673 réponses à ce sujet

[dragonflight288]

@ Lotion

You completely dismiss IanPolaris's arguments, but offer little to no evidence at all to support your own. I love good, honest debates. MisterJB and I had a wonderful debate in this very same thread, around pages 16-18 I believe. He supporting templars and me supporting mages. The result of it was neither of us changed our opinions, but we did become friends from mutual respect. Things were kept civil, we didn't call it each other names, there was a healthy balance of points and counterpoints backed up with evidence from in-game or novel events. I couldn't dismiss his points, even if I disagreed with a few of them, because they were backed up with evidence and I couldn't ignore it. He couldn't dismiss my points for the same reason. The problems were on the table, along with the flaws in our arguments.

But when I see you debate, I have a very hard time taking anything you say seriously as you hardly ever present evidence to support your arguments when you counter someone else, and then you completely dismiss other people's arguments, even if they use in-game or novel evidence to support it.

Please do not take offense to this, but rather instead, take it as a plea to start using evidence more frequently to back up your arguments, and if you want to disprove someone's opinion, you should point out how it's flawed, why it's flawed, with accompanying evidence, instead of the standard "that's silly and wrong so I won't argue with it."

Let's take for example that David Gaider did say that the Seekers job is to investigate templars who overstep their bounds. Okay, cool. No one disputes that's their job description.

Ianpolaris started disputing whether or not they DID their job or not. They weren't in Kirkwall. And Lambert did spend a lot of time trying to be a templar and oppose any sort of reform to the Circles instead of investigating templars, which is his actual job.

[dragonflight288]

Did a double check, my and MistJB's debate is actually on page 14-15.

[Lotion Soronarr]

dragonflight288 wrote...

@ Lotion

You completely dismiss IanPolaris's arguments, but offer little to no evidence at all to support your own.

But when I see you debate, I have a very hard time taking anything you say seriously as you hardly ever present evidence to support your arguments when you counter someone else, and then you completely dismiss other people's arguments, even if they use in-game or novel evidence to support it.

Please do not take offense to this, but rather instead, take it as a plea to start using evidence more frequently to back up your arguments, and if you want to disprove someone's opinion, you should point out how it's flawed, why it's flawed, with accompanying evidence, instead of the standard "that's silly and wrong so I won't argue with it."

You oppinion is noted.
And filed under "I do not care".
I'm not here to satisfy whatever your createria think I should adhere too. I'm not here to repeat the same facts a zillion times over and over (which I did for god-knows how long), only for them to be ignored or mis-interpreted.
I'm not going to write again a 2-page essay on exactly why letting mages roam free is a bad idea.

Common sense. That the prime argument. If you have a problem wiht that...well, I don't care really.

Ianpolaris started disputing whether or not they DID their job or not. They weren't in Kirkwall. And Lambert did spend a lot of time trying to be a templar and oppose any sort of reform to the Circles instead of investigating templars, which is his actual job.

Which doesn't prove anything other than ONE seeker was a douche.
There is a difference between facts, and how one choses to (mis)read that facts.
Causation and correleation and all that jazz.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Nizaris1 wrote...
I just don't understand how you don't see these points from mage supporters

For you, Templar = good, Mage = bad...that is your only argument

nope.
Templars = crap
Mages = bigger crap

In a world of crap, you stick with smaller crap.

I have mentioned before in other thread i think, about the Templar/Chantry treated Mages like ENEMY, why? It is because they generalize all mages are the same with Tevinter Mages, that the Chantry is like USA and Templar is like anti- terrorist troop who being sent to invade Iraq and Afghanistan. If you don't understand what i mean, then you are blind.

Templars is nothing like that. There is no proper analogy in the modern world.
The closest one would be a quarantene, which is FULLY justified in the modern world.

[Fallstar]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
You oppinion is noted.
And filed under "I do not care".
I'm not here to satisfy whatever your createria think I should adhere too. I'm not here to repeat the same facts a zillion times over and over (which I did for god-knows how long), only for them to be ignored or mis-interpreted.
I'm not going to write again a 2-page essay on exactly why letting mages roam free is a bad idea.

Common sense. That the prime argument. If you have a problem wiht that...well, I don't care really.

All Orlesians are in fact aliens imitating humans. Common sense. That's the prime argument. If you have a problem with that...well, I don't care really.

If anyone presents facts in a reasonable manner which suggest that all Orlesians are not in fact aliens, I have this to say. Your opinion is noted, and filed under "I do not care."

Which doesn't prove anything other than ONE seeker was a douche.
There is a difference between facts, and how one choses to (mis)read that facts.
Causation and correleation and all that jazz.

One seeker who just so happens to be the 'Lord Seeker'. Unless all male seekers are referred to as Lord, then it seems to me that he is something of an important seeker, meaning whether or not he is a 'douche' can be quite important.

[MisterJB]

And you think they wouldn't agree on bathing hours for men and women?
That is far more privacy than we had in the showers in my High School. And if you pass your Harrowing, you earn your own private room.
As far as living accomodations go, the mages of Ferelden have nothing to complain about. That is a luxurious tower.

Modifié par MisterJB, 14 juillet 2012 - 02:24 .

[MisterJB]

DuskWarden wrote...
One seeker who just so happens to be the 'Lord Seeker'. Unless all male seekers are referred to as Lord, then it seems to me that he is something of an important seeker, meaning whether or not he is a 'douche' can be quite important.

The High Seeker of "Dawn of the Seeker", Byron, Cassandra and Leliana(?) are all very reasonable people who treat mages with dignity and respect. Even Lambert might have remained an idealist if he hadn't been posted to Tevinter.
This might change in DA3 but, so far, the number of reasonable Seekers beats that of Chantry Zealots Seekers.

Modifié par MisterJB, 14 juillet 2012 - 02:33 .

[LobselVith8]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

You oppinion is noted.
And filed under "I do not care".
I'm not here to satisfy whatever your createria think I should adhere too. I'm not here to repeat the same facts a zillion times over and over (which I did for god-knows how long), only for them to be ignored or mis-interpreted.
I'm not going to write again a 2-page essay on exactly why letting mages roam free is a bad idea.

Common sense. That the prime argument. If you have a problem wiht that...well, I don't care really.

It seems to me that you think your opinions fall under "common sense," and everyone else who views the situation differently than you is wrong. As for letting mages "roam free," why is it that arguing against the Chantry controlled Circles means that mages will simply be lawless? Ian already addressed that mages should be policed, that there should be regulations, and that mages who break the law should be punished. Others have shared this view, or argued for similar views where mages. The crux of the disagreement is the Chantry of Andraste and the Order of Templars having first, last, and final say over mages throughout Thedas.

Some of us think that giving the Chantry and their military arm authority over mages in the name of the Maker is a very, very bad idea.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Which doesn't prove anything other than ONE seeker was a douche.
There is a difference between facts, and how one choses to (mis)read that facts.
Causation and correleation and all that jazz.

Kirkwall is a fairly good example of the Seekers of Truth not doing their job. In fact, since Leliana is apparently not a Seeker, it seems that the Divine had to send one of her own agents to try to surmise what was going on in a city-state that was being ruled by the local Knight-Commander. Letting a city-state become ruled by a templar for years seems to be a fairly good indication that the Seekers aren't fulfilling their responsibilities.

[LobselVith8]

MisterJB wrote...

And you think they wouldn't agree on bathing hours for men and women?

We can assume all we want, I suppose.

MisterJB wrote...

That is far more privacy than we had in the showers in my High School. And if you pass your Harrowing, you earn your own private room.

The Harrowing? I believe the mage protagonist can address this as being "thrown to the wolves," and Irving's response is simply that they all faced the Harrowing. Not exactly much of a rebuttal.

MisterJB wrote...

As far as living accomodations go, the mages of Ferelden have nothing to complain about. That is a luxurious tower.

The Warden can address the problems with the Chantry controlled Circle; the mage protagonist can say the Circle is "prison" and an "oppressive place," and Wynne never contests this. In fact, Wynne's argument to The Warden is that taking a leadership position at the Circle could allow him to change the latter, but she advises that it would take time.

[IanPolaris]

MisterJB wrote...

DuskWarden wrote...
One seeker who just so happens to be the 'Lord Seeker'. Unless all male seekers are referred to as Lord, then it seems to me that he is something of an important seeker, meaning whether or not he is a 'douche' can be quite important.

The High Seeker of "Dawn of the Seeker", Byron, Cassandra and Leliana(?) are all very reasonable people who treat mages with dignity and respect. Even Lambert might have remained an idealist if he hadn't been posted to Tevinter.
This might change in DA3 but, so far, the number of reasonable Seekers beats that of Chantry Zealots Seekers.

Per WoG, Lelianna isn't a Seeker at all, she is merely the Divine's trusted agent going back to when she was a mere Grand Cleric (and was known as Dorthea).  Also in DA2, Lelianna is (IMO) completely retconned and very anti-magic regardless of what she was like in DAO.  As for Cassandra, we have absolutely no idea if she is reasonable or not, or if she wants to treat the mages with dignity and respect or not.  All we know is that she apparently isn't so blinded by bigotry that she can smell a self-fulfilling prophecy (and recognize that Meredith caused most of the problems) when her nose is rubbed in it by Varic (about three years late I might add).  Not exactly a high recommendation there.

-Polaris

[Rinshikai10]

IanPolaris, I'm wondering if you have read Asunder of seen Dots? (spoilers) If so you see that Leliana is not really Anti magic even though she does appear to be that way in DA2. She in truth helps mages more then once in the book. As for Cassandra she is for the most part Anti mage for the most part in DotS, due to her past experiences where she sees all mages as the same circle or not. I believe somewhere on this forum the is a discussion with David Gaider about Leliana. I don't know what it was called but if you Google David Gaider Leliana you should be able to find it.

[MisterJB]

LobselVith8 wrote...
The Warden can address the problems with the Chantry controlled Circle; the mage protagonist can say the Circle is "prison" and an "oppressive place," and Wynne never contests this. In fact, Wynne's argument to The Warden is that taking a leadership position at the Circle could allow him to change the latter, but she advises that it would take time.

You're missing the point. I was not arguing wether or not the Circle is opressive or passing judgement on the nature of the Harrowing.
What I said was that the Circle Tower of Ferelden is a luxurious place compared with the rest of the nation.

From there, you could argue that a gilded cage is still a cage and I might agree or disagree with you.

IanPolaris wrote...
Per WoG, Lelianna isn't a Seeker at all, she is merely the Divine's trusted agent going back to when she was a mere Grand Cleric (and was known as Dorthea).  Also in DA2, Lelianna is (IMO) completely retconned and very anti-magic regardless of what she was like in DAO.
As for Cassandra, we have absolutely no idea if she is reasonable or not, or if she wants to treat the mages with dignity and respect or not.  All we know is that she apparently isn't so blinded by bigotry that she can smell a self-fulfilling prophecy (and recognize that Meredith caused most of the problems) when her nose is rubbed in it by Varic (about three years late I might add).  Not exactly a high recommendation there.

-Polaris

As Rinshikai10 mentioned, Leliana helps the mages more than once in Asunder which shows she is still, very much, not anti-magic. Kirkwall's Circle was out of control. Partially because of Meredith and partially because it is siting on top of an Hellmouth.

As for Cassandra, the simple fact she obeys Justinia and is attempting to end the war peacefully shows she is a much more reasonable Seeker than Lambert.
In "Dawn of the Seeker" she goes through a very common character development. She is anti-magic because blood mages butchered her family, then she works with a mage that challenges her preconceptions and ends up working with Circle mages that help her save the Chantry.

Modifié par MisterJB, 14 juillet 2012 - 07:27 .

[dragonflight288]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

@ Lotion

You completely dismiss IanPolaris's arguments, but offer little to no evidence at all to support your own.

But when I see you debate, I have a very hard time taking anything you say seriously as you hardly ever present evidence to support your arguments when you counter someone else, and then you completely dismiss other people's arguments, even if they use in-game or novel evidence to support it.

Please do not take offense to this, but rather instead, take it as a plea to start using evidence more frequently to back up your arguments, and if you want to disprove someone's opinion, you should point out how it's flawed, why it's flawed, with accompanying evidence, instead of the standard "that's silly and wrong so I won't argue with it."

You oppinion is noted.
And filed under "I do not care".
I'm not here to satisfy whatever your createria think I should adhere too. I'm not here to repeat the same facts a zillion times over and over (which I did for god-knows how long), only for them to be ignored or mis-interpreted.
I'm not going to write again a 2-page essay on exactly why letting mages roam free is a bad idea.

Common sense. That the prime argument. If you have a problem wiht that...well, I don't care really.

<_< Nice job cutting out most of what I said and changing the context.

Very well then. If you cannot have an honest debate, then it's simply not worth trading words with you.

[DPSSOC]

Nizaris1 wrote...

This is apprentice mage quarter...take a note that it is mix men and women...look at the bath...

On mixed gender bathing, so what?  Rome and many other civilizations had public baths; not just baths in the same vicinity but a massive pool with multiple people.  Our attitudes about decency and modesty are, in the grand scheme of things, a fairly new conept so it's not unreasonable that in a world lacking religious organizations preaching that the human form is wretched or unclean and must be covered such attitudes would take longer to develop if ever at all.

As for the image provided the baths are separated by partitions so if they're granted that level of privacy (sides and back) it's reasonable to assume there's a curtain on the front.

[Fallstar]

OK, mixed gender bathing is a terrible crime and all, but I hardly think it's at the top of Anders' manifesto.

[LobselVith8]

MisterJB wrote...

You're missing the point. I was not arguing wether or not the Circle is opressive or passing judgement on the nature of the Harrowing.
What I said was that the Circle Tower of Ferelden is a luxurious place compared with the rest of the nation.

From there, you could argue that a gilded cage is still a cage and I might agree or disagree with you.

Considering how some mages would risk death simply to escape, you and I will have to agree to disagree.

MisterJB wrote...

As Rinshikai10 mentioned, Leliana helps the mages more than once in Asunder which shows she is still, very much, not anti-magic. Kirkwall's Circle was out of control. Partially because of Meredith and partially because it is siting on top of an Hellmouth.

Ian was addressing Leliana in Act III's Faith.

MisterJB wrote...

As for Cassandra, the simple fact she obeys Justinia and is attempting to end the war peacefully shows she is a much more reasonable Seeker than Lambert.
In "Dawn of the Seeker" she goes through a very common character development. She is anti-magic because blood mages butchered her family, then she works with a mage that challenges her preconceptions and ends up working with Circle mages that help her save the Chantry.

She may be more reasonable, but I don't see how she realistically expected to end the war peacefully. Templars and mages want the exact opposite of the other, and the rebellion stretches across the continent.

[MisterJB]

LobselVith8 wrote...
Ian was addressing Leliana in Act III's Faith.

I know. But her actions in "Asunder"; which was written by David Gaider and occur after DA2; shows she is not anti-magic despite being pro-chantry.

[Lazy Jer]

MisterJB wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...
Ian was addressing Leliana in Act III's Faith.

I know. But her actions in "Asunder"; which was written by David Gaider and occur after DA2; shows she is not anti-magic despite being pro-chantry.

Definitely agree.  Leliana is not anti-mage, which is shown in Asunder.  What's more nothing she says in Act III in Faith indicates that she's anti-mage.  She worries about the safetly of the Grand Cleric considering the volitile situation in Kirkwall, but she doesn't really show any anti-mage behavior.

[dragonflight288]

Lazy Jer wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...
Ian was addressing Leliana in Act III's Faith.

I know. But her actions in "Asunder"; which was written by David Gaider and occur after DA2; shows she is not anti-magic despite being pro-chantry.

Definitely agree.  Leliana is not anti-mage, which is shown in Asunder.  What's more nothing she says in Act III in Faith indicates that she's anti-mage.  She worries about the safetly of the Grand Cleric considering the volitile situation in Kirkwall, but she doesn't really show any anti-mage behavior.

I have to disagree that she is portrayed as anti-mage in Act 3.

Bear in mind this is my own personal interpretation and anyone can feel free to disagree.

But Leliana was there on behalf of the Divine on a secret mission. She spread rumors about herself being there and then watched how the mage elements reacted. She simply comments that the Resolutionists reacted with violence and intent to murder, and that establishes that particular element of the mages character.

As a secret agent, who had spent years fooling people in the courts of Orlais, seducing people, stealing from them, assassinating people, she had to have mastered the art of keeping secrets. And I find in many forms of media that the best spies and double agents are the ones who give a little information and keep the rest to themselves. Just enough factual information for people to draw their own conclusions on.

The way I see it, she told Hawke as much as Hawke needed to know, given the circumstances. Hawke was attacked by a rogue group of mages, so Leliana told Hawke about them. Hawke questions why Leliana is there and she says it's to gather information. But she is quite vague on what information she is gathering, where she is gathering it, and even who she is investigating. Only that she is gathering information on the state of affairs here and reporting directly to the Divine. Hawke (and us) jump to conclusions.

We are assuming a lot out of a little. And all she did was give Hawke the information relevant to him/her and Elthina, and everything else was kept quiet.

[Lotion Soronarr]

DuskWarden wrote...
All Orlesians are in fact aliens imitating humans. Common sense. That's the prime argument. If you have a problem with that...well, I don't care really.

If anyone presents facts in a reasonable manner which suggest that all Orlesians are not in fact aliens, I have this to say. Your opinion is noted, and filed under "I do not care."

You might want to look up in the dictionary the definition of "Common Sense". Because making stupid strawmen is not it.

Which doesn't prove anything other than ONE seeker was a douche.
There is a difference between facts, and how one choses to (mis)read that facts.
Causation and correleation and all that jazz.

One seeker who just so happens to be the 'Lord Seeker'. Unless all male seekers are referred to as Lord, then it seems to me that he is something of an important seeker, meaning whether or not he is a 'douche' can be quite important.

Don't read too much into it. "Lord/Lady" may ver well be a title all seekers use, or maby onl higher-ranking ones.
Either wa,y a moron in charge changes nothing.
Wasn't Bush tough to be horrible in his position by many - yet does that mean that the whole political system of the US is utter crap? Corruption and incompetennce occasionaly surface in any organization, even in high positions.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Nizaris1 wrote...

This is apprentice mage quarter...take a note that it is mix men and women...look at the bath...

Middle-ages. A big wooden bucket was a bath. Even for nobles.