194 réponses à ce sujet

[Huntress]

MisterJB wrote...

One Chantry building, yes. And how many millions of people have suffered because of magic?
Tevinter, abominations, blood mages.

Kirkwall was the worst circle in Thedas. Mages are not routinelly raped or turned into Tranquils in other areas of the world.
The mages of Ferelden have it good. They have shelter, food, clothes, security, education. All they lack is freedom.
Anders, that little terrorist, escaped seven times and was brough back each time. In Kirkwall, he would have been run through on the first attempt.

"taught a very good and painful lesson of how little power they really have when compared to a mage who is born with the power to use it at any given moment for good or ill."

Attitudes like this are what leads to people fearing mages and wanting to see them contained.

Anders was part of the ferelden circle since he's teens. I'll leave that there.

Right now everyone fear the templars and that fear is miss placed, yes.. you don't go throwing rocks to the lions den's do you? thats exactly what the templars are doing, they forgot that it takes one mage to go nuts and their little world  comes crashing down, literary.

Modifié par Huntress, 28 juillet 2012 - 10:21 .

[The Hierophant]

Huntress wrote...

Right now everyone fear the templars and that fear is miss placed, yes.. you don't go throwing rocks to the lions den's do you? thats exactly what the templars are doing, they forgot that it takes one mage to go nuts and their little world  comes crashing down, literary.

Tbh with the way DA2 presented mages, it looked like 90% of them were only one bad Monday away from turning into an abomination, regardless of templar interference.

Modifié par The Hierophant, 28 juillet 2012 - 10:30 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Define 'status quo' and 'victory.' I'd rather see the Circle-Templar system with reforms, which is more aligned with the Templars, than I have any sort of optimism for some sort of mage free state. My faith in Human Nature doesn't go far enough to feel that the mages will be any less petty in power than anyone else.

[General User]

I think Mr. House in New Vegas put it best: neither can be permitted to win on their own terms. Any "victory" by either the rebel mages or the rebel Templars might actually work out for the best as long as there's a big enough asterisk attached to it.

Ideally, both the rebel factions would be quashed. You could call that the "status quo" I guess. But really the pre-Kirkwall status quo was dependent on the Chantry using the Templar Order to control and police mages, and putting that back in place more or less left the room when the Templars rebelled.

[Xilizhra]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Massive death and riots will plague Thedas, entire villages and cities will be wiped out as entire groups of people wouldn't be able to control their abilities and set everything aflame / go abomination and then everyone would approach the Circles and demand an education.

Which the Circles wouldn't give out openly, they'd take control and rule over the people as they'd become a necessary resource. Templar would probably still exist as their anti-magic capabilities would come in useful against renegades and abominations, though they'd be shackled to the Circle similar to how Tevinter handles it.

Not if they were imbued with an understanding of how to use their powers at the same time, rendering education per se moot. And if the Veil could be lifted altogether, with spirits now at the mercy of humanity, abominations would no longer be a problem either.

One Chantry building, yes. And how many millions of people have suffered because of magic?
Tevinter, abominations, blood mages.

Of those, only Tevinter could possibly be called an organization, and I don't like them either. The comparison between "magic" and "the Templar Order" is nonexistent; it's like trying to compare air to the Marine Corps.

Kirkwall was the worst circle in Thedas. Mages are not routinelly raped or turned into Tranquils in other areas of the world.

Well, they still can be raped/Tranquilized elsewhere, and it doesn't seem like the templars police their own all that hard for the first one (certainly we've seen no evidence of that, apart from the Seekers who are led by the hardliner Lambert in any case). There's also the fact that the Harrowing routinely kills apprentices through various means, when this isn't a necessity at all. To elaborate on that, I submit two pieces of evidence: mage Hawke says that she's "braved the Fade before," and the codex entry on Bethany if she joins the Circle mentions a "long-delayed Harrowing." From this, I deduce that Malcolm did something kind of like the Harrowing with his children, except with backup in case they were endangered. Which apparently worked stupendously well. Why the Chantry doesn't consider changing this policy... oh wait, they don't consider mages people. Never mind.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 29 juillet 2012 - 02:19 .

[dragonflight288]

General User wrote...

I think Mr. House in New Vegas put it best: neither can be permitted to win on their own terms. Any "victory" by either the rebel mages or the rebel Templars might actually work out for the best as long as there's a big enough asterisk attached to it.

Ideally, both the rebel factions would be quashed. You could call that the "status quo" I guess. But really the pre-Kirkwall status quo was dependent on the Chantry using the Templar Order to control and police mages, and putting that back in place more or less left the room when the Templars rebelled.

This is a very accurate portrayal of both sides. Templar supporters do make excellent points when they bring up the threat of abominations and demons. According to the lore, an abomination or a blood mage criminal can do far greater damage than any mundane in that same amount of time (although the mundane can do equal damage given enough time and effort.)

However us mage supporters also point out that the current systems flaws lead to more cases of abominations than it prevents. Mages are driven to desperation and the templars as a whole aren't held accountable for their actions. And that leads to unnecessary abuses that mages and their supporters call foul on.

The current system cannot stand because of the abuses, but untrained mages are incredibly dangerous to themselves and to everyone around them. Let either side have their way and the flaws of those sides will magnify more than we've already seen.

If any system is to be put back in, if the Chantry is in control then it's highly unlikely they'll ever trust the templars and the seekers to have full reign again. They just can't otherwise we'd have a repeat of all the current problems and history would repeat itself eventually. But if the mages have full freedom, they'll have to deal with 1000 years of religious teachings against them, calling them unholy and cursed for merely existing, and they'd likely remove a lot of the regulations against various forms of magical research that can easily blow up in their faces, and everyone around them would be in danger.

[Xilizhra]

The current system cannot stand because of the abuses, but untrained mages are incredibly dangerous to themselves and to everyone around them. Let either side have their way and the flaws of those sides will magnify more than we've already seen.

Aside from isolated loonies like Tahrone, I don't think we've ever seen anyone in-game advocating for a complete lack of regulation. Fiona's vote, remember, was simply for the Circles to leave the Chantry, not for the Circles to stop existing. Claiming that neither side can win on its own terms is something of a golden mean fallacy and presumes that both sides have an equal claim.

[dragonflight288]

Xilizhra wrote...

The current system cannot stand because of the abuses, but untrained mages are incredibly dangerous to themselves and to everyone around them. Let either side have their way and the flaws of those sides will magnify more than we've already seen.

Aside from isolated loonies like Tahrone, I don't think we've ever seen anyone in-game advocating for a complete lack of regulation. Fiona's vote, remember, was simply for the Circles to leave the Chantry, not for the Circles to stop existing. Claiming that neither side can win on its own terms is something of a golden mean fallacy and presumes that both sides have an equal claim.

I'm not forgetting that. But I'm taking into account, and please understand that this is purly supposition on my part (and I'm a mage supporter so it's not an argument against mages, just a likely event) that the common people, who already blame young mages who are newly discovered for events that they have nothing to do with (bad crop, a person's cow dying, etc) and then kill the young mage, that after 1000 years of being told all mages are cursed by the maker and their power is unholy, these people aren't going to take mages being free from the Chantry easily.

I foresee prejudiced idiots with pitchforks tracking down mages on their own in their own form of witch hunt, and end up forcing mages into desperate measures when the mage in question simply wants to be left in peace. Mages and the independent circles may be forced into making extreme decisions to keep themselves safe.

Granted, with an army of drug addicted religious zealots running around, the common man may quickly lose the belief that templars exist to defend, when the templars are razing their village to the ground to try and gather enough valuables to smuggle some lyrium.

[Xilizhra]

I'm not forgetting that. But I'm taking into account, and please understand that this is purly supposition on my part (and I'm a mage supporter so it's not an argument against mages, just a likely event) that the common people, who already blame young mages who are newly discovered for events that they have nothing to do with (bad crop, a person's cow dying, etc) and then kill the young mage, that after 1000 years of being told all mages are cursed by the maker and their power is unholy, these people aren't going to take mages being free from the Chantry easily.

Most of the people of Kirkwall are quite willing to turn against the templars even if it means freeing mages, and the people of Ferelden will heap unreserved praise on a mage Warden, even with them outright ruling an arling. I think the Chantry's attitude is changing more slowly than that of the common people, especially with Cullen's conversation in the Gallows.

I foresee prejudiced idiots with pitchforks tracking down mages on their own in their own form of witch hunt, and end up forcing mages into desperate measures when the mage in question simply wants to be left in peace. Mages and the independent circles may be forced into making extreme decisions to keep themselves safe.

If that happens, then it's the choice of the common people to make, and will bring about necessary means for the mages to defend themselves.

Granted, with an army of drug addicted religious zealots running around, the common man may quickly lose the belief that templars exist to defend, when the templars are razing their village to the ground to try and gather enough valuables to smuggle some lyrium.

This is likely why the templars haven't already won.

[The Hierophant]

Someone should wrest the Templars secret abilities from them, and teach it to the local guardsmen, and troops. As for the lyrium addiction issue, i remember Alistair saying that it was an amplifier, but it wasn't mandatory, and mostly used by the order to keep them obedient due to addiction withdrawals.

[MisterJB]

Xilizhra wrote...
If that happens, then it's the choice of the common people to make, and will bring about necessary means for the mages to defend themselves.

"necessary means for the mages to defend themselves."
Wonderful, the war isn't over yet and we are already looking at the future excuses for blood magic and magocracy.
Horray. Vive la resistance and all.

[Xilizhra]

MisterJB wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
If that happens, then it's the choice of the common people to make, and will bring about necessary means for the mages to defend themselves.

"necessary means for the mages to defend themselves."
Wonderful, the war isn't over yet and we are already looking at the future excuses for blood magic and magocracy.
Horray. Vive la resistance and all.

If the common folk choose to attack, on their own head be the consequences. Assuming the means used are proportional, of course. But if they attack with lethal force, they should expect to be met with such.

[Vexille]

I cant help but side with the templars... For me it always boils down to the fact that mages are incredibly dangerous and cannot be trusted to be left to there own devices, turning to blood magic, being susceptible to demons etc. Honestly I had no issue with the Ferelden circle (mages were contained but by and large seemed to be free from abuse) Kirkwalls chantry was out of line (Funnily enough the circle there going from "out of line" to "bat **** crazy" is partly Hawkes fault for finding crazy in the deep roads )

So in DA3 I hope I get to defeat the rogue mage faction and put mages back into ferelden style circles. "Free mages" will never work, mages not being supervised by templars (or a secular force... that does exactly what templars do now) is just unrealistic and could never work.


(is it odd that I always play a pro templar mage? I kind of see it as my mage being able to look at the "big picture" and understanding that "free unsupervised mages" just isnt feasible)

[MisterJB]

A group of mundanes wielding pitchforks versus mages who can command the forces of nature with a tought. The answer would never be proportional if the mages decide to attack with lethal force because there is a great disparity between the military strenght of the two groups.

It's not the way to dispell fear and suspicion and from it to Tevinter are two small steps.

[Xilizhra]

So in DA3 I hope I get to defeat the rogue mage faction and put mages back into ferelden style circles. "Free mages" will never work, mages not being supervised by templars (or a secular force... that does exactly what templars do now) is just unrealistic and could never work.

Don't worry, you won't.

A group of mundanes wielding pitchforks versus mages who can command the forces of nature with a tought. The answer would never be proportional if the mages decide to attack with lethal force because there is a great disparity between the military strenght of the two groups.

Good, then the mundanes probably wouldn't be sufficiently rock-stupid to do so. If lethal disarmament can be accomplished, it'd be ideal, but it's not something they should just expect.

[MisterJB]

Xilizhra wrote...
Don't worry, you won't.

So, you wish for DA3 to only have a Pro-Mage ending.

Good, then the mundanes probably wouldn't be sufficiently rock-stupid to do so. If lethal disarmament can be accomplished, it'd be ideal, but it's not something they should just expect.

And mages shouldn't just expect normal people to be confortable with co-existing with such dangerous people.

[Xilizhra]

So, you wish for DA3 to only have a Pro-Mage ending.

To lack a status quo ending, at any rate.

And mages shouldn't just expect normal people to be confortable with co-existing with such dangerous people.

Discomfort is easy enough to stomach. Attempted murder is not and will not be tolerated.

[MisterJB]

Fear of living with someone who can burn you alive with a tought is completely understandable and not easy to stomach.

[Xilizhra]

MisterJB wrote...

Fear of living with someone who can burn you alive with a tought is completely understandable and not easy to stomach.

I meant that the mages should be able to survive simple discomfort.

[Vexille]

Xilizhra wrote...

So, you wish for DA3 to only have a Pro-Mage ending.

To lack a status quo ending, at any rate.

And mages shouldn't just expect normal people to be confortable with co-existing with such dangerous people.

Discomfort is easy enough to stomach. Attempted murder is not and will not be tolerated.

Why do you say that? Status quo actually makes far more sense then any "Free mages" scenario

[Xilizhra]

Why do you say that? Status quo actually makes far more sense then any "Free mages" scenario

It'd be boring and render the last two games pointless.

[dragonflight288]

Vexille wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

So, you wish for DA3 to only have a Pro-Mage ending.

To lack a status quo ending, at any rate.

And mages shouldn't just expect normal people to be confortable with co-existing with such dangerous people.

Discomfort is easy enough to stomach. Attempted murder is not and will not be tolerated.

Why do you say that? Status quo actually makes far more sense then any "Free mages" scenario

I personally think status quo ending can only make sense if the templars and seekers are limited in their power...by a lot. Watch the mages, fine, protect against blood mages and abominations, fine. But don't control the Circles or issue out punishments. Don't kill apprentices or use tranquility as a punishment (except in extreme crime cases, such as a blood mage using mind control to remove the free will and thought of another.) Don't have control over mages by divine right.

The way the templars have rebelled, the Chantry and the status quo would have to be absolute idiots to trust them unconditionally with the role they've had again. That just won't work anymore.

I don't see a status quo ending. The mages as a whole don't want to be in that situation again. They don't trust the templars to watch out for them, and with darn good reason. What the current templar leadership wants goes against everything the mages are willing to accept now. Both sides have to lose something if any form of status quo is to be made at all, even if it means changing the entire system.

[Vexille]

Xilizhra wrote...

Why do you say that? Status quo actually makes far more sense then any "Free mages" scenario

It'd be boring and render the last two games pointless.

giving players more options for endings is "bad" now?

Also rendering the previous 2 games pointless? LOL.

[TEWR]

MisterJB wrote...

Eigtheen Circle annulated over the course of centuries and only after the tower had been overrun by Abominations and Maleficarum

Assuming that all of the previous Annulments were all justified seems to be implausible to me, given that there's nothing to suggest they all were.

Some? Sure. All? Not really.

MisterJB wrote...

Those mages used blood magic. It is true they were backed into a corner by Meredith but Cullen has shown that he is not going to execute mages who have shown no sign of corruption in cold blood.

Not all of the Mages in Kirkwall's RoA used blood magic. Just look at the opening scene showing the Mages fighting the Templars (badly) or even the gameplay, where not once do you fight blood mages -- aside from Orsino, who on the pro-mage route is at the very least written poorly for his course of action and at most wholly unnecessary.

Oh and David Gaider said those mages would be made Tranquil IIRC. Yea... not exactly doing a whole lot there by saving Mages from death only to impose another death upon them.

Anyone in Thedas should have been able to see that Meredith was clearly in the wrong for calling such an Annulment -- legally she may have had the authority, but ethically/morally/practically/whatever else she was wrong to call such a thing -- and no argument she or anyone else could make at the point of calling it would make it seem okay to go through with such a thing.

The Templars exist to protect the Mages from the people as well as the people from the Mages. At this point, it's nighttime -- due to a Rivaled Anders saying the bomb would blow at midnight, meaning people are unaware of what's happened -- and Meredith is the ruler of the city-state (unlawfully). You don't bow down to a mob's demands, especially when the guilty party has voluntarily submitted to justice. Once you bow down to them, you empower them. You see this in Awakening and it's just as true anywhere else.

Also, Kirkwall's Veil is at best paper-thin. Ordering an Annulment is just going to lead to more death which will thin the Veil more and, shock of shocks, lead to more problems for Kirkwall down the line.

Bah! Talking about Act 3 sets my blood aboil, as it just reeks of bad writing on interesting concepts.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 29 juillet 2012 - 07:19 .

[Darth Krytie]

Xilizhra wrote...

Why do you say that? Status quo actually makes far more sense then any "Free mages" scenario

It'd be boring and render the last two games pointless.

I agree.  I mean...what's the point if you start the game with this conflict and end the game in the exact place you started. I'm not saying I'm for the Mages going around zapping everyone willy nilly. But a new sort of resolution has to come or you're just spinning your wheels.

And if it's about the sustainability of creating so many divergent, sometimes extremely so, endings or whatever, they can easily solve most of that by country-hopping. They can minimize the severity of impact of those choices by going to different places not as primarily affected by them.