or not.
3) Phylacateirs are comepltey different.
[/quote]
I have never seen any Templar save one (and he was near retirement) even bother to do any detective work at all. It is sight and slay, and let the Maker sort it out. The one that did actually bother to do real detective work was univerally ridiculed within his own order.
As for phylacteries being different, no they aren't. They are blood magic per WoG. The Chantry is extremely hypocritical about blood magic.
[quote]
And do you REALLY want the Chatnry to start using mind-control magic? Seriously?
[/quote]
Actually as part of an overall Magical Law Enforcement Agency with FULL ACCOUNTABILITY, Mind Control magic is not the horrible evil you paint it as (or as the Chantry does). It's no different than forced rehabilitation and mandated psychoactive drug therapy for criminals (ethically anyway). Is Mind Controlling convicted criminals to peacefully serve their sentences really a bad thing?
I am shocked that the Chantry doesn't already use Mind Control Magic (we know that the Imperial Chantry does). I can only guess that's because they haven't had any pet mage be willing to do it for them is all....and yes I am in full cynic mode here.
-Polaris
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
If the IA board believes you should have known or even that you overreacted, then you were not defending yourself legally, and you will be prosecuted. Even if they do, you will probably lose your job as being pyschologically unsuited for field police work.
A police officer knows that his life and career are on the line before he (or she) even pulls his pistol. Threat recognition is ingrained in every police recruit from the start of the Academy, and people that lose their cool or are prone to make a snap judgement are weeded out of training.[/quote]
Snap judgment is exactly what field officers often HAVE to make.
And what the IA board believes is up to the IA board.
[/quote]
The police officer that makes a snap judgement undergoes extensive training to be right about that snap judgement and is held fully accountable if they are not. None of that seems to be true for the Templars.
[quote]
[quote]
There are ways you can tell if a person is a mage by sight. Shale could. So could the old man in the Brecilian forest. Perhaps the Templars might want to invest in something like that? Nah...kill em' all, and let the Maker sort them out seems to be the Templar watchword....and you wonder why the Templars are losing popularity?[/quote]
Just because Shale could you assume everyone can? Seriously?
[/quote]
The ability exists and it can be manufactured (Shale says it comes from the modification of her crystals by Wilhelm in her case). We also know the old hermit in the Brecilian forest could tell a mage by sight, AND both Morrigan and Wynne can tell that the old hermit is a mage by sight.
Given that the ability exists and given that normal people CAN aquire it, there is no excuse for the templars to misidentify a mage if they really were serious about being right....but they aren't. That apparently would take too much effort on their part. The claim that they 'can't tell' even though we know that they can (or they could if they wanted to invest the time, effort, and money to learn how).
[quote]
[quote][quote]
When your job involves handling deadly weapons and any mistakes could result in the death of an innocent person? Yes, you had damn well better be perfect, or face the goddamn consequences! If you can't do that, then turn in your gun and your badge and find a job you're better suited for.[/quote]
There is no perfection. Are you that stupid?
[/quote]
There is accountability or at least ther is suposed to be and that is far from stupid.[/quote]
Within bounds of REASON.
[/quote]
Which is determined by your supreriors AND by those outside your organization (i.e.civilian Judges and prosecutors). They key point you keep on neglecting is ACCOUNTABILITY.
[quote]
[quote][quote]
Because you know you set impossible standards.....
[/quote]
Accountability is not an impossible standard especially when there ARE ways you can tell a mage on sight and you CAN use magic to compell truth.[/quote]
No there AREN'T.
Blod magic is forbidden and you can't tell a mage on sight (unless the plot dictates you do).
[/quote]
But we have many instances where we can tell a mage by sight, so your entire argument fails. The Templars apparently can't be bothered to get it right.
[quote]
[quote][quote]
Nope. Don't work that way.
First of all, the witnesses don't know magic. So how can they know he wasn't a mage?
Secondly, you cannot use magic for force the truth out of someone who doesn't know the truth.
Thirdly, mind-control magic is forbidden and templar would be resistant to it anyway.
[/quote]
1. The witnesses might not know magic, but they might. A proper detective would at least ask.
2. You don't know if they know the truth or not until you ask, and compelling the truth is hardly the realm of magic. In fact Interrogation has a very long and thoroughly mundane history.
3. The Chantry only forbids mind-control and blood magic when it doesn't suit them. The Chantry uses bloodmagic all the time when it does (see Phylacteries and the Litany of Adralla both of which are bloodmagic).
[/quote]
1) How do you know no one did ask? And again, how much weight does a pesants word have?
2) you never know if they know the truth or not, or if what they said was truth or not.
3) Phylacateirs are comepltey different.
[/quote]
I have never seen any Templar save one (and he was near retirement) even bother to do any detective work at all. It is sight and slay, and let the Maker sort it out. The one that did actually bother to do real detective work was univerally ridiculed within his own order.
As for phylacteries being different, no they aren't. They are blood magic per WoG. The Chantry is extremely hypocritical about blood magic.
[quote]
And do you REALLY want the Chatnry to start using mind-control magic? Seriously?
[/quote]
Actually as part of an overall Magical Law Enforcement Agency with FULL ACCOUNTABILITY, Mind Control magic is not the horrible evil you paint it as (or as the Chantry does). It's no different than forced rehabilitation and mandated psychoactive drug therapy for criminals (ethically anyway). Is Mind Controlling convicted criminals to peacefully serve their sentences really a bad thing?
I am shocked that the Chantry doesn't already use Mind Control Magic (we know that the Imperial Chantry does). I can only guess that's because they haven't had any pet mage be willing to do it for them is all....and yes I am in full cynic mode here.
-Polaris
#485
Posté 12 juillet 2012 - 10:21
IanPolaris
-
- Members
- 9 650 messages
Lotion Soronnar wrote...
IanPolaris wrote...
Given that and given the number of mages we see, 1:100 is a very conservative estimate for the ration of mages to non-mages.
Keep repeating that, I don't buy it.
That's nice. Look up your history of technology sometime. Given the ratio of rural to urban folk (see DA: Awakening) and given the farming technology we see, we KNOW that population sizes have a hard limit of perhaps a few tens of thousands in even the largest of Cities (Denerim, Val Royaleux, Mithranus), and most places are far, far more sparsely populated. The land simply won't support any more.
Given the low population number and the number of mages we see, then 1:100 is a very conservative estimate. You opinion is not required. This is simple math and technology limits talking (and there is no indication that magic is being used AT ALL to mitigate these limits unlike many other fantasy worlds).
Also my argument talks about DEVELOPING civilizations starting from tribes. You don't get to assume anti-magic prejudice in advance. Otherwise you are assuming the thing you are trying to justify and that is illogical. Also all the examples we see in Thedas of primitive socieites both current and past show that mages were not feared but indeed were honored members of the tribes often in leadership roles.[/qutoe]
I get to assume whatever I want, just as you do.
Actually you don't. It is a logical fallacy to assume the thing you are trying to prove.
The "primitive" societies of today have been in existance for thousands of years. Plenty of time for change.
And the first mages were hardly as in control or knew as much magic as later ones. Which makes it far more unlikely for them to have any revered position. Quite the contrary.
There is never any indication that primitive societies have ever been harsh towards mages. Indeed the progression has always been the other way around. You are again assuming what you are trying to prove. Don't do that.
Nope. Sorry, but 1 out of 3 or 1 out of 4 mages becoming abominatiosn is still a LOT.
That you want to assign a very specific ratio to some wording to justify your views is YOUR problem.
My argument still works even with 1:4 and the Chantry preaches that ANY unsupervised mage is a timebomb which argues for a 1:1 ratio (or close to it) which is plainly ridiculous. For my argument not to work, the rate would have to be much much lower.
No, ti doesn't argue any specific ratio. Your argument does not work.
Sure it does. It's a very simple argument. If we take even very conservative (low end) assumptions consistant with Chantry claims about mages and abomintions, it fails the fundamental reality check.
Either the Chantry is lying about mages, or the world as written can't exist.
-Polaris
Modifié par IanPolaris, 12 juillet 2012 - 10:26 .
#486
Posté 12 juillet 2012 - 03:02
dragonflight288
-
- Members
- 8 852 messages
Nizaris1 wrote...
@Lotion Soronnar
I am arguing what the Chantry did, it is the same with fascists in real history in real world
if you failed to see that than you are blindOh, I see what you're arguing.
It's just that your agument is worthless, pointless and wrong.
Ummm....Nizaris's argument isn't pointless or wrong. What she (or at least I think Nizaris is a she) did was take factual, real world examples and drew a parallel to the actions of the Chantry. That is an acceptable debating method.
Your response was to completely dismiss it without facts or evidence. If you want to disprove her, you need to use facts, parallels, in-game and novel events, to prove that the Chantry isn't doing what she claimed. And that would be an acceptable debating strategy.
The way you dismiss what people say, ignore the lore when its brought up, ignore the writers words on how abominations come to be, and dismiss anything a mage supporter says, without bringing up an evidence to counter the points, all you do is remove any credibility your own arguments have and you make yourself look foolish.
So lotion, let me ask you a few questions. Let's completely ignore the issues of mages and abominations for the moment. Let us focus strictly on the templar order and its practices.
1. If a templar breaks the law, their individual vows, or abuses their authority, should they be punished?
2. If blood magic is accepted as using blood in a spell, a ritual, or even as a component in something else (the Grey Warde Joining, the Reaver ceremony, Finn's spell to find the lights of Arlathan) then do you consider the phylacteries or the litany of adralla to also be blood magic? And if not, why?
3. And finally, should the templars be held accountable for their own actions? And if so, who will enforce it?
#487
Posté 12 juillet 2012 - 03:07
MisterJB
-
- Members
- 15 584 messages
dragonflight288 wrote...
Ummm....Nizaris's argument isn't pointless or wrong. What she (or at least I think Nizaris is a she) did was take factual, real world examples and drew a parallel to the actions of the Chantry. That is an acceptable debating method.
Your response was to completely dismiss it without facts or evidence. If you want to disprove her, you need to use facts, parallels, in-game and novel events, to prove that the Chantry isn't doing what she claimed. And that would be an acceptable debating strategy.
Lotion presented a very valid counter argument.
But regardless what you think white people think or say - that's exactly that. Nothing more than words without real weight. Doesn't matter if a black man calls a white man dangerous or a white man calls a black man dangerous or whatever. In reality that danger doesn't exist. That superiority/danger is immaginary.
Not so for mages. The difference and danger is VERY real.
In our world, the differences between races are minimal and thus, the actions of an opressive governement that proclaims the superiority of a particular race are wrong.
However, the dangers of magic are very, very real in the world of Thedas and some of us believe this justifies the actions of the Chantry.
Modifié par MisterJB, 12 juillet 2012 - 03:08 .
#488
Posté 12 juillet 2012 - 03:14
LobselVith8
-
- Members
- 16 993 messages
MisterJB wrote...
Lotion presented a very valid counterargument.
By saying her argument was worthless and pointless? I respectfully disagree.
MisterJB wrote...
However, the dangers of magic are very, very real and some of us believe this justifies the actions of the Chantry.
Giving a religious organization that preaches such intolerance towards mages that innocent mages are killed due to hysteria and ignorance (as we know from Wynne and Redcliffe as an Amell mage) domination over mages seems to be a mistake to some of us. Magic is dangerous, but so are the templars and the Chantry.
#489
Guest_Nizaris1_*
Posté 12 juillet 2012 - 04:02
Guest_Nizaris1_*
Guest_Nizaris1_*
-
- Guests
MisterJB wrote...
In our world, the differences between races are minimal and thus, the actions of an opressive governement that proclaims the superiority of a particular race are wrong.
However, the dangers of magic are very, very real in the world of Thedas and some of us believe this justifies the actions of the Chantry.
Compare to modern world today...which countries have weapon of mass destruction as known as nuclear warheads?
1. USA
2. Russia
3. United Kingdom
4. France
5. China
6. Pakistan
7. North Korea
8. India
9. Israel
source : http://en.wikipedia....nuclear_weapons
They all not only have missiles on ground, but also submarines that can deploy nuclear warheads anywhere silently underwater, and also with stealth aircraft.
Now, which countries that are labelled as dangerous, axis of evil and the blight of the world?
Does any countries in this world have a right to attack those 9 countries above to prevent the danger of nuclear weapons?
Let say 50 Muslim countries declare a jihad on those countries to neutralize the nuclear weapon threat on this world, will you accept it? These 50 Muslim countries will sent soldiers on your soil, declaring your people are dangerous people that need to be neutralize. Your people are too dangerous to let free, must be watched 24/7 because your people have weapon of mass destruction that may destroy the world....will you just let them invade you with that justification?
The Chantry justifying their action by labeling some human/humanoid as dangerous, so anyone in this real world can do the same, do you agree?
#490
Posté 12 juillet 2012 - 04:14
Fallstar
-
- Members
- 1 519 messages
MisterJB wrote...
Lotion presented a very valid counter argument.
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not, but if not, calling someone's argument pointless and wrong, then leaving it at that, isn't a valid argument.
In our world, the differences between races are minimal and thus, the actions of an opressive governement that proclaims the superiority of a particular race are wrong.
However, the dangers of magic are very, very real in the world of Thedas and some of us believe this justifies the actions of the Chantry.
Ok, lets take the Wardens. The Wardens are a small politically independent organisation. At Warden's Keep, a group of 20-30 or so Wardens held off an entire army. As far as I see it, that makes the Wardens a very, very dangerous dangerous group of people, as you describe the mages. The Joining ritual requires a form of blood magic, the Wardens have no problem with blood mages (As your Warden tells a blood mage you have the option of trying to recruit: "That just means you can kill darkspawn faster.") and most Warden mages seem to have no issue with summoning demons when required. (Corypheus's tower, Avernus)
The Wardens therefore also seem to be a very dangerous organisation. Should they too be placed under Chantry control?
#491
Guest_Nizaris1_*
Posté 12 juillet 2012 - 04:29
Guest_Nizaris1_*
Guest_Nizaris1_*
-
- Guests
Surely those 9 countries i mention above will not just trigger a nuclear war, there will be no leader will declare to use nuclear weapon just like that...WW2 teach us what destruction nuclear weapon bring to this world
Don't say those weapons are secured, they can blow up anytime by accident or by any reason
But no one in this world have a right to invade those 9 countries just by labeling those countries as dangerous, a threat. No one can justify "i attack that country because they are dangerous with nuclear warhead that might blow up anytime unpredictably and thus bring destruction on the world"
In DA, mages are like those with nuclear warhead, they are in fact walking nuclear warhead.
But let see...there are a lot of nuclear submarines roaming in our ocean...but they are safe, there are accidents but from time to time the engineers have perfected nuclear engine for submarine, taking safety procedure and so on...those nuclear subs in which also carrying nuclear warhead roaming safely and freely around the world
The same with mages...through training, proper education, law, safety procedure and discipline, they can be like those nuclear submarines. Mages only need these, not living under oppression and isolated
Don't say those weapons are secured, they can blow up anytime by accident or by any reason
But no one in this world have a right to invade those 9 countries just by labeling those countries as dangerous, a threat. No one can justify "i attack that country because they are dangerous with nuclear warhead that might blow up anytime unpredictably and thus bring destruction on the world"
In DA, mages are like those with nuclear warhead, they are in fact walking nuclear warhead.
But let see...there are a lot of nuclear submarines roaming in our ocean...but they are safe, there are accidents but from time to time the engineers have perfected nuclear engine for submarine, taking safety procedure and so on...those nuclear subs in which also carrying nuclear warhead roaming safely and freely around the world
The same with mages...through training, proper education, law, safety procedure and discipline, they can be like those nuclear submarines. Mages only need these, not living under oppression and isolated
#492
Posté 12 juillet 2012 - 04:41
MisterJB
-
- Members
- 15 584 messages
No one is born a Warden, the rate of mortality of the joining is very high which keeps their numbers in check and the taint ensures their lifespan is smaller than that of a normal person.DuskWarden wrote...
Ok, lets take the Wardens. The Wardens are a small politically independent organisation. At Warden's Keep, a group of 20-30 or so Wardens held off an entire army. As far as I see it, that makes the Wardens a very, very dangerous dangerous group of people, as you describe the mages. The Joining ritual requires a form of blood magic, the Wardens have no problem with blood mages (As your Warden tells a blood mage you have the option of trying to recruit: "That just means you can kill darkspawn faster.") and most Warden mages seem to have no issue with summoning demons when required. (Corypheus's tower, Avernus)
The Wardens therefore also seem to be a very dangerous organisation. Should they too be placed under Chantry control?
The Wardens survive because they are politically neutral. When a commander decided to stick her nose in Ferelden politics, that branch was destroyed.
Modifié par MisterJB, 12 juillet 2012 - 04:41 .
#493
Posté 12 juillet 2012 - 04:56
Fallstar
-
- Members
- 1 519 messages
MisterJB wrote...
No one is born a Warden, the rate of mortality of the joining is very high which keeps their numbers in check and the taint ensures their lifespan is smaller than that of a normal person.
The Wardens survive because they are politically neutral. When a commander decided to stick her nose in Ferelden politics, that branch was destroyed.
Indeed, but what about the modern Wardens? We are told in Awakening that our role as Warden Commander and arl of Amaranthine is deemed important by the First Warden, as it would show that wardens can be trusted in positions of power.
The Wardens post DAO have become very politically involved in Ferelden, and by the First Warden's keen interest, that seems to be something he wishes to replicate in other countries.
#494
Posté 12 juillet 2012 - 05:44
MisterJB
-
- Members
- 15 584 messages
The three deterrents I previously mentioned still make them less dangerous than mages. The taint doesn't give a Warden many abilities besides sensing Darkspawn; that we know of; so there might not be many difference between giving governed by a mundane Arl or a mundane Grey Warden Arl. If the Grey Wardens main mission remains to be to fight the Darkspawn and they do not become tyrants, there is no issue.DuskWarden wrote...
Indeed, but what about the modern Wardens? We are told in Awakening that our role as Warden Commander and arl of Amaranthine is deemed important by the First Warden, as it would show that wardens can be trusted in positions of power.
The Wardens post DAO have become very politically involved in Ferelden, and by the First Warden's keen interest, that seems to be something he wishes to replicate in other countries.
On the other hand, we have seen exactly what the Magisters do with their power.
#495
Posté 12 juillet 2012 - 05:54
LobselVith8
-
- Members
- 16 993 messages
MisterJB wrote...
On the other hand, we have seen exactly what the Magisters do with their power.
The same can be said of the Andrastian Chantry.
#496
Posté 12 juillet 2012 - 05:58
MisterJB
-
- Members
- 15 584 messages
The Chantry is no saint but it doesn't bleed slaves to fuel magic to open a path to the Golden City out of greed.LobselVith8 wrote...
MisterJB wrote...
On the other hand, we have seen exactly what the Magisters do with their power.
The same can be said of the Andrastian Chantry.
#497
Posté 12 juillet 2012 - 06:19
LobselVith8
-
- Members
- 16 993 messages
MisterJB wrote...
LobselVith8 wrote...
The same can be said of the Andrastian Chantry.
The Chantry is no saint but it doesn't bleed slaves to fuel magic to open a path to the Golden City out of greed.
They strip the humanity out of people to turn them into emotionless husks that serve their needs, demonize mages to the point where innocents are brutally murdered by Andrastians because of the hatred and fear that has been spread for centuries by the Chantry's religious docturine, and support the invasion and occupation of other nations in the name of the Maker that has lead to the rape and murder of countless people - such as Loghain's mother.
Magisters enslaved elven mages from Arlathan. Some believe Andraste was a mage. Shartan may have been a mage. And who helped fight in all the Blights? Mages. Who are instrumental in the creation of Grey Wardens? Mages. The deeds of a few Magisters who enslave mages and non-mages alike don't diminish this.
#498
Posté 12 juillet 2012 - 06:26
TEWR
-
- Members
- 16 987 messages
[quote]MisterJB wrote...
The three deterrents I previously mentioned still make them less dangerous than mages. The taint doesn't give a Warden many abilities besides sensing Darkspawn; that we know of; so there might not be many difference between giving governed by a mundane Arl or a mundane Grey Warden Arl. If the Grey Wardens main mission remains to be to fight the Darkspawn and they do not become tyrants, there is no issue. [/quote]
Avernus' research with only a handful of Grey Wardens over the course of the first 90 or so days of his imprisonment led to the discovery of 6 abilities that the Taint can provide -- 2 per fighting style.
The Wardens merely use it to sense Darkspawn. A triviality. -- Avernus
Additionally, if spared, in DAII we discover that he makes some startling discoveries about the Taint/Wardens/Darkspawn. Discoveries that prompted someone to move against the Wardens -- hiring thugs to steal secret Warden documents.
[quote]MisterJB wrote...
On the other hand, we have seen exactly what the Magisters do with their power. [/quote]
[/quote]
Because every free mage automatically wants to be a tyrannical ruler of a country!
The three deterrents I previously mentioned still make them less dangerous than mages. The taint doesn't give a Warden many abilities besides sensing Darkspawn; that we know of; so there might not be many difference between giving governed by a mundane Arl or a mundane Grey Warden Arl. If the Grey Wardens main mission remains to be to fight the Darkspawn and they do not become tyrants, there is no issue. [/quote]
Avernus' research with only a handful of Grey Wardens over the course of the first 90 or so days of his imprisonment led to the discovery of 6 abilities that the Taint can provide -- 2 per fighting style.
The Wardens merely use it to sense Darkspawn. A triviality. -- Avernus
Additionally, if spared, in DAII we discover that he makes some startling discoveries about the Taint/Wardens/Darkspawn. Discoveries that prompted someone to move against the Wardens -- hiring thugs to steal secret Warden documents.
[quote]MisterJB wrote...
On the other hand, we have seen exactly what the Magisters do with their power. [/quote]
[/quote]
Because every free mage automatically wants to be a tyrannical ruler of a country!
Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 12 juillet 2012 - 06:30 .
#499
Posté 12 juillet 2012 - 06:28
Sylvius the Mad
-
- Members
- 24 111 messages
Being a non-mage makes the Chantry's oppression beneficial to you. I see no intrinsic moral value to self-interest.Dave of Canada wrote...
Unless you're a non-mage.
#500
Posté 12 juillet 2012 - 06:41
MisterJB
-
- Members
- 15 584 messages
The Rite of Tranquility is only forced to blood mages or mages who truly can't control their powers. If templars perform it on anyone else who did not volunteer, they are going against the Chantry.LobselVith8 wrote...
They strip the humanity out of people to turn them into emotionless husks that serve their needs,
That fear and hatred has roots in Tevinter and the magisters.demonize mages to the point where innocents are brutally murdered by Andrastians because of the hatred and fear that has been spread for centuries by the Chantry's religious docturine,
The Chantry's doctrine doesn't help but don't say that they are simply trying to demonize a group of people who has never done anything wrong or are not dangerous at all.
Ferelden was already Andrastian before the occupation. The Chantry did nothing to support, or oppose, that particular invasion.and support the invasion and occupation of other nations in the name of the Maker that has lead to the rape and murder of countless people - such as Loghain's mother.
They have attacked "heathen" nations, true but their warfare tactics pale in comparison to Tevinter's, they attempt peaceful way of spreading the faith first and don't take slaves.
No but nor should we forget the dangers of magic. The magisters simply represent how much a mage can abuse his powers.Magisters enslaved elven mages from Arlathan. Some believe Andraste was a mage. Shartan may have been a mage. And who helped fight in all the Blights? Mages. Who are instrumental in the creation of Grey Wardens? Mages. The deeds of a few Magisters who enslave mages and non-mages alike don't diminish this.
It's in the nature of man to be greedy. Without a system to keep them in check, many mages will use their powers to elevate themselves above mundanes just like many others might simply wish to be left alone.The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
Because every free mage automatically wants to be a tyrannical ruler of a country!
Modifié par MisterJB, 12 juillet 2012 - 06:44 .
