673 réponses à ce sujet

[Fallstar]

MisterJB wrote...

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.

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.

On the other hand, we have seen exactly what the Magisters do with their power.

The Joining ritual ensures the Wardens remain a relatively small group, I agree. However, Avernus has lived for around two hundred years? It doesn't seem that far of a stretch that future Wardens might not die after 30 years or so. And his research allows any Warden, not necessarily a mage, to use the power in their tainted blood to enhance their abilites and perform feats a normal person could not. (Moving faster than normal humans, being able to attack faster, you inflict critical damage more often than normal humans, being examples in gameplay)

In addition, only the most capable are even allowed to take the Joining. Those who survive it are the toughest and strongest out of even that select group. Combined, that suggests to me that a Warden Arl would be very difficult to remove from power. Especially when a Warden (non mage) can kill Templars just as easily as a normal soldier. 

As for the Warden's main mission being to fight the darkspawn, that will remain the case. But DAO showed us how close the governments in Ferelden came to destroying their country. The Dwarves' inability to choose a king, Loghain's betrayal and mistrust. Ferelden was very nearly destroyed by the Blight because of the current rulers' failings. Since the Wardens will do anything to stop the Blight, you have to wonder if in the future, the Wardens wouldn't simply take control to remove that threat. 

Besides the fact that your Warden can potentially be both arl of Amaranthine and teyrn of Gwaren, and you or another grey warden (Alistair) can be on the throne, and you see that they already have a great deal of political influence. And as I explained previously, a Grey Warden could be extremely difficult to depose. If you would trust a Warden in such a position, why not a mage?

[TEWR]

MisterJB wrote...

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.

It'd help if they didn't cast every Mage into that same group. If they said "Fear the Magisters, not the Mages themselves" that'd be one thing.

MisterJB wrote...

Ferelden was already Andrastian before the occupation. The Chantry did nothing to support, or oppose, that particular invasion.

I distinctly recall a Grand Cleric supporting the Orlesian occupation, saying that the Fereldan rebellion should cease and desist because they were in the wrong -- or something of the sort.

The Chantry was also going to name the ninth Age the Sun Age originally -- can't remember what the significance was -- but then the presence of the High Dragon prompted the Divine to change it to the Dragon Age. This happened prior to the High Dragon's rampage, and rumors swirled that the reason for the name change was to support the Usurper King Meghren -- whose symbol was the Dragon.

Kordillius Drakon I took the Chantry -- the one we know of today -- and made it the national religion out of many Andrastian cults at the time as he progressively invaded other territories to expand Orlesian influence.

Never mind that Orlais itself has often pretended to help nations that were suffering from Blights and then routinely occupied those areas due to how weak they were, forcing said nations to have to fight back against Orlais and kick them out (Nevarra, Free Marches, and in Loghain's mind Ferelden was probably next).

LobselVith8 wrote...

Shartan may have been a mage

He wasn't. He was a swordsman.

[LobselVith8]

MisterJB wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

They strip the humanity out of people to turn them into emotionless husks that serve their needs,

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.

And who was keeping Alrik in check? The Knight-Commander who was promoted to watch over mages despite her history?The only thing that stopped him from turning the child mage Ella into another tranquil victim was Hawke, who might be either an apostate or a blood mage himself.

Who watches the watchmen? The Seekers? Because no one intervened when Meredith became the de facto Viscount of Kirkwall, causing unrest among the people, the mages, and the templars.

MisterJB wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

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,

That fear and hatred has roots in Tevinter and the magisters.
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.

The Dalish have reason to hate Tevinter as well - enslavement, destruction of their homeland - but they don't react with the same fear and hatred that Andrastians do. Neither do the Avvar tribes or the Chasind Wilders or their predecessors, who have dealt with the Tevinter mages. If it was strictly the role Tevinter played in the past, why does it seem to be Andrastians who have such fear and hatred for mages and magic?

MisterJB wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

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.

Ferelden was already Andrastian before the occupation. The Chantry did nothing to support, or oppose, that particular invasion.
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.

The Chantry supported the Orlesian occupation of Ferelden. The Stolen Throne addresses this. It's why Maric and Loghain contemplated dissolving the Chantry once they emancipated the nation.

As for peaceful and the like, I think the elves and the mages would respectfully disagree.

MisterJB wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

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.

No but nor should we forget the dangers of magic. The magisters simply represent how much a mage can abuse his powers.

The Chantry and the templars show how much a non-mage can abuse their powers as well. Divine Ambrosia II nearly declared an Exalted March on her own cathedral because of a peaceful protest by mages. Meredith ordered the genocide of an entire population of men, women, and children because they were mages.

[MisterJB]

DuskWarden wrote...
If you would trust a Warden in such a position, why not a mage?

Because no one is born a Warden. If the Wardens become so physically powerful; if they take power during a Blight and refuse to relinquish it; if joining the Grey Wardens suddenly becomes less about fighting Darkspawn and more about gaining superhumans abilities; then they have become too dangerous and measures must be taken.
As of yet, it is not the case. Alistair rules as a ferelden first and Grey Warden second.

[TEWR]

MisterJB wrote...

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.

Of course human nature automatically dictates that people want more. But you can't say every Mage will create another Imperium just on those grounds alone, because that's assuredly not the case.

Examine Tevinter's culture and society and look at non-Tevinter society/culture. Do that and you'll see that the chances of every free mage -- or even the majority of free mages -- is not something that will occur very often to the point where all Mages must be locked up in fear of it.

Suffice it to say, Tevinter is a place built on the premise of "Survival of the fittest". Additionally, Tevinter Mages have never tried to do things on their own. Fenris himself states that without the slaves there Tevinter would crumble. Indeed, much of Tevinter now is a hollow shell of what it once was, in both range of influence and how the cities themselves appear.

Whereas other countries have stood on their own for centuries after Andraste's Exalted March and the Mages have been brought up with a different mindset. Not survival of the fittest, but a more ethical/moral/human way of living.

You'll have the occasional crazy like Tarohne, but she's just that: occasional.

[Fallstar]

MisterJB wrote...

DuskWarden wrote...
If you would trust a Warden in such a position, why not a mage?

Because no one is born a Warden. If the Wardens become so physically powerful; if they take power during a Blight and refuse to relinquish it; if joining the Grey Wardens suddenly becomes less about fighting Darkspawn and more about gaining superhumans abilities; then they have become too dangerous and measures must be taken.
As of yet, it is not the case. Alistair rules as a ferelden first and Grey Warden second.

Of all those things you say, what if they are requirements to stop a blight? What if the Wardens needed to use Avernus's research to stand a chance against the horde, what if there was no prospect of alternative leadership, like in Kirkwall. Would you trust your (non mage) Warden, or Alistair, or Duncan or whoever else to rule responsibly in the meantime? If you would, what makes that any different from having a mage in charge?

Besides, I'm getting away from my point here. The mages wouldn't need to be in charge, they just want to govern themselves, not everyone else. They are perfectly capable of policing themselves, and with the Templars gone, the reason the vast majority (if not 100%) of mages we have seen who go abomination do so, disappears.

As a matter of fact, I am struggling to think of a single case we have seen or read in a codex, where a mage summoning a demon across the veil into themselves and becoming an abomination, isn't as a direct result of Templars, fear of the circle, or the circle itself. If someone else can think of an example, I'd like to see it. Either way, the vast majority of such cases can be directly attributed to those three reasons. Surely the removal of the Templars as a military entity, and the abolisment of the circle system, is then only a logical step to prevent mages from becoming abominations?

[MisterJB]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
It'd help if they didn't cast every Mage into that same group. If they said "Fear the Magisters, not the Mages themselves" that'd be one thing.

The magisters are not the only ones who can abuse their power or become abominations.
Not that I support incinting lynch mobs, of course

I distinctly recall a Grand Cleric supporting the Orlesian occupation, saying that the Fereldan rebellion should cease and desist because they were in the wrong -- or something of the sort.

She wanted the civil war over because Ferelden was suffering. Once Maric became more powerful, she supported him.

The Chantry was also going to name the ninth Age the Sun Age originally -- can't remember what the significance was -- but then the presence of the High Dragon prompted the Divine to change it to the Dragon Age. This happened prior to the High Dragon's rampage, and rumors swirled that the reason for the name change was to support the Usurper King Meghren -- whose symbol was the Dragon.

I can't recall one way or the other. The Chantry had little reason to support the invasion since Ferelden was already Andrastian. Afterwards, they might have feared Maric would retaliate against it if he won.

Kordillius Drakon I took the Chantry -- the one we know of today -- and made it the national religion out of many Andrastian cults at the time as he progressively invaded other territories to expand Orlesian influence.

Never mind that Orlais itself has often pretended to help nations that were suffering from Blights and then routinely occupied those areas due to how weak they were, forcing said nations to have to fight back against Orlais and kick them out (Nevarra, Free Marches, and in Loghain's mind Ferelden was probably next).

True, Drakon used the excuse of the Maker to expand his influence. The Chantry is no saint.

LobselVith8 wrote...
And who was keeping Alrik in check? The Knight-Commander who was promoted to watch over mages despite her history?The only thing that stopped him from turning the child mage Ella into another tranquil victim was Hawke, who might be either an apostate or a blood mage himself.

Who watches the watchmen? The Seekers? Because no one intervened when Meredith became the de facto Viscount of Kirkwall, causing unrest among the people, the mages, and the templars.

The templars who commit these excesses need to be held accountable, no doubt. But like not all mages wishe to be magisters, not all templars wish to be Meredith and they play a needed role.
How can there be equality when there are men who can conjurate fireballs with their minds?

The Dalish have reason to hate Tevinter as well - enslavement, destruction of their homeland - but they don't react with the same fear and hatred that Andrastians do. Neither do the Avvar tribes or the Chasind Wilders or their predecessors, who have dealt with the Tevinter mages. If it was strictly the role Tevinter played in the past, why does it seem to be Andrastians who have such fear and hatred for mages and magic?

Because Andrastian societies have a greater number of mages amongst them due to the size of their population.
It's not just about the magisters, you know? Magic is dangerous, intentionally or not. People fear mages for good reason.
But, like I already acknowledged, the Chantry doesn't help dispell fear of magic.

The Chantry supported the Orlesian occupation of Ferelden. The Stolen Throne addresses this. It's why Maric and Loghain contemplated dissolving the Chantry once they emancipated the nation.

The Grand Cleric of Denerim supported it because she wanted Ferelden to be at peace. That is all.

As for peaceful and the like, I think the elves and the mages would respectfully disagree.

Missionaries were peacefully sent to the Dales and were violently kicked out.
Then the elves attacked Red Crossing and pushed further into Orlais at which point the Chantry called for an Exalted March.

The Chantry and the templars show how much a non-mage can abuse their powers as well. Divine Ambrosia II nearly declared an Exalted March on her own cathedral because of a peaceful protest by mages. Meredith ordered the genocide of an entire population of men, women, and children because they were mages.

You are correct. But these people only have the power we atribute to their positions.
Mages hold a very real power.

Modifié par MisterJB, 12 juillet 2012 - 07:49 .

[MisterJB]

DuskWarden wrote...
Besides, I'm getting away from my point here. The mages wouldn't need to be in charge, they just want to govern themselves, not everyone else. They are perfectly capable of policing themselves, and with the Templars gone, the reason the vast majority (if not 100%) of mages we have seen who go abomination do so, disappears.

As a matter of fact, I am struggling to think of a single case we have seen or read in a codex, where a mage summoning a demon across the veil into themselves and becoming an abomination, isn't as a direct result of Templars, fear of the circle, or the circle itself. If someone else can think of an example, I'd like to see it. Either way, the vast majority of such cases can be directly attributed to those three reasons. Surely the removal of the Templars as a military entity, and the abolisment of the circle system, is then only a logical step to prevent mages from becoming abominations?

Currently, the Chantry holds power and uses it to control mages So yes, people Uldred can claim they used blood magic in the name of freedom but this is just a convenient excuse. If it wasn't the templars, it would be something else.

The hard truth is that men, mundanes and mages alike, are by nature greedy and prone to conflict. If you let the mages police themselves, what will happen is that the different fraternities will compete for power and the first mage that resorts to blood magic will have a dozen following his steps. Out of necessity, they will claim.

How long until the first mage appears that believes mages should rule mundanes because they are clearly superior? It's all downhill from there.

[dragonflight288]

The hard truth is that men, mundanes and mages alike, are by nature greedy and prone to conflict. If you let the mages police themselves, what will happen is that the different fraternities will compete for power and the first mage that resorts to blood magic will have a dozen following his steps. Out of necessity, they will claim.

Or you'll have a mages collective like in Ferelden who make mundanes far more comfortable with magic because mages are seen in a more positive light. They police themselves, stick to the Chantry's teachings, and take care of problems before the Chantry gets involved.

[IanPolaris]

[quote]MisterJB wrote...

[quote]The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
It'd help if they didn't cast every Mage into that same group. If they said "Fear the Magisters, not the Mages themselves" that'd be one thing.[/quote]
The magisters are not the only ones who can abuse their power or become abominations.
Not that I support incinting lynch mobs, of course[/quote]

Yet this is precisely what the Chantry does with word and deed.  Support Lynch mobs against mages.  The Reverend Mother of Redcliff even admits this to a mage (human) warden.

[quote]
[quote]
I distinctly recall a Grand Cleric supporting the Orlesian occupation, saying that the Fereldan rebellion should cease and desist because they were in the wrong -- or something of the sort.[/quote]
She wanted the civil war over because Ferelden was suffering. Once Maric became more powerful, she supported him.
[/quote]

The Chantry was very much on the side of the Orlesian occupiers per Stolen Throne and most Fereldans have not forgotten it.  While Fereldan is indeed an Andrastian nation, support for the Chantry as an institution (beyond the local revered mothers) is probably the weakest in all the Andrastian nations.  King Maric and Gen Loghain very nearly abolished the Chantry in Fereldan for what they did during the occupation, and the current king (or queen) of Fereldan has de facto already schismed with the Chantry w/r/t magic and sheltering apostate mages.  I strongly suspect it's only a matter of time before Fereldan goes "Church of England" on the Chantry.

[quote]

[quote]The Chantry was also going to name the ninth Age the Sun Age originally -- can't remember what the significance was -- but then the presence of the High Dragon prompted the Divine to change it to the Dragon Age. This happened prior to the High Dragon's rampage, and rumors swirled that the reason for the name change was to support the Usurper King Meghren -- whose symbol was the Dragon.[/quote]
I can't recall one way or the other. The Chantry had little reason to support the invasion since Ferelden was already Andrastian. Afterwards, they might have feared Maric would retaliate against it if he won.
[/quote]

It was supposed to be the "sun age" and the sunburst is the symbol of Orlais among other things.

[quote]
[quote] Kordillius Drakon I took the Chantry -- the one we know of today -- and made it the national religion out of many Andrastian cults at the time as he progressively invaded other territories to expand Orlesian influence.

Never mind that Orlais itself has often pretended to help nations that were suffering from Blights and then routinely occupied those areas due to how weak they were, forcing said nations to have to fight back against Orlais and kick them out (Nevarra, Free Marches, and in Loghain's mind Ferelden was probably next).
[/quote]
True, Drakon used the excuse of the Maker to expand his influence. The Chantry is no saint.
[/quote]

And you think that they and their pet Inquisitors (that was the original name of the Templars btw) deserve total control over mages to treat them as subhuman why?

[quote]
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
And who was keeping Alrik in check? The Knight-Commander who was promoted to watch over mages despite her history?The only thing that stopped him from turning the child mage Ella into another tranquil victim was Hawke, who might be either an apostate or a blood mage himself.

Who watches the watchmen? The Seekers? Because no one intervened when Meredith became the de facto Viscount of Kirkwall, causing unrest among the people, the mages, and the templars.[/quote]
The templars who commit these excesses need to be held accountable, no doubt. But like not all mages wishe to be magisters, not all templars wish to be Meredith and they play a needed role.
How can there be equality when there are men who can conjurate fireballs with their minds?
[/quote]

That's nice, but the Chantry has proven over and over again that they not only are unable but UNWILLING to watch the Templars.  Indeed the Seekers seem to be even more anti-magic and anti-mage (and inhuman) than the Templars themselves (see Lambert)  This isn't about equality. It's about treating human beings AS human beings and not some exotic animal to be caged and feared....because shocker...if you treat anyone like an animal, many will indeed act like animals...and when such a person has great intrinsic power, the result is....unfortunate.

In short almost all the problems the Chantry lies at the feet of magic and mages are self-inflicted....by the Chantry and the Inquisitors...I mean Templars.

[quote]
[quote]
The Dalish have reason to hate Tevinter as well - enslavement, destruction of their homeland - but they don't react with the same fear and hatred that Andrastians do. Neither do the Avvar tribes or the Chasind Wilders or their predecessors, who have dealt with the Tevinter mages. If it was strictly the role Tevinter played in the past, why does it seem to be Andrastians who have such fear and hatred for mages and magic?[/quote]
Because Andrastian societies have a greater number of mages amongst them due to the size of their population.
It's not just about the magisters, you know? Magic is dangerous, intentionally or not. People fear mages for good reason.
[/quote]

Actually per capita the Dalish and apparently Avvars seem to have many more mages than Andrastian societies do.  In the case of the Dalish, lore states that all elves were once mages which does a lot to change one's perspective (and makes it harder to fear monger).  Just because you FEAR something does not give you the right to select a group that's done nothing to you and declare them to be sub-human.  Instead, deal with the fear and mitigate the real issues of magic in a human but just manner.

[quote]
But, like I already acknowledged, the Chantry doesn't help dispell fear of magic.
[/quote]

Indeed, they promote it by the Admission of the Revered Mother of Redcliff.  Why?  The Codex Entry "History of the Circle" tells us why.  Power.  The Chantry wants total control of all magic and any magic they don't control they want wiped out.  Safety has bupkis to do with it.  That's just convenient pap for the idiots in the pews.

[quote]
[quote]
The Chantry supported the Orlesian occupation of Ferelden. The Stolen Throne addresses this. It's why Maric and Loghain contemplated dissolving the Chantry once they emancipated the nation.[/quote]
The Grand Cleric of Denerim supported it because she wanted Ferelden to be at peace. That is all.
[/quote]

The Chantry was an active arm supporting the Orlesian occupation.  Indeed most non-Orlesians question where the Chantry leaves off and Orlais begins.

[quote]

[quote]As for peaceful and the like, I think the elves and the mages would respectfully disagree.[/quote]
Missionaries were peacefully sent to the Dales and were violently kicked out.
Then the elves attacked Red Crossing and pushed further into Orlais at which point the Chantry called for an Exalted March.
[/quote]

The Dalish tell a somewhat different tale.  In any event, the Dalish were given their lands by Andraste herself.  That is a little factoid the Chantry would like you to forget, and since it was their lands, they have every right to do with foreigners and missionaries as they saw fit including execution.  Orlais proved (per the Dalish) that they wouldn't be good neighors and wouldn't leave them be (a PoV supported by other Orlesian actions) and so decided to get rid of the problem...and would have too had the chantry not intervened to save Orlais (and I doubt they would have so intervened with any other nation).

I also find it "interesting" that the Chantry rewrote the Chant of Light to justify the Exalted March ex-post facto.

[quote]
[quote]
The Chantry and the templars show how much a non-mage can abuse their powers as well. Divine Ambrosia II nearly declared an Exalted March on her own cathedral because of a peaceful protest by mages. Meredith ordered the genocide of an entire population of men, women, and children because they were mages. [/quote]
You are correct. But these people only have the power we atribute to their positions.
Mages hold a very real power.[/quote]

Mages should be held accountable for their power like anyone else.  That does NOT mean being punished and imprisoned (or worse) just for being a mage.  The same arguments used against mages were used by the US Govt agains the Japanese-Americans during WWII.  I know that DG hates that comparison, but it's accurate and apt (including the danger aspect since SOME Japanese-Americans living in Hawaii really were Japanese spies and really did do a lot of damage at least in terms of intelligence).  It was wrong in WWII to slander all Japanese-Americans for their ethnicity and imprison them.  It is wrong today, and it is wrong in Fereldan.  Fear doesn't make a wrong action into a right one.

-Polaris

[Fallstar]

MisterJB wrote...
Currently, the Chantry holds power and uses it to control mages So yes, people Uldred can claim they used blood magic in the name of freedom but this is just a convenient excuse. If it wasn't the templars, it would be something else.

The hard truth is that men, mundanes and mages alike, are by nature greedy and prone to conflict. If you let the mages police themselves, what will happen is that the different fraternities will compete for power and the first mage that resorts to blood magic will have a dozen following his steps. Out of necessity, they will claim.

How long until the first mage appears that believes mages should rule mundanes because they are clearly superior? It's all downhill from there.

And that mage would be dealt with by other mages. There is no need to 'resort' to blood magic. Those who have proven themselves responsible should be able to study it like any other form of magic. 

[LobselVith8]

[quote]The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Shartan may have been a mage[/quote]

He wasn't. He was a swordsman.[/quote]

I know he wielded Glandivalis, but I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility. It's not as though Shartan is restricted by game mechanics like we are.

[quote]MisterJB wrote...

[quote]The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

It'd help if they didn't cast every Mage into that same group. If they said "Fear the Magisters, not the Mages themselves" that'd be one thing.[/quote]

The magisters are not the only ones who can abuse their power or become abominations.
Not that I support incinting lynch mobs, of course [/quote]

So in order to protect people from mages, the Chantry imprisons and subjugates them to the point where a continential revolt has taken place, with mages and templars fighting across Thedas over their ideological differences?

[quote]MisterJB wrote...

[quote]The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I distinctly recall a Grand Cleric supporting the Orlesian occupation, saying that the Fereldan rebellion should cease and desist because they were in the wrong -- or something of the sort.[/quote]

She wanted the civil war over because Ferelden was suffering. Once Maric became more powerful, she supported him. [/quote]

Mother Bronach turned her support to Maric once Meghren started alienating the people of Ferelden with his actions. Given that she was an advisor to King Meghren, and tried to help his leadership, I don't see how you can seriously deny that the Andrastian Chantry supported the occupation. In fact, she said she would have captured Maric if she had a proper honor guard when she went to meet Maric.

[quote]MisterJB wrote...

[quote]The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

The Chantry was also going to name the ninth Age the Sun Age originally -- can't remember what the significance was -- but then the presence of the High Dragon prompted the Divine to change it to the Dragon Age. This happened prior to the High Dragon's rampage, and rumors swirled that the reason for the name change was to support the Usurper King Meghren -- whose symbol was the Dragon.[/quote]

I can't recall one way or the other. The Chantry had little reason to support the invasion since Ferelden was already Andrastian. Afterwards, they might have feared Maric would retaliate against it if he won. [/quote]

Maric and Loghain contemplated doing precisely that because the Andrastian Chantry supported the Orlesian occupation.

[quote]MisterJB wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

And who was keeping Alrik in check? The Knight-Commander who was promoted to watch over mages despite her history?The only thing that stopped him from turning the child mage Ella into another tranquil victim was Hawke, who might be either an apostate or a blood mage himself.

Who watches the watchmen? The Seekers? Because no one intervened when Meredith became the de facto Viscount of Kirkwall, causing unrest among the people, the mages, and the templars.[/quote]

The templars who commit these excesses need to be held accountable, no doubt. But like not all mages wishe to be magisters, not all templars wish to be Meredith and they play a needed role.
How can there be equality when there are men who can conjurate fireballs with their minds? [/quote]

The same can be said about the men who wish to dominate mages because they think it's their divine right to do so.

[quote]MisterJB wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

The Dalish have reason to hate Tevinter as well - enslavement, destruction of their homeland - but they don't react with the same fear and hatred that Andrastians do. Neither do the Avvar tribes or the Chasind Wilders or their predecessors, who have dealt with the Tevinter mages. If it was strictly the role Tevinter played in the past, why does it seem to be Andrastians who have such fear and hatred for mages and magic?[/quote]

Because Andrastian societies have a greater number of mages amongst them due to the size of their population.
It's not just about the magisters, you know? Magic is dangerous, intentionally or not. People fear mages for good reason.
But, like I already acknowledged, the Chantry doesn't help dispell fear of magic. [/quote]

Considering the stark difference between the Andrastian nations and the societies outside Andrastian influence, it seems they play the driving role in why such anti-mage sentiment exists. We only need to look at mages like Keili to see just how destructive that influence can be.

[quote]MisterJB wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

The Chantry supported the Orlesian occupation of Ferelden. The Stolen Throne addresses this. It's why Maric and Loghain contemplated dissolving the Chantry once they emancipated the nation.[/quote]

The Grand Cleric of Denerim supported it because she wanted Ferelden to be at peace. That is all.[/quote]

Mother Bronach advised King Meghren even when rebellion was breaking out, in an attempt to help him, and defected only after he violently refused her advice about how to lead Ferelden as its King, when he commanded her to paint Maric as a demon.

[quote]MisterJB wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

As for peaceful and the like, I think the elves and the mages would respectfully disagree.[/quote]

Missionaries were peacefully sent to the Dales and were violently kicked out.
Then the elves attacked Red Crossing and pushed further into Orlais at which point the Chantry called for an Exalted March.[/quote]

The Orlesians claim the elves started the war by attacking Red Crossing unprovoked, but the elves claim a different story for the inception of the war. They say the Chantry sent missionaries into the Dales, and when those missionaries were kicked out by the elves, they sent in templars. Considering the Orleisan history of conquest, there's reason to doubt the accuracy of the Orlesian version.

[quote]MisterJB wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

The Chantry and the templars show how much a non-mage can abuse their powers as well. Divine Ambrosia II nearly declared an Exalted March on her own cathedral because of a peaceful protest by mages. Meredith ordered the genocide of an entire population of men, women, and children because they were mages. [/quote]

You are correct. But these people only have the power we atribute to their positions.
Mages hold a very real power.[/quote]

Considering the only human religion in most nations has attributed a great deal of power to the templars, these armed and armored warriors seem to wield the kind of power that mages will never have.

[TEWR]

LobselVith8 wrote...

I know he wielded Glandivalis, but I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility. It's not as though Shartan is restricted by game mechanics like we are.

True, but there's no real indication that it's a possibility. None so far anyway. It's possible, but never hinted towards.

I'm sure the Canticle of Shartan has more on the subject though. It'd be interesting to read the whole Canticle in DAIII, since it's among the Dissonant Verses. All we have currently is this:

At Shartan's word, the sky
Grew black with arrows.
At Our Lady's, ten thousand swords
Rang from their sheaths,
A great hymn rose over Valarian Fields gladly proclaiming:
Those who had been slaves were now free.

-Shartan 10:1, Dissonant Verse

MisterJB wrote...

The magisters are not the only ones who can abuse their power or become abominations.

First: I'm not saying don't educate the masses on the dangers of magic. I'm saying don't go "All Mages are evil! They'll create another Imperium if they're free! They're responsible for all the sins of the world!!"

Because what does that accomplish, other then riling up non-mages to kill Mages and making people look like uneducated ****s?

Second: You're right that the Magisters aren't the only ones that can abuse their power. The Baroness did, Arland did, Meghren did, Meredith did, Vaughan did, Howe did, etc..

What's interesting to note is that the Chantry, for all its proclamations that Mages cannot be free or in a position of political power, let the Baroness rule Ferelden's Blackmarsh region. And she was a Mage.

Of course, money buys Mages rights they should already have. So either the Chantry took her money and let her live freely -- a sign of how sickeningly intertwined Orlais and the Chantry are -- or they're not bothering to enforce their laws on Orlesian Mages.

LobselVith8 wrote...

Maric and Loghain contemplated doing precisely that because the Andrastian Chantry supported the Orlesian occupation

Somehow I can see Ferelden becoming the new HQ of the Divine, seeing as she's got very little influence now but is open to pro-mage reforms -- as are Alistair and Anora.

[Sylvius the Mad]

MisterJB wrote...

How long until the first mage appears that believes mages should rule mundanes because they are clearly superior? It's all downhill from there.

It's currently going downhill in the other direction.  There is no happy medium.  There is no compromise  Either the mages will be eradicated, or they will rule over and oppress the non-mages.  Those are your options.

[IanPolaris]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

How long until the first mage appears that believes mages should rule mundanes because they are clearly superior? It's all downhill from there.

It's currently going downhill in the other direction.  There is no happy medium.  There is no compromise  Either the mages will be eradicated, or they will rule over and oppress the non-mages.  Those are your options.

It doesn't have to be that way, though.  Look at the Haven Cultists.  Sure they were evil sots that worshipped an overgrown lizard, but you had mages and non-mages living side by side with each other.  Their leader:  A NON-Mage Reaver named Kolgrim.  In fact Kolgrim has some interesting and pithy things to say about the Chantry's attitude towards mages and magic.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Maric and Loghain contemplated doing precisely that because the Andrastian Chantry supported the Orlesian occupation

Somehow I can see Ferelden becoming the new HQ of the Divine, seeing as she's got very little influence now but is open to pro-mage reforms -- as are Alistair and Anora.

Before Asunder was written, I foretold that Fereldan was about to go "Church of England" on the Chantry.  Given what has happened, I strongly suspect that the Divine will simply grant Alistair (or Anora) the mage reforms they want including secular control of magic.  It's either that or lose the Chantry entirely to the likes of Lambert.  Given Celene's weakened position vis a vis the civil war, Orlais will be forced to accept the Fereldan schism.  So in short, I think that Fereldan will go Church of England on the Chantry but will do so with the Divine's blessings given the (lack of) alternatives the Divine now has.

-Polaris

[MisterJB]

IanPolaris wrote...
Yet this is precisely what the Chantry does with word and deed.  Support Lynch mobs against mages.  The Reverend Mother of Redcliff even admits this to a mage (human) warden.

I'm sure they preech magic is dangerous but I seriously doubt any Revered Mother actually says "Kill mage children."
If they do, it's something that needs to change.

The Chantry was very much on the side of the Orlesian occupiers per Stolen Throne and most Fereldans have not forgotten it. 

I can't speak for the Chantry in Orlais but what the Grand Cleric of Denerim says to Maric is that he should submit because too may fereldens had died due to the civil war.
I won't fault a woman for attempting to save the lives of her people. Even if she supported a tyrant.

And you think that they and their pet Inquisitors (that was the original name of the Templars btw) deserve total control over mages to treat them as subhuman why?

I have often said mages deserve more freedoms than they have. Certainly much more than they had in Kirkwall.
What I oppose is the idea that we should let people who have so clear and gigantic natural advantages to the common men police themselves.
Mages and templars should work together to protect mundanes from mages, mages from mundanes and everyone from demon.

That's nice, but the Chantry has proven over and over again that they not only are unable but UNWILLING to watch the Templars.  Indeed the Seekers seem to be even more anti-magic and anti-mage (and inhuman) than the Templars themselves (see Lambert) 

Lambert? One person makes the Seekers anti-magic? Cassandra's mentor and the High Seeker from "Dawn of the Seeker" were both reasonable men with friends inside the Circle.
Do you remember how Lambert became anti-mage? Because he witnessed the Magisters take back power in Tevinter.

This isn't about equality. It's about treating human beings AS human beings and not some exotic animal to be caged and feared....because shocker...if you treat anyone like an animal, many will indeed act like animals...and when such a person has great intrinsic power, the result is....unfortunate.

In short almost all the problems the Chantry lies at the feet of magic and mages are self-inflicted....by the Chantry and the Inquisitors...I mean Templars.

It is about equality. Do not act as if the mages are somehow a morally superior group that would never opress anyone. They are human and prone to the same abuses of power as any other.
Unfortunately, mages have the power to imolate people with their minds. How can the mundanes expect to be treated as equals if there is no system to prevent the rise of another Tevinter?

Actually per capita the Dalish and apparently Avvars seem to have many more mages than Andrastian societies do.  In the case of the Dalish, lore states that all elves were once mages which does a lot to change one's perspective (and makes it harder to fear monger).  Just because you FEAR something does not give you the right to select a group that's done nothing to you and declare them to be sub-human.  Instead, deal with the fear and mitigate the real issues of magic in a human but just manner.

Yes, I'm sure the elves would like to think they were all once immortal too. It is as doubtful as the existence of the Maker.

Do you have a proposition on how to mitigate what you view as the real issues of magic?

Indeed, they promote it by the Admission of the Revered Mother of Redcliff.  Why?  The Codex Entry "History of the Circle" tells us why.  Power.  The Chantry wants total control of all magic and any magic they don't control they want wiped out.  Safety has bupkis to do with it.  That's just convenient pap for the idiots in the pews.

It may be so they want a monopoly but remember how a group of mages took over the Grand Cathedral because they felt their talents were being wasted? Or how only seven mages were sent to Ostagar?
The Chantry doesn't actually abuse it's control over magic. Thet prohibition is well enforced, there are no secret blood mages serving the Divine.
So, I think you are wrong. I think it truly is more about fear and safety than anything else.

The Dalish tell a somewhat different tale.  In any event, the Dalish were given their lands by Andraste herself.  That is a little factoid the Chantry would like you to forget, and since it was their lands, they have every right to do with foreigners and missionaries as they saw fit including execution.  Orlais proved (per the Dalish) that they wouldn't be good neighors and wouldn't leave them be (a PoV supported by other Orlesian actions) and so decided to get rid of the problem...and would have too had the chantry not intervened to save Orlais (and I doubt they would have so intervened with any other nation).

I also find it "interesting" that the Chantry rewrote the Chant of Light to justify the Exalted March ex-post facto.

It's true that there are always two sides to a war but I find it interesting how you give the Chantry hell for imprisioning people because they might be dangerous but now you are defending the right of the elves to destroy Orlais because the nation might not respect borders.

Mages should be held accountable for their power like anyone else.  That does NOT mean being punished and imprisoned (or worse) just for being a mage.  The same arguments used against mages were used by the US Govt agains the Japanese-Americans during WWII.  I know that DG hates that comparison, but it's accurate and apt (including the danger aspect since SOME Japanese-Americans living in Hawaii really were Japanese spies and really did do a lot of damage at least in terms of intelligence).  It was wrong in WWII to slander all Japanese-Americans for their ethnicity and imprison them.  It is wrong today, and it is wrong in Fereldan.  Fear doesn't make a wrong action into a right one.

Who said anything about it being right? It is necessary. Mages and mundanes are not born equal so, equality between them is almost impossible. If there is to be lasting peace, both sides must be willing to make concessions.
But just like mages shouldn't be expected to give up their children at birth to the Chantry, mundanes can't be expected to not be fearful of living next door to someone who can slit his wrists, force you to kill your family and no one will ever know.

Modifié par MisterJB, 12 juillet 2012 - 09:07 .

[TEWR]

MisterJB wrote...

Mages and templars should work together to protect mundanes from mages, mages from mundanes and everyone from demon.

That's what I've often said, and the Mages' Collective showcases this at its finest -- as fine as they can be, when operating in secrecy.

The Mages there have an entire regiment of Templars agreeing with and helping them continue their existence. One can logically assume that the Mages will often petition said Templars for assistance in matters of arcane policing.

[TEWR]

IanPolaris wrote...

Before Asunder was written, I foretold that Fereldan was about to go "Church of England" on the Chantry.  Given what has happened, I strongly suspect that the Divine will simply grant Alistair (or Anora) the mage reforms they want including secular control of magic.  It's either that or lose the Chantry entirely to the likes of Lambert.  Given Celene's weakened position vis a vis the civil war, Orlais will be forced to accept the Fereldan schism.  So in short, I think that Fereldan will go Church of England on the Chantry but will do so with the Divine's blessings given the (lack of) alternatives the Divine now has.

-Polaris

Yup I remember those posts of yours long ago. They were definitely things I saw happening as well -- and indeed I partook in those discussions -- and I can see what you're stating as still being a possibility.

But that would require DA3 to have an interesting plot that is well executed and makes sense! Can't have that, now can we?

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 12 juillet 2012 - 09:14 .

[MisterJB]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
First: I'm not saying don't educate the masses on the dangers of magic. I'm saying don't go "All Mages are evil! They'll create another Imperium if they're free! They're responsible for all the sins of the world!!"

Because what does that accomplish, other then riling up non-mages to kill Mages and making people look like uneducated ****s?

We can agree on this.

What's interesting to note is that the Chantry, for all its proclamations that Mages cannot be free or in a position of political power, let the Baroness rule Ferelden's Blackmarsh region. And she was a Mage.

Of course, money buys Mages rights they should already have. So either the Chantry took her money and let her live freely -- a sign of how sickeningly intertwined Orlais and the Chantry are -- or they're not bothering to enforce their laws on Orlesian Mages.

They enforce the laws on orlesian mages. The war started in the White Spire, after all.
As to why the Baroness was able to rule in freedom despite being a mage...your guess is as good as mine. Being a baroness would probrably help, yes. That is one of the reasons it is hard to control the mages in Tevinter, they belong to noble houses.

The Baroness is actually a good example of how dangerous a mage in positions of power can be. A mundane baroness could opress the people but when they went to burn her mansion, all she could do was send soldiers.
This magical Baroness, however, imprisioned the souls of her subjects in the Fade for dozens of years.

Modifié par MisterJB, 12 juillet 2012 - 09:14 .

[MisterJB]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

Mages and templars should work together to protect mundanes from mages, mages from mundanes and everyone from demon.

That's what I've often said, and the Mages' Collective showcases this at its finest -- as fine as they can be, when operating in secrecy.

The Mages there have an entire regiment of Templars agreeing with and helping them continue their existence. One can logically assume that the Mages will often petition said Templars for assistance in matters of arcane policing.

I don't trust the Collective unless we are given more information.
Too shady.

[TEWR]

They enforce the laws on orlesian mages. The war started in the White Spire, after all.

Sorry, I mean Orlesian Mages that are apostates. Not Orlesian Mages in general. My bad.

The Baroness is actually a good example of how dangerous a mage in positions of power can be. A mundane baroness could opress the people but when they went to burn her mansion, all she could do was send soldiers.
This magical Baroness, however, imprisioned the souls of her subjects in the Fade for dozens of years.

Oh I don't disagree that they should be barred from the political realm -- though I personally believe it's the how that matters when ruling, not the who.

Still, that alone isn't reason to lock up Mages. To lock them up for that seems like overkill. It's not really addressing the issue. It's side-stepping it IMO.

Haven, for all its moral bankruptcy, had free Mages and didn't have Tevinter 2.0 or Abominations running rampant. It's something I pointed out a few pages back IIRC.

[Xilizhra]

It may be so they want a monopoly but remember how a group of mages took over the Grand Cathedral because they felt their talents were being wasted? Or how only seven mages were sent to Ostagar?
The Chantry doesn't actually abuse it's control over magic. Thet prohibition is well enforced, there are no secret blood mages serving the Divine.
So, I think you are wrong. I think it truly is more about fear and safety than anything else.

Actually, everyone who uses phylacteries is using blood magic. And I suspect much of it is less about mundane safety than it is about religious paranoia and bigotry.

Whether or not mages are dangerous, the Chantry deserves no say whatsoever in managing them. How exactly mages should be treated is a separate issue from the Chantry being able to do anything. It should not, the templars should be wiped out as a coherent order and the Chantry forced into surrender before any sort of new arrangements can be made about how the mages should be handled.

[TEWR]

MisterJB wrote...

I don't trust the Collective unless we are given more information.
Too shady.

Why not? If it's about how they're secretive, consider the fact that at that time they were apostates -- with connections in the Circle.

They can't really go around blabbing about who they are, as that runs detrimental to their cause.

They do police themselves, as we see that they want a cabal of maleficarum taken care of. They also abide by the Chantry's laws -- indeed, we never hear anything about any mage within the Collective practing blood magic and NOT being punished for it. Quite the opposite. -- and enforce them.

They also make it a point to deal with problems before the Chantry gets involved, thereby increasing pro-mage sentiments in Ferelden.

All of that, plus a regiment of Templars helping them, while remaining hidden from the non-friendly Chantry authorities.... that seems to point to them being good at what they do.

If they didn't have to stay hidden, they'd probably do a helluva job.

[Sylvius the Mad]

IanPolaris wrote...

It doesn't have to be that way, though.  Look at the Haven Cultists.  Sure they were evil sots that worshipped an overgrown lizard, but you had mages and non-mages living side by side with each other.  Their leader:  A NON-Mage Reaver named Kolgrim.  In fact Kolgrim has some interesting and pithy things to say about the Chantry's attitude towards mages and magic.

Yes, I suppose you could introduce a third-party to oppress mages and non-mages alike.

I fail to see how that's better.