278 réponses à ce sujet

[Red Templar]

Out of interest, how many of you who take this "right to personal freedom and autonomy line > everything" live outside the cushy safety of the first world?

This kind of zealous "MY RIGHTS ARE INVIOLATE" attitude is why, for example, you have so much needless gun violence in developed, civilized countries because of a cultural core of selfishness that masquerades as libertarianism. That's also why you have certain politicians saying that extending the "God given right to bear arms" to the entire world would be a righteous and libertarian thing to do, just as people argue for the lack of "mage control" being the way to a brighter future.

Society requires structure and regulation to work. If you doubt that, you don't have to go that far on the internet to find out how a lack of those ebul, fascist, controlling laws and regulations doesn't work out nearly as well as naive idealism dictates. I highly doubt that the same people in politics arguing in favour of an inviolate right to bear arms would much enjoy a holiday in Somalia. Somalia has no big ebul government forces to tell you what you can and can't do, or decide whose rights need to be limited so that you don't have to lie awake at night worrying about rape, murder, and ritual mutilation. Somalia has lots of fine, libertarian individuals roving their country and others with absolute freedom with no regard for how the rights of other people balance out their own rights to do whatever they damn well please with power that they feel entitled to because of the same "us vs. them" logic that led Anders to his terrorist jihad.

Reading people's arguments for mage autonomy always just seem to me like a politician talking up the right to bear arms while not understanding that the limitation and denial of that right is one of the key differences separating the developed world from the chaos of Africa's failed states.

Mage regulation is not a matter of innocence or guilt. That line of thinking is twisted into being all about the minority. It isn't about the mages, it is about everyone else's far superior right not to mentally enslaved, sacrificed as a battery, roasted alive for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, or have their face eaten off by a magic wielding spouse who just hit their midlife crisis. Those things aren't a luxury, "oh you selfish person, how dare you not want to have your mind flayed and your blood snorted by someone who you have no chance of defending yourself against!" Those things are a basic necessity for a functioning society.

What the mages have to give up in order to achieve this fundamental simplistic requirement of social viability is laughably small. Boohoo, they have to live their lives in a nice warm tower, have steady meals delivered to them, be protected from pitchfork wielding mobs, and live lives of academic and intellectual purpose. How horrific. Not only is that a vastly better life than the overwhelming majority of peasants living in any medieval era, who live their lives at the mercy of famine, rampant disease, and abusive feudal overlords who don't have to bother sending away for a Church issued document before butchering your whole family for failing to hand over your last pig, but it is a vastly better life than most people in the third world have here in our real modern world. There are - millions - of people in my single country alone who would jump at the chance of a life of such luxurious oppression. That the odd bad egg has to be neutered so that they don't go on a killing spree is unpleasant in a vacuum, but next to being used and abused by country highwaymen before having your throat slit, or being forced to become that highwayman to keep yourself fed, it is an awfully small thing to trade for a life of comfort. Heck, not even a life of comfort for its own sake, but a life of comfort that helps to guarantee the preservation of other people's rights to physical and mental integrity.

Maybe my perceptions are skewed because I don't have the luxury of living in a part of a world where people take for granted the fact that their safety and standard of life doesn't come at a price and is just an universal constant that comes about when big meanie headed governments stop meddling in their affairs, but the entire mage perspective of this story seems to be carried on the shoulders of rampaging, jingoistic pettyness.

The way in which people tend to side with the mages almost by default leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It is, for example, a little alarming how many people are completely okay with terrorist rhetoric so long as the victim is someone they see as the enemy, by defending Anders blowing up that terrifying old lady and her chruch. If I had written that character I'd be a little alarmed by the line of thinking he inspires.

Modifié par Red Templar, 08 août 2012 - 09:23 .

[Xilizhra]

This is one of the reasons so many players are hacked off at the Chantry -- we've never seen anything like what they describe when it comes to an abomination being a serious, serious threat.

So Redcliffe wasn't that?

This kind of zealous "MY RIGHTS ARE INVIOLATE" attitude is why, for example, you have so much needless gun violence in developed, civilized countries because of a cultural core of selfishness that masquerades as libertarianism. That's also why you have certain politicians saying that extending the "God given right to bear arms" to the entire world would be a righteous and libertarian thing to do, just as people argue for the lack of "mage control" being the way to a brighter future.

Whaa...? Did any of this bear any resemblance to reality? Not only does the US have far more guns than the rest of the "first world," but are you really saying that "developed, civilized" countries have more violence?

Society requires structure and regulation to work. If you doubt that, you don't have to go that far on the internet to find out how a lack of those ebul, fascist, controlling laws and regulations doesn't work out nearly as well as naive idealism dictates. I highly doubt that the same people arguing in favour of an inviolate right to bear arms would much enjoy a holiday in Somalia. Somalia has no big ebul government forces to tell you what you can and can't do, or decide whose rights need to be limited so that you don't have to lie awake at night worrying about rape, murder, and ritual mutilation. Somalia has lots of fine, libertarian individuals roving their country and others with absolute freedom with no regard for how the rights of other people balance out their own rights to do whatever they damn well please with power that they feel entitled to because of the same "us vs. them" logic that led Anders to his terrorist jihad.

I'm left-wing myself and appreciate your concerns over gun violence/lack of government control, but your extrapolation is kind of insane. No one at all has proposed the general dissolution of national governments, or even total anarchy for mages. Especially since the Chantry isn't a government; it's an extragovernmental religious institution that imposes its own rules without any obligation to those under its control.

Reading people's arguments for mage autonomy always just seem to me like a politician talking up the right to bear arms while not understanding that the limitation and denial of that right is one of the key differences separating the developed world from the chaos of Africa's failed states.

Actually, a lot of that is due to the past tyrannical governments imposed by European colonists that left behind political ruins when international opinion forced them to pull out.

Mage regulation is not a matter of innocence or guilt. That line of thinking is twisted into being all about the minority. It isn't about the mages, it is about everyone else's far superior right not to mentally enslaved, sacrificed as a battery, roasted alive for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, or have their face eaten off by a magic wielding spouse who just hit their midlife crisis. Those things aren't a luxury, "oh you selfish person, how dare you not want to have your mind flayed and your blood snorted by someone who you have no chance of defending yourself against!" Those things are a basic necessity for a functioning society.

Murder is murder. You may as well imprison all people for having hands, as with those hands they could use weapons. Demonic possession, because it may occur outside the mage's volition, is a different matter, but imprisoning mages just because they have greater power is a gross violation of their rights. Anyone could kill anyone at any time, but we don't imprison everyone for it.

What the mages have to give up in order to achieve this fundamental simplistic requirement of social viability is laughably small. Boohoo, they have to live their lives in a nice warm tower, have steady meals delivered to them, be protected from pitchfork wielding mobs, and live lives of academic and intellectual purpose. How horrific. Not only is that a vastly better life than overwhelming majority of peasants living in any medieval era, who live their lives at the mercy of famine, rampant disease, and abusive feudal overlords who don't have to bother sending away for a Church issued document before butchering your whole family for failing to hand over your last pig, but it is an overwhelming better life than most people in the third world have here in our real modern world. There are - millions - of people in my single country alone who jump at the chance of a life of such luxurious oppression. That the odd bad egg has to neutered so that they don't go on a killing spree is unpleasant in a vacuum, but next to being used and abused by country highwaymen before having your throat slit, or being forced to become that highwayman to keep yourself fed, it is an awfully small thing to trade for a life of comfort. Heck, not even a life of comfort for its own sake, but a life of comfort that helps to guarantee the preservation of other people's rights to physical and mental integrity.

Strangely, we don't seem to have heard a lot about plague or famine per se among the common people of Thedas (aside from one riot that was spurred by a noble conspiracy in Amaranthine). I suspect that's less of a factor than it may have been IRL. In any case, most of what you describe could still happen to mages; they live in comfort... solely on the whim of the templars. The openness of Kirkwall's excesses is unusual, but in the White Spire, one boy was starved to death and then had all records of him erased. Apprentices thrown to demons who fail simply vanish. There's precedent for some being raped under the threat of being made Tranquil. The Grand Enchanter Fiona was a sex slave to an Orlesian noble before joining the Circle and found the former preferable, from what I hear. You vastly underestimate how bad the Circle can be.

Maybe my perceptions are skewed because I don't have the luxury of living in a part of a world where people take for granted the fact that their safety and standard of life doesn't come at a price and is just an universal constant that comes about when big meanie headed governments stop meddling in their affairs, but the entire mage perspective of this story seems to be carried on the shoulders of rampaging, jingoistic pettyness.

You also fail to comprehend their own perspective.

The way in which people tend to side with the mages almost by default leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It is, for example, a little alarming how many people are completely okay with terrorist rhetoric so long as it is applied to someone they see as the enemy, by defending Anders. If I had written that character I'd be a little alarmed by the line of thinking he inspires.

A terrorist from one point of view is a freedom fighter from another. I doubt many people in my own country would call the American Revolution a terrorist operation.

[Red Templar]

Whaa...? Did any of this bear any resemblance to reality? Not only does the US have far more guns than the rest of the "first world," but are you really saying that "developed, civilized" countries have more violence?

No, I'm saying that unnecessary violence occurs because of a stubborn insistence on protecting people's right to bear arms, when the ultimate expression of that "right" is clear and obvious in other parts of the world. Like the mage issue. Except here, Thedas' "africa" of non-existent gun control are lands that we don't have any real first hand experience with, so people tend to point at them and say "they manage without Templars in Rivain!" Which doesn't work, but it would help if those places were defined better.

I'm left-wing myself and appreciate your concerns over gun violence/lack of government control, but your extrapolation is kind of insane. No one at all has proposed the general dissolution of national governments, or even total anarchy for mages. Especially since the Chantry isn't a government; it's an extragovernmental religious institution that imposes its own rules without any obligation to those under its control.

Well sure, no one ever says "let's have total anarchy". It usually arises, however, from freedom fighters with good intentions but bad ideas of how to implement change. This mage uprising, like say the freedom fighters who fought for their autonomy in Zibabwe, have heads full of high minded, though self-centred, values and no real plan for how to tackle the problems of their world once their immediate goal is accomplished. Just, instead of creating a failed state, the mages are going to create a world where 1) the templars are overthrown, 2) there is no established system to replace them, and 3) many, many mages walking free who are now combat-experienced and accustomed to the idea of using their powers towards the violent accomplishment of their wants (many of whom will have embraced blood magic as the tool of their liberation). The resulting world, going by real world history is a comparison, would almost certainly be in a state of anarchy.

And the chantry is a type of government. Being the obvious counterpart of the Catholic church, it has real legal power which is accepted as legitimate by most people in the Andrastian world. It isn't some illegitimate foreign organisation, it is a part of the legal framework of the setting.

Actually, a lot of that is due to the past tyrannical governments imposed by European colonists that left behind political ruins when international opinion forced them to pull out.

Sure, in the greater economic picture. But in the day-to-day sense of the world, a colonial power from a hundred years ago is not the reason why a woman can be abused and murdered by a gang of fourteen year olds with military grade firearms. The lack of real, meaningful laws that prevent people from using the continent as a market for their left over first world firearms (and the lack of enforcement for the laws that do exist) is... or at least, that is the root that is most solvable, whereas history can't be changed

Murder is murder. You may as well imprison all people for having hands, as with those hands they could use weapons. Demonic possession, because it may occur outside the mage's volition, is a different matter, but imprisoning mages just because they have greater power is a gross violation of their rights. Anyone could kill anyone at any time, but we don't imprison everyone for it.

Imprisonment implies that it is related to judicial process. It isn't. It is quarantine. Like quarantine, it involves people who are a danger to themselves and others, without necessarily intending such. Like quarantine, the threat that these people pose is not one that is visually discernable, nor can it be disarmed. Like quarantine, it limits people's rights to protect the majority. Like quarantine, it tries to prevent rather than allow the damage to be done and look for a cure after the fact.

The difference is that, unlike people suffering from disease, mages also can and do abuse their powers in subtle ways that also necessitate a law-enforcement component to templar operations. And the extent of mage powers are far beyond what we have experienced in the real world. If we want to make this about judicial process... a lunatic with a gun can kill maybe a dozen people before caught and dealt with. Horrific, but not so overwhelming as to require constant vigilance (provided that gun control laws aren't stupidly lax). Police forces don't have to deal with children who, after barely starting to use the big boy potty, can, by themselves, take control of a military fortification and start terrorizing an entire community. That kind of extreme threat has to be concentrated where it is already under the attention of people who are equiped to deal with it. If a mere child can cause that, how are the guardsmen of Thedas supposed to deal with an entire demographic of mages?

Strangely, we don't seem to have heard a lot about plague or famine per se among the common people of Thedas (aside from one riot that was spurred by a noble conspiracy in Amaranthine). I suspect that's less of a factor than it may have been IRL. In any case, most of what you describe could still happen to mages; they live in comfort... solely on the whim of the templars. The openness of Kirkwall's excesses is unusual, but in the White Spire, one boy was starved to death and then had all records of him erased. Apprentices thrown to demons who fail simply vanish. There's precedent for some being raped under the threat of being made Tranquil. The Grand Enchanter Fiona was a sex slave to an Orlesian noble before joining the Circle and found the former preferable, from what I hear. You vastly underestimate how bad the Circle can be.

Tempars can certainly abuse their power. Power corrupts, etc, and people, especially in pre-modern mindsets, are generally jerks. But still, the circle has to be at its very worst to approach the sheer misery of the life of the average medieval peasant. On average, their lives are relatively luxurious. Sure it can be worse, but if the average is a rough improvement on quality of life over the common people, it can hardly be seen as "oppressive" in an inclusive view of society.

And however corrupt Templars can be with their earthly, martial, political power, how much worse would mages get with their supernatural power and mind control? The templars are the lesser evil - what they would be replaced with if overthrown, the potential for abuse is much wider.

You also fail to comprehend their own perspective.

Not really. "Liberty is nice, we would like some" isn't difficult to understand. Of course everyone would like to live with perfect freedom if it didn't have consequences. Everyone values their own autonomy, I don't think there's some complicated angle that I'm missing. I just don't afford absolute personal freedom the same level of value as I do to a healthy society that protects its least from its greatest.

A terrorist from one point of view is a freedom fighter from another. I doubt many people in my own country would call the American Revolution a terrorist operation.

The Revolution was an insurgency. It isn't hard to justify that one's ancestors fought soldiers in red uniforms for their freedom. Targeting civilians and non-military structures with civilians in them, though, isn't ambiguous. I know Americans can be sensitive discussing Hiroshima, but Anders is much closer to that to the Revolution. Not that I want to talk about Hiroshima. In fact Anders is much more closer to different events that I don't really want to get into either. It is just... I find it troubling how easily people can transition into "blowing up non-coms is okay if it inspires a violent struggle of liberation" rhetoric.

Modifié par Red Templar, 08 août 2012 - 10:20 .

[Xilizhra]

Well sure, no one ever says "let's have total anarchy". It usually arises, however, from freedom fighters with good intentions but bad ideas of how to implement change. This mage uprising, like say the freedom fighters who fought for their autonomy in Zibabwe, have heads full of high minded, though self-centred, values and no real plan for how to tackle the problems of their world once their immediate goal is accomplished. Just, instead of creating a failed state, the mages are going to create a world where 1) the templars are overthrown, 2) there is no established system to replace them, and 3) many, many mages walking free who are now combat-experienced and accustomed to the idea of using their powers towards the violent accomplishment of their wants (many of whom will have embraced blood magic as the tool of their liberation). The resulting world, going by real world history is a comparison, would almost certainly be in a state of anarchy.

You're making claims without basis. The mage revolution is in its infancy; the very last thing that we saw happen was them voting to go through with it. There hasn't been time yet to determine whether or not they'll set up something better; personally, I don't see why they couldn't. Ultimately, there's no proof for any of this.

And the chantry is a type of government. Being the obvious counterpart of the Catholic church, it has real legal power which is accepted as legitimate by most people in the Andrastian world. It isn't some illegitimate foreign organisation, it is a part of the legal framework of the setting.

Irrelevant. Its rule possesses no hint of any kind of social contract and possesses no legitimacy.

Sure, in the greater economic picture. But in the day-to-day sense of the world, a colonial power from a hundred years ago is not the reason why a woman can be abused and murdered by a gang of fourteen year olds with military grade firearms. The lack of real, meaningful laws that prevent people from using the continent as a market for their left over first world firearms (and the lack of enforcement for the laws that do exist) is... or at least, that is the root that is most solvable, whereas history can't be changed

If by "day-to-day sense" you mean "ignoring the root causes of why we can't just walk in and impose laws like that."

Imprisonment implies that it is related to judicial process. It isn't. It is quarantine. Like quarantine, it involves people who are a danger to themselves and others, without necessarily intending such. Like quarantine, the threat that these people pose is not one that is visually discernable, nor can it be disarmed. Like quarantine, it limits people's rights to protect the majority. Like quarantine, it tries to prevent rather than allow the damage to be done and look for a cure after the fact.

Unlike quarantine, it's permanent and no one is bothering to cure the danger they possess (without horrific mindrape). Unlike quarantine, there's a religious dogma of fear and hatred sticking them there. Unlike quarantine, it seeks to control an entire genetic condition that also isn't contagious.

The difference is that, unlike people suffering from disease, mages also can and do abuse their powers in subtle ways that also necessitate a law-enforcement component to templar operations. And the extent of mage powers are far beyond what we have experienced in the real world. If we want to make this about judicial process... a lunatic with a gun can kill maybe a dozen people before caught and dealt with. Horrific, but not so overwhelming as to require constant vigilance (provided that gun control laws aren't stupidly lax). Police forces don't have to deal with children who, after barely starting to use the big boy potty, can, by themselves, take control of a military fortification and start terrorizing an entire community. That kind of extreme threat has to be concentrated where it is already under the attention of people who are equiped to deal with it. If a mere child can cause that, how are the guardsmen of Thedas supposed to deal with an entire demographic of mages?

Even if it does have to be concentrated like this, there are other ways to do it aside from the current system. And personally, I'm not convinced that they all have to be concentrated all the time. In any case, the only way a child would ever accomplish something like that is if they were possessed, which isn't really a law enforcement issue.

Tempars can certainly abuse their power. Power corrupts, etc, and people, especially in pre-modern mindsets, are generally jerks. But still, the circle has to be at its very worst to approach the sheer misery of the life of the average medieval peasant. On average, their lives are relatively luxurious. Sure it can be worse, but if the average is a rough improvement on quality of life over the common people, it can hardly be seen as "oppressive" in an inclusive view of society.

The "average medieval peasant" doesn't exist in Thedas. At least, none who seem miserable. In fact, the only lower-class citizens whom we've seen examples of really wanting to change their lot are city elves and casteless dwarves, who are despised ethnic enclaves more than ordinary commoners. In short, you have no proof whatsoever for this supposedly miserable peasantry aside from vaguely remembered impressions of our own world's history, that don't really match what we've seen in the games. Or the novels, that I know of.

And however corrupt Templars can be with their earthly, martial, political power, how much worse would mages get with their supernatural power and mind control? The templars are the lesser evil - what they would be replaced with if overthrown, the potential for abuse is much wider.

Probably about the same, really. In any case, the Circle mages have never shown themselves to be a force of evil at all, while the templars have shown it for centuries.

Not really. "Liberty is nice, we would like some" isn't difficult to understand. Of course everyone would like to live with perfect freedom if it didn't have consequences. Everyone values their own autonomy, I don't think there's some complicated angle that I'm missing. I just don't afford absolute personal freedom the same level of value as I do to a healthy society that protects its least from its greatest.

Of course, this society just kicks all of its least while they're down, and not just mages but normal elves. And you vastly overestimate the supposed luxury of the Circle.

The Revolution was an insurgency. It isn't hard to justify that one's ancestors fought soldiers in red uniforms for their freedom. Targeting civilians and non-military structures with civilians in them, though, isn't ambiguous. I know Americans can be sensitive discussing Hiroshima, but Anders is much closer to that to the Revolution. Not that I want to talk about Hiroshima. In fact Anders is much more closer to different events that I don't really want to get into either. It is just... I find it troubling how easily people can transition into "blowing up non-coms is okay if it inspires a violent struggle of liberation" rhetoric.

I don't consider Elthina an innocent by any means, but aside from that, the Hiroshima thing was conducted in large part because we feared the casualties of a land invasion would be worse on both sides. In any case, it killed fewer people than the earlier firebombing of Tokyo. I personally probably wouldn't have blown up the Chantry, but I see nothing wrong with making the best of the situation.

[Red Templar]

Xilizhra wrote...

You're making claims without basis. The mage revolution is in its infancy; the very last thing that we saw happen was them voting to go through with it. There hasn't been time yet to determine whether or not they'll set up something better; personally, I don't see why they couldn't. Ultimately, there's no proof for any of this.

The basis is that situations like this, wherein in the status quo is violently overthrown with *terror tactics* by increasingly militant freedom fighters, almost always end up creating at least one generation of anarchy.

Sure it could, theoretically, be a happy-la-la idealist ending with no consequences. Is Dragon Age really that setting though? And more importantly, can anyone actually put forward an alternative idea that does the templar's job (doesn't just wait for blood mages and possessions to cause disaster before trying to do stop them) without denying the liberty of mages (who won't agree on what is "far enough" and who won't all be willing to set blood magic aside), without resulting in another Imperium, withour resulting in even more room for corruption and abuse? I've yet to see a solid alternative proposed by even the most ardent mage supporters. Every alternative I've seen is easier to pick apart than the status quo.

Irrelevant. Its rule possesses no hint of any kind of social contract and possesses no legitimacy.

Legitmacy isn't a matter of constitutionalism or democracy, espeically in a pre demoncratic world. Legitimacy is a matter of public recognition, often reflected in tradition and the common mores. The Chantry is the institution that unites the Andrastian world with a common identity, the overwhelming majority of the people of the Andrastian world are Andrastian, and the powers of the Chantry and the Templars have heretofore been recognized by the kings, nobility and peasantry. The chantry is legitimate because the people think it is legitimate and have thought so for centuries.

If by "day-to-day sense" you mean "ignoring the root causes of why we can't just walk in and impose laws like that."

As opposed to... if the lack of law and regulation was the result of a proclamation from the unicorn parliament rather than colonialism? I'm not sure where you're going with this. There is a lack of laws and law enforcement regarding the regulation of firearms, and people suffer en masse as a very direct result of this. Similarly, a lack of effective regulation regarding magic, a much more powerful and corruptive weapon than a firearm, would result in very real suffering for those who couldn't defend themselves from it. The issue is whether or not, after violently overthrowing such a regulating system using terrorist jihad rhetoric in the name of their own autonomy, the mages would be able to replace the templars with a fuctioning system that doesn't limit their autonomy, doesn't rely only on a "all punishment, no prevention" tactic to stopping magic abuse, and doesn't dissolve into anarchy after the mages no longer have a common enemy and a common vision. I don't see how they could. I'd like to see a realistic alternative, but know from prior instances of this debate that any alternative will have huge gaping holes in it.

Unlike quarantine, it's permanent and no one is bothering to cure the danger they possess (without horrific mindrape). Unlike quarantine, there's a religious dogma of fear and hatred sticking them there. Unlike quarantine, it seeks to control an entire genetic condition that also isn't contagious.

With an altogether darker and more uncertain alternative. Not wanting to be victimized by demons and blood mages isn't petty; it isn't like the people of thedas are locking mages away to protect their property values. Living a monastic lifestyle is hardly slavery. The lifetime quarantine that mages live in is still better than that of most peasants.

Even if it does have to be concentrated like this, there are other ways to do it aside from the current system. And personally, I'm not convinced that they all have to be concentrated all the time. In any case, the only way a child would ever accomplish something like that is if they were possessed, which isn't really a law enforcement issue.

Other ways that don't open up room for much, much more abuse?

Mages being possessed is obviously part of the issue. They are the only people in Thedas who are threatened by possession outside of extreme exceptions, like areas where the fade is thin (of which mages are the biggest culprit) or mages forcing possession on others.

What alternative can you propose for how a post-Templar world deal with the problem of mage possession once mages are dispersed throughout every level of society? Can you think of something that doesn't just rely on mopping up the aftermath?

And then moving on from possession. There would be a whole generation of mages taught that their power is a right and not a curse/responsibility, free in the world to chase the ambitions, passions, and depraved cravings that were previously denied them. Some would behave themselves, but how many would succumb to the baser part of human nature? In a world of free mages, how do you stop a mage from using blood magic to become a serial rapist? Forcing people to sign over their homes and possessions? Forcing people to murder each other? Influencing the decisions of people of power and authority?

The mind control element alone is mind boggling. There is no underestimating the sheer magnitude of the effect it would have on society for people who can, using invisible force, control the minds and actions of others walk free. That alone, without demons or anything else, justifies the templars.

Then there's the more "mundane" aspects. A mage fireballing a farmer's market in a jealous fit over a spouse's infidelity. A mage using his powers to commit theft, assault, and violent coercion? Virtually every crime a man can commit with a gun becomes a thousand times worse when "gun" becomes "can shoot napalm out of hands". We can't even prevent this kind of crime in the heart of the civilized world in real life, how would a dark ages civilisation deal with lowlife criminals who have superpowers?

Any alternative that anyone cooks up will either be a templar copy paste that limits the rights of the few to the protect the many, or it will be a cop-out that says "we can't stop these things from happening, let's just try to punish wrong doers when they commit crimes". Which, given the powers of mages, would be as good as making nuclear weapons commonly available and deciding to deal with abuses as they happen. It might "work" for the dalish and the chasind, in their small tribal communities with next-to-no privacy and their cultural resilience to being gobbled up from time to time, but for the teeming urban communities of humanity, the tribal model of magic enforcement would be as viable as New York city sustaining itself on a hunter-gatherer economy. Things just don't work the same way when there are such huge differences in the numbers involved, and the tribal model doesn't work that well to begin with.

The "average medieval peasant" doesn't exist in Thedas. At least, none who seem miserable. In fact, the only lower-class citizens whom we've seen examples of really wanting to change their lot are city elves and casteless dwarves, who are despised ethnic enclaves more than ordinary commoners. In short, you have no proof whatsoever for this supposedly miserable peasantry aside from vaguely remembered impressions of our own world's history, that don't really match what we've seen in the games. Or the novels, that I know of.

It doesn't? So a world with real, active demons, undead, rampaging dragons, marauding grimlocks who turn women into giant grimlock-o-matics... this world is somehow lighter and more egalitarian than ours? The human residents of the lowtown and darktown don't live in squalor that forces them into crime and depravity to sustain themselves? Criminal groups like the carta, the coterie, the raiders of the waking sea, and tevinter slavers don't make their livings by victimizing innocent, hard working people? The exploitative nature of the feudal system over the working class is somehow resolved? Poverty and the suffering and evils born of it are not an issue unless your ears are pointed?

Nonsense. The franchise is intentionally dark and gritty. It was practically the mission statement of origins' marketing. Bioware may as well have hung a "play this game if you like ASOIAF" banner over the game stands. And while the franchise fails to deliver on authenticity at times, the core is still there. With minor revisions, A Stolen Throne could be historical fiction detaling the rebellion of an oppressed people against the depraved tyranny of foreign invaders, such as the failed anglo saxon rebellions after the norman conquest. Loghain, certainly one of the best characters to come out of the franchise, is grounded in exactly the oppressed peasant background that you insist doesn't exist, and in Origins we are told about Orlesian Chevaliers who can essentially rape and murder the peasantry with impunity. These very real human concerns are an important part of the setting.

No proof whatsoever? Not only do I have the likes of the chevaliers, criminals, slavers, and the like, but I have common sense. Poverty and hard labour in low-tech cultures with little-to-no sense of rights for churls and peasants is kind of unplesant.

There are much worse ways to live than to be be cloistered away in a place with warm beds and steady hot meals.

Probably about the same, really. In any case, the Circle mages have never shown themselves to be a force of evil at all, while the templars have shown it for centuries.

What about Orsino aiding an obviously insane man to prey on and butcher women in a prolonged psycopathic carreer? What about Uldred forcing possessions on his felow mages because they were "larval forms for something greater" What about mages abducting templars and, potentially anyone else, and forcing possessions on them? Or the simple fact that, when faced with real, open conflict rather than just talking about it, virtually the entire circle of kirkwall resorted to blood magic and demon summoning? Are those isolated things that will disappear when the templars are gone, because mages can never go bad by themselves?

When a templar goes bad, maybe he kills, abuses, or tranqul-izes a mage wrongly. With a templar officer goes bad, maybe he aks for a rite of annulment without cause, or impedes the day to day quality of life of the mages in circle way beyond what is necessary. Unpleasant, but not much different from what you get in the real world when government and law enforcement officials go bad.

When a mage goes bad, maybe he takes over an entire castle and wipes out the town below it. Maybe he uses mindcontrol on a bunch of people and destablizes and entire political region. Maybe he chucks some fireballs into an important house of commerce to show just how much he disproves of the actions of the government. Maybe he conjures a few dozen demons to turn the tide in a civil war and ends up tearing the vale, resulting in demonic terror rampages across the countryside.

You have to realise that there is a difference between what a guy with a sword can do when he goes corrupt, and what a napalm-chucking superhero can do when he goes corrupt.

Of course, this society just kicks all of its least while they're down, and not just mages but normal elves. And you vastly overestimate the supposed luxury of the Circle.

With tevinter as the alternative. Life for the least still sucks in Andrastian kingdoms, but at least the people aren't just playthings for a magic-wielding elite with no sense of resposibility or moderation.

And there is no overestimating the value of a warm bed and regular meals unless you don't know what it is to go without them. Compared to millions upon millions of people living in the real world, the circle is absolute luxury. I can only imagine how much more the dark ages sucked compared to modern day africa. And I can only imagine how much more the dark ages would have sucked had they been full of darkspawn, demons, and undead.

Getting hung up over being stuck indoors living the life of a monk is extremely petty compared to people who have real problems.

I personally probably wouldn't have blown up the Chantry, but I see nothing wrong with making the best of the situation.

You see nothing wrong in terms of Anders, or did you mean the real life scenario? Because if you mean you see nothing wrong with blowing up a civilian structure filled with non-combatants with the deliberate intention of polarizing people into armed conflict, that would be why I say I'm distressed with how comfy people are with terror rhetoric once the victim is "the other guy". If you have the emotional fortitude for it, you might look up transcripts of the speeches posted on the internet by real world terrorists. They talk about the exact same things that Anders does; defending the freedom of their people, removing the option for compromise and middle ground, and the resolute black-and-white necessity of bringing down governments and institutions that they see as illegitimate oppressors. If a person validates that rhetoric for Anders, they tacitly validate the same principle of action for the likes of terror bombers everywhere.

(edit) On a reread I figured out what you meant. The mages maging the best of the situation after Anders went all jihad on the chantry, I guess? Well that's really were we will differ, obviously, because we disagree on the issue. The mages have a sympathetic cause, but one that is ultimately misguided and poorly thought out. Realistically, their war of liberation will result in evil greater than the one they overthrow, and the best thing for mages and Thedas in general would be if they hadn't vindicated Anders' terrorism by jumping on the bandwagon. The best the mages can hope for is Thedas plunged into anarchy, the templars gone, and somehow keeping their house together long enough to put up a feeble defense against the inevitable qunari roflstompage that will happen when the kingdoms are depeleted and the new order is in infancy.

Modifié par Red Templar, 09 août 2012 - 01:44 .

[Xilizhra]

[quote]Sure it could, theoretically, be a happy-la-la idealist ending with no consequences. Is Dragon Age really that setting though? And more importantly, can anyone actually put forward an alternative idea that does the templar's job (doesn't just wait for blood mages and possessions to cause disaster before trying to do stop them) without denying the liberty of mages (who won't agree on what is "far enough" and who won't all be willing to set blood magic aside), without resulting in another Imperium, withour resulting in even more room for corruption and abuse? I've yet to see a solid alternative proposed by even the most ardent mage supporters. Every alternative I've seen is easier to pick apart than the status quo.[/quote]
They're easy to pick apart because not only is there nothing substantial to prove it, but none of us live in the world and none of us can offer a perfect solution. Obviously nothing will be as well detailed as the status quo.

[quote]Legitmacy isn't a matter of constitutionalism or democracy, espeically in a pre demoncratic world. Legitimacy is a matter of public recognition, often reflected in tradition and the common mores. The Chantry is the institution that unites the Andrastian world with a common identity, the overwhelming majority of the people of the Andrastian world are Andrastian, and the powers of the Chantry and the Templars have heretofore been recognized by the kings, nobility and peasantry. The chantry is legitimate because the people think it is legitimate and have thought so for centuries.[/quote]
If that's the case, then it's possible that only force will do the job. Of course, there's no need to interfere with the little the Chantry does for or to the common folk, but even force may no longer be necessary because the Chantry's entire army deserted. This may make the future rather easier if the templars can be defeated.

[quote]As opposed to... if the lack of law and regulation was the result of a proclamation from the unicorn parliament rather than colonialism? I'm not sure where you're going with this. There is a lack of laws and law enforcement regarding the regulation of firearms, and people suffer en masse as a very direct result of this. Similarly, a lack of effective regulation regarding magic, a much more powerful and corruptive weapon than a firearm, would result in very real suffering for those who couldn't defend themselves from it. The issue is whether or not, after violently overthrowing such a regulating system using terrorist jihad rhetoric in the name of their own autonomy, the mages would be able to replace the templars with a fuctioning system that doesn't limit their autonomy, doesn't rely only on a "all punishment, no prevention" tactic to stopping magic abuse, and doesn't dissolve into anarchy after the mages no longer have a common enemy and a common vision. I don't see how they could. I'd like to see a realistic alternative, but know from prior instances of this debate that any alternative will have huge gaping holes in it.
[/quote]
Obviously you'll think it has holes in it. But again, we'll need to see the next game to truly see how this can work out.

[quote]What alternative can you propose for how a post-Templar world deal with the problem of mage possession once mages are dispersed throughout every level of society? Can you think of something that doesn't just rely on mopping up the aftermath?
[/quote]
Did I say my solution would involve that?

[quote]And then moving on from possession. There would be a whole generation of mages taught that their power is a right and not a curse/responsibility, free in the world to chase the ambitions, passions, and depraved cravings that were previously denied them. Some would behave themselves, but how many would succumb to the baser part of human nature? In a world of free mages, how do you stop a mage from using blood magic to become a serial rapist? Forcing people to sign over their homes and possessions? Forcing people to murder each other? Influencing the decisions of people of power and authority?[/quote]
The Litany of Adralla seems to work well enough. Even in Tevinter, where blood magic is omnipresent, regular mind control doesn't seem to be everywhere, from those minor glimpses we've seen. In fact, despite mages ruling in Tevinter, none of what you've mentioned seem to be endemic problems; the fact that more powerful mages are always on hand to crush the criminal ones may be a help here. And if not that, then widening access to templar training to give regular guards a better chance against magic could work.

[quote]It doesn't? So a world with real, active demons, undead, rampaging dragons, marauding grimlocks who turn women into giant grimlock-o-matics... this world is somehow lighter and more egalitarian than ours?[/quote]
Yes. Is this not painfully obvious from the gender equality and acceptance of homosexuality?

[quote]The human residents of the lowtown and darktown don't live in squalor that forces them into crime and depravity to sustain themselves? Criminal groups like the carta, the coterie, the raiders of the waking sea, and tevinter slavers don't make their livings by victimizing innocent, hard working people? The exploitative nature of the feudal system over the working class is somehow resolved? Poverty and the suffering and evils born of it are not an issue unless your ears are pointed?
[/quote]
The feudal system as a whole hasn't really been explored. Poverty and criminality do exist, but from the example of Kirkwall alone, the Gallows seems to be even worse than Darktown.

[quote]Nonsense. The franchise is intentionally dark and gritty. It was practically the mission statement of origins' marketing. Bioware may as well have hung a "play this game if you like ASOIAF" banner over the game stands. And while the franchise fails to deliver on authenticity at times, the core is still there. With minor revisions, A Stolen Throne could be historical fiction detaling the rebellion of an oppressed people against the depraved tyranny of foreign invaders, such as the failed anglo saxon rebellions after the norman conquest. Loghain, certainly one of the best characters to come out of the franchise, is grounded in exactly the oppressed peasant background that you insist doesn't exist, and in Origins we are told about Orlesian Chevaliers who can essentially rape and murder the peasantry with impunity. These very real human concerns are an important part of the setting.[/quote]
Loghain was presented as a victim of war, not of poverty per se. The chevalier issue exists, but the templar issue with mages is virtually identical except the mages are constantly stuck in the same building as the templars with no possibility of freedom.

[quote]What about Orsino aiding an obviously insane man to prey on and butcher women in a prolonged psycopathic carreer?[/quote]
For the sake of the Circle as a whole. The women killed were in lower numbers than the possible casualties of the Circle if Meredith attacked because of that.

[quote] What about Uldred forcing possessions on his felow mages because they were "larval forms for something greater"[/quote]
That wasn't Uldred; he was possessed by then. The real Uldred only wanted freedom.

[quote]What about mages abducting templars and, potentially anyone else, and forcing possessions on them?[/quote]
Not Circle mages.

[quote]Or the simple fact that, when faced with real, open conflict rather than just talking about it, virtually the entire circle of kirkwall resorted to blood magic and demon summoning? Are those isolated things that will disappear when the templars are gone, because mages can never go bad by themselves?[/quote]
There was no possibility of compromise with the templars, and never was. Especially since Orsino did try to talk about it, even eventually offering surrender, and Meredith still wanted to murder the entire Circle.

[quote]You have to realise that there is a difference between what a guy with a sword can do when he goes corrupt, and what a napalm-chucking superhero can do when he goes corrupt.[/quote]
I have. But that's ultimately irrelevant because the templars are far more abusive than required, and that particular system is by no means the only way to accomplish things. The current war is because of the templars primarily, not the mages; the mage question can find a new answer once the Templar Order is ash on the wind.

[quote]With tevinter as the alternative. Life for the least still sucks in Andrastian kingdoms, but at least the people aren't just playthings for a magic-wielding elite with no sense of resposibility or moderation.[/quote]
Except in Orlais and Antiva, both of which also practice slavery.

[quote]Getting hung up over being stuck indoors living the life of a monk is extremely petty compared to people who have real problems.[/quote]
Consider Evelina. Who was quite happy to, having run away from the Circle, remain in Darktown's squalor rather than return to the Circle. Consider the fact that you've never lived in the Circle and all of your supposed experience here is utterly useless for figuring out the mage perspective. Don't presume to know more than the people who've experienced it.

[quote]You see nothing wrong in terms of Anders, or did you mean the real life scenario? Because if you mean you see nothing wrong with blowing up a civilian structure filled with non-combatants with the deliberate intention of polarizing people into armed conflict, that would be why I say I'm distressed with how comfy people are with terror rhetoric once the victim is "the other guy". If you have the emotional fortitude for it, you might look up transcripts of the speeches posted on the internet by real world terrorists. They talk about the exact same things that Anders does; defending the freedom of their people, removing the option for compromise and middle ground, and the resolute black-and-white necessity of bringing down governments and institutions that they see as illegitimate oppressors. If a person validates that rhetoric for Anders, they tacitly validate the same principle of action for the likes of terror bombers everywhere.[/quote]
What he did is irrelevant, given that I can't change it. He's on my side and will be useful for that. Also, he's my friend.

[quote](edit) On a reread I figured out what you meant. The mages maging the
best of the situation after Anders went all jihad on the chantry, I
guess? Well that's really were we will differ, obviously, because we
disagree on the issue. The mages have a sympathetic cause, but one that
is ultimately misguided and poorly thought out. Realistically, their war
of liberation will result in evil greater than the one they overthrow,
and the best thing for mages and Thedas in general would be if they
hadn't vindicated Anders' terrorism by jumping on the bandwagon. The
best the mages can hope for is Thedas plunged into anarchy, the templars
gone, and somehow keeping their house together long enough to put up a
feeble defense against the inevitable qunari roflstompage that will
happen when the kingdoms are depeleted and the new order is in infancy.[/quote]
Unlikely. Narratively speaking, the templars aren't going to win and redo the status quo, and the mages won't just be crushed by the qunari. Neither one would be satisfying. I suspect some larger event will render this conflict moot, but until then, the mages will fight, likely stand a chance at winning, and not fall apart immediately after doing so. The conservative side almost never wins here, nor is proven right, and will not be this time.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 09 août 2012 - 01:49 .

[CelestJP]

well as long as its not the 6th blight and they give me a character that is not my DA 1 warden to sacrifice to kill it .... "paragon of self preservationists" my Solona Amell plans to live forever no blight or taint is going to kill her

Modifié par CelestJP, 09 août 2012 - 03:03 .

[dragonflight288]

Chances are the templars and Seekers will still want to kill all the mages even if the 6th blight came up. Origins did a wonderful job showcasing that a blight is the perfect time to kill each other.

And before anyone talks about the mages declaring Independence before the templars decided to rebel, the Mages were having a perfectly legal Assembly to vote on Independence. They didn't actually vote, their meeting was perfectly lawful, and Lambert wanted them to go back to their circles and when they refused to do that, and to judge Rhys themselves before handing him to a biased judge, he decided to kill them all. There were First Enchanters who gave up without a fight and they were killed without a thought, or in the confusion of the battle.

The seekers and the templars started this war, not the mages, and I think the mages have every right to defend their right to live independent of the Chantry, still held accountable for their own actions like anyone else. A criminal must still face justice, be they mage or templar.

[GavrielKay]

Red Templar wrote...
This mage uprising, like say the freedom fighters who fought for their autonomy in Zibabwe, have heads full of high minded, though self-centred, values and no real plan for how to tackle the problems of their world once their immediate goal is accomplished.

And could it be that part of oppression is making sure the oppressed don't have a chance to get together and plot out a new government?  Really, the mages were kept separated and locked in their rooms whenever the Templars thought they got a bit unruly.  Sometimes you have to first get free and then figure out what to do with yourselves.

Freedom is very important because it provides hope.  People need to feel that they have some control of their circumstances - that they can work to better themselves.  If you look at societies with a real lack of social mobility, they usually end up in bloody rebellions.  If you take a whole group of people and put them down and keep them down, eventually they will rise up, even if they don't have a good plan for what to do afterwards.  When you're at rock bottom, anything else is moving in the right direction.

Society in general is ok with taking freedom away from those who take action against society.  If there's anything we like as much as freedom, it's karma.  We want to feel that bad people have bad things happen to them and good people have good things happen to them.  Just look at the various world religions to see the focus on reward and punishment.

So, we're ok with stripping rights from criminals - they've acted against us.  But there's a real problem in setting a group of people aside and saying "these people are different, they are dangerous" even though they haven't done anything.  Now you start to wonder who else might be different, will someone decide "I" am different?  The powers that be have always been good at coming up with excuses for why someone else should be kept down - they're lazy, stupid, dangerous, primitive...  take your pick, it's all been tried.  And generally it ends exactly the way it did in the game world - bloody revolution.

The biggest reason it was a bad plan to lock the mages up and treat them badly is it gives them every reason to fight against it.  However dangerous they might have been with a bit more freedom, they certainly are more dangerous in all out war.  The Chantry couldn't be bothered to compromise and now the mages have stopped asking politely.  It was the inevitable outcome of such oppression. 

If mages are too dangerous for complete freedom, they are certainly too dangerous to abuse, enslave and push to the breaking point.

[CelestJP]

the chantry can be summed up as [And thus I clothe my naked villainy / With old odd ends stolen forth from holy writ/And seem a saint when most I play the devil.
[quoting Shakespeare's Richard III, Act I Scene 3]

[Morhen]

Oh, Red Templar. Will you be my mage's love interest in the coming game? I'll whisper sweet nothings about bunnyfluffles into your ear. Your masculinity alone will cure me of my idealism.

Mages and templars should be forced to marry. That way they can keep an eye on each other.

[CelestJP]

lol i dunno morhen cullen don't strike me as the marrying kind and he seemed more scared of my mage but that might just be the whole its forbidden brain washing still seeing how run off after you hit on him is funny

[Red Templar]

[quote]Xilizhra wrote...

They're easy to pick apart because not only is there nothing substantial to prove it, but none of us live in the world and none of us can offer a perfect solution. Obviously nothing will be as well detailed as the status quo.

[/quote]

I'm not saying that people should draw an example from the franchise to prove a better system. I'm saying that people should use logic and reason to detail a potentially better replacement system. Which is not possible without prioritizing the mages' rights over those of non-mages and resulting either in anarchy, Tevinter, or some half baked middle ground.

By all means, prove me wrong with a solid counter proposal.

[quote]If that's the case, then it's possible that only force will do the job. Of course, there's no need to interfere with the little the Chantry does for or to the common folk, but even force may no longer be necessary because the Chantry's entire army deserted. This may make the future rather easier if the templars can be defeated.[/quote]

You are going of on a tangent. You seem to see the defeat of the templars as some first step to the eradication of the chantry and some atheist utopia. Which is neither here nor there and just shores up the weakness of your argument with counter-zealotry.

The point is that the chantry is a legitimate part of the lawful framework of Thedas. An argument that is based on the chantry being an illegitimate forces, which is what it seems you were trying to go for in an undefined and half-hearted manner, doesn't work.

[quote]Obviously you'll think it has holes in it. But again, we'll need to see the next game to truly see how this can work out.[/quote]

So in other words, "I can't think of a working solution but I don't want to admit that so I'm going to wait for the franchise to prove me right".

That's not particularly useful to you in this present debate we are having.

[quote]
Did I say my solution would involve that?[/quote]

Nope. You didn't say what your solution would be. How about you commit to one, instead of some undefined chameleon alternative that is impossible to engage with? You are rather proving my point that this movement is just high-minded talk with absolutely no vision of how to proceed once the fight is done.

The unavoidable truth is that any alternative in which the mages are free is a world wherein people are not protected from mages, and the best that any new order could hope to do would be mop up the aftermath of every abuse.

[quote]The Litany of Adralla seems to work well enough. Even in Tevinter, where blood magic is omnipresent, regular mind control doesn't seem to be everywhere, from those minor glimpses we've seen.[/quote]

You mean, if the authorities find out about the use of blood magic mind control and arrive on the scene in time to save the day with the Litany, that is good enough? Realistically, how often would that be the case? We're dealing with an invisible, untraceable weapon here. It isn't like a huge red lightbuld starts flashing in the mage-cave whenever someone uses blood magic.

Tevinter is a reality where blood magic is regulated in the sense that the elite mages seem to hoard knowledge of it for themselves. Fenris certainly attests to their abuse of it. If blood magic isn't ubiquitous it is because power is concentrated in the hands of the ruling minority of the ruling minority, not because the system works to protect people.

[quote]In fact, despite mages ruling in Tevinter, none of what you've mentioned seem to be endemic problems; the fact that more powerful mages are always on hand to crush the criminal ones may be a help here.[/quote]

Based on what? Your fond imaginings of what the place is like? We have precious little evidence of Tevinter, and none of it supports the idea that they don't deal with any of the fallout I've suggested a post-templar Thedas would have to deal with. You personally can't answer the questions I have raised, so you resort to the cop out of "someone knows an answer, so it isn't a problem".  It would help your credibility if you could at least admit that the lack of a templar system would result in very difficult problems with no easy answers. Arguing from naivete is a waste of both our time.

Also I don't need to tell you that the powerful mages in tevinter who are always on hand to crush the criminal ones are almost certainly the most corrupt and tyrannical blood mages themselves, acting to protect their place in the heirarchy rather than acting to protect the populace from mages. Do you think the tevinters care about protecting farmers from being used as playthings by mages? No, they care about being overthrown by the mages subordinate to them.

[quote]And if not that, then widening access to templar training to give regular guards a better chance against magic could work.[/quote]

Give every guardsman the rigorous, disciplined templar training so that he can serve as a competent guard of something as mundane as a farmer's market? You're not serious? You may as well say "well duh, if every policeman in the country was a CIA trained counter terrorist agent, we wouldn't have to worry about terrorism!" Not really, and that solution is unrealistic that no one would consider it.

Also, the idea that regular guards en masse would have to make the sacrifice of taking an addictive substance that drives them senile is a little hypocritical don't you think? So mages are entitled to no restrictions on their quality of life, but common muggles don't deserve the same? The majority should be forced to make huge sacrifices for a tiny minority? Like that would work. Occupy Cumberland movement incomming?

And after resorting to blood magic and terrorism in a bitter struggle to overthrow the templars, do you seriously think any of these new libertarian blood mages are going to be okay with training new people with the skills to thwart their magnificent birthright?

If that's really your best suggestion, surely you can see why I'm dismissive of alternatives with no basis in practicality and realism.

[quote]Yes. Is this not painfully obvious from the gender equality and acceptance of homosexuality?[/quote]

So nevermind that I specifically mentioned a whole bunch of ways and places where life for human commoners is hellish, the fact the franchise has same sex romance content somehow wipes away all the intentional grit and darkness that the writers put into the setting, in defense of your assertion that people in Thedas somehow haren't suffering the ravages of poverty and social ills?

You need to do better than throw out words like "homosexuality" if you're trying to make a case that Thedas is a land where crime is beneign and hunger is a mild inconvenience.

[quote]The feudal system as a whole hasn't really been explored.[/quote]

It has been explored in enough detail to prove that your idea of Thedas as a bright and happy world for everyone but mages, elves and dwarves is nonsense. There exists a practice of prima nocta, places where knights can rape commoners with impunity, and the same petty dynastic wars wherein people died in huge numbers based on lord-so-and-so's claim to this-and-that. Besides the obvious "duh moment" of the franchise being based on the middle ages, it has continued to uphold medieval themes with enough consistency that you don't really have grounds to back up this happy-la-la interpretation of yours.

[quote]Poverty and criminality do exist, but from the example of Kirkwall alone, the Gallows seems to be even worse than Darktown.[/quote]

What? Have you seen Darktown? Darktown is the worse than alienages.  It reminds me of the worst parts of the Cape Flats. People in the Gallows are provided with meals and beds, and whatever abuses they suffer at the hands of the templars are nowhere near the abuses that people can suffer at the hands of gangs that lives in places like Darktown.

It doesn't really work to just say "poverty and criminality do exist" as if that is somehow my point addressed and countered. The fact of these things, and their representation in the franchise, point clearly towards a reality where people suffer the same difficulties that they have suffered in the real world throughout history. I'm perplexed that you would even argue that. DA's marketing, and Gaider's statements on the forum, always seems to touch back the the idea that this is an intentionally gritty setting that is purposefully a blend of high and low fantasy elements, and that the major conflicts of the world are designed not to have easy solutions. That mage advocates always to fall back on denial of this demonstrates I think that people want the setting to be a setting that it isn't. A high-magic cosmopolitan fantasy franchise with modern values is better represented in dungeons and dragons setting, warcraft, and eastern fantasy franchises. I highly doubt that Bioware is going to backtrack Dragon Age to being bubblegum fantasy.

[quote]The chevalier issue exists, but the templar issue with mages is virtually identical except the mages are constantly stuck in the same building as the templars with no possibility of freedom.[/quote]

There's a difference in scope here that you aren't getting.

In the worst case sccenarios, a templar might abuse his position to rape and injure a mage. This likely only happens in the most oppressive circles under the most oppressive knight commanders. And when it does happen, it isn't going to be some open abuse that is recognized as the templar's social right. It is something that is strictly forbidden, and therefore the consequences of having this type of behaviour exposed 1) acts to deter this sort of behaviour, and 2) represents that the institution itself is not an advocate of this abuse.

There is a huge difference between that and a chevalier. A chevalier's abuses are protected by law and custom. A chevalier doesn't have to cover up his deeds to avoid discipline, he can kill your family and rape you in broad daylight and then go boast about it to his buddies without fear. If his abuses are terribly widespread so as to embarass his lord, he might get some punishment - not out of outrage for his bestial behaviour, but out of embarassment for his lack of discretion. If you make a fuss about it, he might kill you to shut you up. Without so much as an inquiry. And this isn't some rare breed of oppression that will be born from rare occurances. It is the Orlesian status quo - Loghain even mentions the application of Orlesian values as their noblemen raped women during their occupation of Ferelden.

And what about other nations? Orlais is obviously rooted in the French absolutism and rigid classism that led to the french revolution, but if Bioware is willing to depict the darker side of Orlesian culture do we have any reason to believe that nations we haven't seen yet will be shown to be happy friendly places to live? Of course not. The Anderfells are discribed as the poorest and most militaristic nation in the world, so we can assume that life there suck as much as it does for the peasants in Orlais. Antiva is a nation ruled by lowlife hatchetmen... who are themselves recruited from suffering and squalor.

Life in Thedas sucks for peasantfolk, as life for peasantfolk sucked in the Dark Ages. An instance of a templar raping a mage doesn't somehow equalize that. A policeman might rape a woman in New York, and that would be horrific, but that's an entirely different situation from Somalians, Zimbabweans, even South Africans being raped in broad daylight by gangs of teenagers with military grade weapons. Sure rape is rape but the freedom, openess, frequency, and lack of consequence with which it is practiced is obviously a big deal.

[quote]For the sake of the Circle as a whole. The women killed were in lower numbers than the possible casualties of the Circle if Meredith attacked because of that.[/quote]

What? So helping him was necessary to protect the circle? He couldn't just, y'know, not support this guys' research? The cause of mages wasn't helped an inch by Orsino's actions here. If anything it vindicates Meredith because Orsino was doing all along what she accused him of. His letters make it very clear that he wasn't acting out of principle, he was acting out of scholarly lust for the innovations that would come from that madness.

[quote]That wasn't Uldred; he was possessed by then. The real Uldred only wanted freedom.[/quote]

Same difference. Uldred allowed himself to be possessed and inflicted evil on everyone around him. The same potential for massive harm is present in any other militantly libertarian circle mage.

[quote]There was no possibility of compromise with the templars, and never was. [/quote]

Not the point. You demonstrate the exact same thinking that dooms the mage movement to creating a worse evil than it vanquishes.

"If there is no possibility of compromise, I may as well as throw sanity and moderation out the window, embrace blood magic, and use any means necessary to accomplish what I want. That doesn't at all prove that the templars are right about people like me!"

If the very first instance of mages taking arms in this war shows how completely and categorically they embraced blood magic, we have no reason to believe that mages will fight a righteous war without succumbing to temptation. For every mage that embraces blood magic because of this "no compromise, jihad jihad" logic, there are three serious risks; 1) the risk that they will be accustomed to abusing blood magic and will continue to do so outside the confines of the war, 2) the risk that they will become possessed, and 3) the possibility that they will tear the veil like we saw at Soldier's Peak. None of those is acceptable, and every time one of those things happen the templars will be proven right.

[quote]I have. But that's ultimately irrelevant because the templars are far more abusive than required, and that particular system is by no means the only way to accomplish things. The current war is because of the templars primarily, not the mages; the mage question can find a new answer once the Templar Order is ash on the wind.[/quote]

If that system isn't the only means to accomplish things, suggest another. Sure there could be institutional reform to make things better for mages, but if you can outline a replacement system that isn't a miserably ineffective cop out, by all means.

People used your same rhetoric towards the end of Apartheid south africa. "There's no compromise, civil war is inevitable, we can pick up the pieces once the other side is dead". Luckily, there were people who stubbornly held on to the idea of peaceful reform rather than declarations of war, and compromise was indeed reached without bloodshed. The mages started the war, in reaction to the templar policies but still they were the ones who chose to commence it rather than pursue reform. If more people thought as you do, using this Anders rhetoric, our real world be a much darker and emptier place.

[quote]Except in Orlais and Antiva, both of which also practice slavery.[/quote]

Source?


[quote]Consider Evelina. Who was quite happy to, having run away from the Circle, remain in Darktown's squalor rather than return to the Circle.[/quote]

Ah yes, Evilina who was so happy, stable, and functional that she became possessed.

How many other mages would succomb to demonic temptation when faced with the real problems of the real world rather than sheltered monastic lifestyle of the circle, I wonder.

[quote]Consider the fact that you've never lived in the Circle and all of your supposed experience here is utterly useless for figuring out the mage perspective. Don't presume to know more than the people who've experienced it.[/quote]

And you do? Weren't you just telling me, quite authoratively, that life for human peasants isn't horrible at all?

Don't be silly. We are people with reason and can use that reason to weigh people's circumstances against each other. The important thing here is that mages take for granted two things which are all too often a luxury for people with the "freedom" they so covet; warm beds and regular meals.

Mages are sheltered. They live their entire lives in the protective embrace of the chantry, like children living in a strict household or boarding school. They don't know what it is to struggle for food and shelter, because they haven't lived in the real world. They don't know what it is to be subject to the predation of criminals and kings alike, because they haven't lived in the real world. The templars and the circle are all that they know, and the flaws in these things seem so dramatic and important because they have nothing else to compare it to. The mages are like a child who thinks that his mother is cruel and hateful because she refuses to buy him the icecream that he wants. That petty definition of suffering seems to them to be the worst thing imaginable. Not because it is, but because they are so thoroughly sheltered that they don't know better.

[quote]Also, he's my friend.[/quote]

Oh boy. I'm sure he just absolutely wuves you back.

No he's not your friend. He's a fictional character that doesn't know you exist. That you have a misplaced personal attachment to a piece of fiction that seems to you like an actual relationship is worrying enough, but that the character in question is the blond haired caucasian version of Osama Bin Ladin is exactly why I say that this board sometimes makes me worry about the gaming community.

Modifié par Red Templar, 09 août 2012 - 08:15 .

[Maria Caliban]

Xilizhra wrote...

I know of someone who tried to build a nuclear reactor in his garage and we could only tell him to stop doing it after he'd blown something up.

I find this hard to believe.

1) You can tell someone to stop doing something at any time.

2) You can report a person's activity at any time.

3) Several of the materials necessary to build a nuclear reactor are restricted and/or very expensive.

4) The materials necessary for building a nuclear reactor don't 'blow up' unless you manage to start a reaction. There are chemicals involved that can kill you if you inhale them and the electrical work could start a fire.

Was he trying to 'build a nuclear reactor' using bleach, fertilizer, and oily rags?

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 09 août 2012 - 06:00 .

[Beerfish]

A noble thought by the original poster but if the Mages crime happens to be turning into an abomination and wiping out a full village it is a bit late to call the cops, other than to stop him for doing it to the next village.

As an aside, blood magic is not the main worry of any solution that gives total freedom to the mages.  It is simply the risk taking of some mages (See the dude in Dave Gaiders novel Asunder) or simply the weak willed (see Connor in redcliffe.)

It doesn't matter much to the common folk if they get decimated by blood magic or just a demon on the loose.

Modifié par Beerfish, 09 août 2012 - 07:11 .

[GavrielKay]

Beerfish wrote...
It doesn't matter much to the common folk if they get decimated by blood magic or just a demon on the loose.

How about looking at it a different way:

Ask the common folk if they'd trade in their 1 in 10 change of dying from illness or injury for a 1 in 1,000 chance of dying due to an abomination.  I'm sure many more peasants die from things that  a healing mage can cure than they would from the mage himself.  Just look at Kirkwall where the common folk were willing to fight to protect Anders and his clinic.

Modifié par GavrielKay, 10 août 2012 - 12:10 .

[Goneaviking]

Funny thing, templar incarceration of mages pushed a significant minority of the Ferelden circle to study blood magic and attempt a violent uprising to free themselves.

Persecution of the mages in Kirkwall pushed increasing numbers of mages to adopt blood magic and fall to demonic possession in their attempts to avoid Templar incarceration and suspicion.

It turns out that treating people like criminals, because of who they are rather than what they've done, has the effect of encouraging them to become the thing you've already convinced yourself that they are. Most noticeably demonstrated in Anders' degeneration from benevolent healer to bomb throwing anarchist.

How like life.

What I would support, and my characters by extension, would have been mandatory training and registration. Have properly accountable authorities, with templar skills but not those allegiances or bigotries, monitor them and interact with them on a regular basis to talk to them and help them with potential issues.

Something often overlooked is that mages are as at risk from an ignorant and intolerant public as the public is from them - the mages may be able to do more damage, but there are a lot more villagers and a thrown brick will kill a mage as quickly as anyone else. Expecting the mages to make all the concessions and still trust in the beneficence of their jailers is a recipe for disaster as the Stanford Prison Experiment handily proved all the way back in 1971.

[MisterJB]

Goneaviking wrote...

Funny thing, templar incarceration of mages pushed a significant minority of the Ferelden circle to study blood magic and attempt a violent uprising to free themselves.

Persecution of the mages in Kirkwall pushed increasing numbers of mages to adopt blood magic and fall to demonic possession in their attempts to avoid Templar incarceration and suspicion.

It turns out that treating people like criminals, because of who they are rather than what they've done, has the effect of encouraging them to become the thing you've already convinced yourself that they are. Most noticeably demonstrated in Anders' degeneration from benevolent healer to bomb throwing anarchist.

How like life.

Yes, it's pleasant to believe that all people want is equality, that if you treat them well, you will be well treated in return.
Unfortunately, this is simply not true. I've no doubt there are many blood mages who resorted to it out of desperation but a great number of these mages would have used blood magic regardless of their social status, the excuse would just be something else. This happens in Tevinter constantly.
So, in your righteous attempt to end discrimination, you've just freed a group of people who will never appreciate or respect mundanes and have now more leeway to abuse their power.

I acknowledge that there are mages like Bethany who just want to live their lives and I feel for them. But they are a necessary sacrifice for the greater good. The best we can do is ensure the Circle provides a confortable life for these mages.

[Goneaviking]

MisterJB wrote...

Goneaviking wrote...

Funny thing, templar incarceration of mages pushed a significant minority of the Ferelden circle to study blood magic and attempt a violent uprising to free themselves.

Persecution of the mages in Kirkwall pushed increasing numbers of mages to adopt blood magic and fall to demonic possession in their attempts to avoid Templar incarceration and suspicion.

It turns out that treating people like criminals, because of who they are rather than what they've done, has the effect of encouraging them to become the thing you've already convinced yourself that they are. Most noticeably demonstrated in Anders' degeneration from benevolent healer to bomb throwing anarchist.

How like life.

Yes, it's pleasant to believe that all people want is equality, that if you treat them well, you will be well treated in return.
Unfortunately, this is simply not true. I've no doubt there are many blood mages who resorted to it out of desperation but a great number of these mages would have used blood magic regardless of their social status, the excuse would just be something else. This happens in Tevinter constantly.
So, in your righteous attempt to end discrimination, you've just freed a group of people who will never appreciate or respect mundanes and have now more leeway to abuse their power.

I acknowledge that there are mages like Bethany who just want to live their lives and I feel for them. But they are a necessary sacrifice for the greater good. The best we can do is ensure the Circle provides a confortable life for these mages.

Way to distort my position beyond recognition.

My argument is NOT that all mages want nothing save equality. My argument is that treating ALL mages like criminals encourages them to act like criminals.

So in your attempt to protect yourself from a potential threat. You've created an actual threat.

[MisterJB]

Yes, I understood that.
My counterargument is that treating all mages like criminals might encourage them to become criminals. But if you treat them as equals, many will still become criminals and it will be even easier for them to commit crimes because you've relaxed your vigilance.

[Goneaviking]

MisterJB wrote...

Yes, I understood that.
My counterargument is that treating all mages like criminals might encourage them to become criminals. But if you treat them as equals, many will still become criminals and it will be even easier for them to commit crimes because you've relaxed your vigilance.

Except there's no more reason not to be vigilant than with any other group.

With authorities who are trained and experienced in dealing with mages there's every reason to believe they'd actually be more successful than the current situation. How does any authority identify an apostate, let alone a bloodmage, if they've never had any dealings with mages?

There's more reason for mages to cooperate if they're free and treated as part of the community than in the current system. Locking them all up in a tower means that the only people most mages knows are either other mages or templars, which breeds a distinctly us and them mentality, which First Enchanter Irving makes very clear to mage characters in the mage introduction if you tell him about Jowan and Lily's plan to escape.

If even leaders who enjoy the trust and respect of the templars (as the only person who can talk Greagoir out of purging the mages entirely he certainly has that qualification) insists on an adversarial and ******-for-tat approach to disciplinary matters, it's reasonable to presume that mages who lack that are going to be more inclined to stand together against the people they regard, justly, as their jailers. I wouldn't expect many informers in that crowd.

Encouraging mages to take part in the community also familarises the populace with what to expect from a mage on the up-and-up. It means it should be easier to identify mages, and to spot aberrant behaviour in them, when they're not constantly on the defensive.

Certainly there'll still be bad mages who will still perform horrible acts for their own ends. But we live in a world where the template country for "western civilisation" refuses to put limits on gun ownership and use despite having a ridiculously high rate gun massacres. If it's credible to allow people own automatic weapons despite knowing that some of them will be used to shoot up schools, cinemas, political rallies or holy places then it must be credible to refuse to lock up people just because they can shoot lightning out of their hands.

Which is without touching on the morality of keeping them locked up for the way they were born. If they're de facto criminals based on their identity it may be more merciful and economical just to kill them, rather than to subject them to the psyche altering trauma of perpetual incarceration.

If they're only allowed to leave the tower to perform specific tasks, which appears to be the case, then the mages in effect form Thedas' slave caste. Deprived of freedom and only permitted to perform tasks that conform to the will of their masters.

[MisterJB]

GavrielKay wrote...
How about looking at it a different way:

Ask the common folk if they'd trade in their 1 in 10 change of dying from illness or injury for a 1 in 1,000 chance of dying due to an abomination.  I'm sure many more peasants die from things that  a healing mage can cure than they would from the mage himself.  Just look at Kirkwall where the common folk were willing to fight to protect Anders and his clinic.

How about we have a group of veteran templars escort the healing mage to the sick population and return him to the Circle once he is finished?
The threat of retribution should he sabotage his own work ought to be enough to earn his cooperation.
There, we have harnessed the benefits of magic while still keeping the risks contained.

[GavrielKay]

MisterJB wrote...

GavrielKay wrote...
How about looking at it a different way:

Ask the common folk if they'd trade in their 1 in 10 change of dying from illness or injury for a 1 in 1,000 chance of dying due to an abomination.  I'm sure many more peasants die from things that  a healing mage can cure than they would from the mage himself.  Just look at Kirkwall where the common folk were willing to fight to protect Anders and his clinic.

How about we have a group of veteran templars escort the healing mage to the sick population and return him to the Circle once he is finished?
The threat of retribution should he sabotage his own work ought to be enough to earn his cooperation.
There, we have harnessed the benefits of magic while still keeping the risks contained.

Except now you're enslaving the mage and giving him zero reason to act like anything other than the potential threat that you're treating him as.  As Goneaviking says, if you treat someone like that, they're going to act like that.  Why should any mage locked up in a tower give a darn about the people whose fear and ignorance keeps him there?

As I said before...  if mages are too dangerous for complete freedom, they are certainly too dangerous to treat badly.  A person with no hope can be very dangerous, and easy prey for a demon.

And as to Tevinter...  it's a totally different culture.  Sure, mages raised in such a cutthroat environment will turn out rotten.  So would anyone.  I think you'd get different results from mages raised in otherwise normal loving families in places like Ferelden and the Free Marches.  You don't see the Mage Collective making some huge power grab after all.  Rather, they police themselves to help ensure that the Templars have less reason to go after them.

[MisterJB]

Goneaviking wrote...
Except there's no more reason not to be vigilant than with any other group.

Yes, there is. Mages are absurdly more dangerous than normal people due to their natural advantage of being able to shape reality with their mind.

With authorities who are trained and experienced in dealing with mages there's every reason to believe they'd actually be more successful than the current situation. How does any authority identify an apostate, let alone a bloodmage, if they've never had any dealings with mages?

That is what the templars are for.
If you keep the mages contained, you lessen the chance of a common guard having to deal with them.

There's more reason for mages to cooperate if they're free and treated as part of the community than in the current system. Locking them all up in a tower means that the only people most mages knows are either other mages or templars, which breeds a distinctly us and them mentality, which First Enchanter Irving makes very clear to mage characters in the mage introduction if you tell him about Jowan and Lily's plan to escape.

If even leaders who enjoy the trust and respect of the templars (as the only person who can talk Greagoir out of purging the mages entirely he certainly has that qualification) insists on an adversarial and ******-for-tat approach to disciplinary matters, it's reasonable to presume that mages who lack that are going to be more inclined to stand together against the people they regard, justly, as their jailers. I wouldn't expect many informers in that crowd.

The "us vs them" mentality is a staple of human condition. We all have it and it's not going anywhere.  Even in these forums, we regularly engange in conflict that pits Pro-Templars vs Pro-Mages.

If mages are free, the social separation between them and mundanes will still exist. It will simply be less obvious.

Encouraging mages to take part in the community also familarises the populace with what to expect from a mage on the up-and-up. It means it should be easier to identify mages, and to spot aberrant behaviour in them, when they're not constantly on the defensive.

"Aberrant behaviour" is not something obvious or serial killers would be a lot easier to identify.
Encouraging mages to take part in the community simply exposes innocent victims to dangers while slowing down templar response.

Certainly there'll still be bad mages who will still perform horrible acts for their own ends. But we live in a world where the template country for "western civilisation" refuses to put limits on gun ownership and use despite having a ridiculously high rate gun massacres. If it's credible to allow people own automatic weapons despite knowing that some of them will be used to shoot up schools, cinemas, political rallies or holy places then it must be credible to refuse to lock up people just because they can shoot lightning out of their hands.

I am against common citizens having acess to firearms.
And altough many western countries allow their citizens to own them, there are still limits. A common citizen can't own a tank or uranium because these things are incredibly dangerous.
Unfortunately, mages are born with this type of firepower as well as inherent danger and it can't be removed.

Which is without touching on the morality of keeping them locked up for the way they were born. If they're de facto criminals based on their identity it may be more merciful and economical just to kill them, rather than to subject them to the psyche altering trauma of perpetual incarceration.

That can't be done because mages are a resource. They are the nuclear power of Thedas, dangerous but still needed.

If they're only allowed to leave the tower to perform specific tasks, which appears to be the case, then the mages in effect form Thedas' slave caste. Deprived of freedom and only permitted to perform tasks that conform to the will of their masters.

Think of it instead as a way of paying for the cost of mantaining them. They do live in a luxurious tower, are clothed and fed.

[MisterJB]

GavrielKay wrote...
Except now you're enslaving the mage and giving him zero reason to act like anything other than the potential threat that you're treating him as.  As Goneaviking says, if you treat someone like that, they're going to act like that.  Why should any mage locked up in a tower give a darn about the people whose fear and ignorance keeps him there?

And how many people who are treated equally and fairly and given freedom do not turn towards banditry or terrorism?
How many mages would not become convinced they are superior to mundanes? How many would not wish for the rise of a magocracy?

As I said before...  if mages are too dangerous for complete freedom, they are certainly too dangerous to treat badly.  A person with no hope can be very dangerous, and easy prey for a demon.

I don't support abusing mages. Tough I suspect we would disagree on just what costitutes as abuse.

And as to Tevinter...  it's a totally different culture.  Sure, mages raised in such a cutthroat environment will turn out rotten.  So would anyone.  I think you'd get different results from mages raised in otherwise normal loving families in places like Ferelden and the Free Marches.  You don't see the Mage Collective making some huge power grab after all.  Rather, they police themselves to help ensure that the Templars have less reason to go after them.

People are people. Yes, humans are culturally diverse but, let's face it, deep down, we are all d*cks. People are greedy and selfish in Ferelden, people are greedy and selfish in Orlais and people are greedy and selfish in Tevinter.

Right now, mages in Andrastian societies fight for freedom. Give it to them and they will want more and more until they are fighting for a magocracy.