2177 réponses à ce sujet

[Xilizhra]

Ok... so this Lambert fellow arrested a murder suspect. I'm not seeing the problem so far. And this connects back to Adrian... how?

Technically, he imprisoned every mage present just for the hell of it, as he wanted any excuse to crack down on the Circle as a whole. As for Adrian, well, she just killed Pharamond.

[LobselVith8]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Like the Circles of Magi participating in the Blights, or the Circle mages helping the Andrastian nations remain free from the Qunari and their advanced technology?

Like countless mages falling and abominations causing death and destruction.
Like the Blight caused by the mages.

There's no evidence the Blights were caused by mages; in fact, the Golden City was already Black when the Magisters arrived (which implies there were darkspawn prior to the Magisters like Corypheus), and the dwarven records don't mention encountering any darkspawn like Corypheus.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

And we know there are mages who seek something other than anarchy: Aldenon the Wise wanted to create a kingdom where all people were equal; the mage rebellion at Ferelden sought to free the Circle from the Order of Templars and the Chantry of Andraste; the mage protagonist can seek autonomy for the Circle of Magi, rather than it's dissolution; apostate Hawke can seek to overthrow the templars.

Aldenon was a fool. His kingdom can only exist in the My Little Pony land of fairy-tales.

Aldenon was a visionary who wanted mages and non-mages to live side by side, which we know is possible from non-Andrastian societies.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

You missed my point about the argument being against Chantry controlled Circles, rather than Circles of Magi in general. To address your point, First Enchanter Irving supports the emancipation of the Circle of Ferelden from the Chantry, saying that the Hero of Ferelden has freed the mages from "their shackles." He was a responsible and rational mage.

Again, why should I care what Irwing thinks?

And of course, everyone wants more. It's human nature to want more. No matter how much you get.

In other words, you ignore the evidence you asked for?

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

There's always a point in fighting for what you believe in; the mage rebels simply happen to share an opposing point of view than you.

Which means that there is a point in Templars fighting for what they believe in.

I suppose Lambert and the templars who have the same viewpoint as him would concur; however, I don't share his view of the situation.

[Vandicus]

KainD wrote...

@Vandicus

I talked about it before. I don't like a LOT about today's countries / politics / laws. The only difference is I have no huge power/say in the real world. But in fantasy RPG's I often do, and as such may pursue my true beliefs on things.

As for freedom it should be a given.

You are then guilty of the same thing that all the people who you justify the killing of are. You knowingly fund(support) a system which you are a member(citizen or resident) of which to some degree or another restricts people's freedom. Your morality justifies the killing of every person on the planet.

[LobselVith8]

Vandicus wrote...

You are then guilty of the same thing that all the people who you justify the killing of are. You knowingly fund(support) a system which you are a member(citizen or resident) of which to some degree or another restricts people's freedom. Your morality justifies the killing of every person on the planet.

I think the Right of Annulment, the Rite of Tranquility, and giving templars "dominion over mages by divine right" make the situation a little different.

[Vandicus]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Vandicus wrote...

You are then guilty of the same thing that all the people who you justify the killing of are. You knowingly fund(support) a system which you are a member(citizen or resident) of which to some degree or another restricts people's freedom. Your morality justifies the killing of every person on the planet.

I think the Right of Annulment, the Rite of Tranquility, and giving templars "dominion over mages by divine right" make the situation a little different.

Given that he would accept the death of every member of the Democrat party in the 19th century, I think the situation is exactly as I described it.

[KainD]

Vandicus wrote...

KainD wrote...

@Vandicus

I talked about it before. I don't like a LOT about today's countries / politics / laws. The only difference is I have no huge power/say in the real world. But in fantasy RPG's I often do, and as such may pursue my true beliefs on things.

As for freedom it should be a given.

You are then guilty of the same thing that all the people who you justify the killing of are. You knowingly fund(support) a system which you are a member(citizen or resident) of which to some degree or another restricts people's freedom. Your morality justifies the killing of every person on the planet.

Well if you want to dig that deep then yes. 
Though if a "knight in shining armor" like Anders came and actually changed the world forever and being stagnate wouldn't be an option anymore, I would very much love the opportunity and would follow the cause. I just don't really see what exactlyI can do. 
But then again, on a daily basis I do not support the system exactly. 

[LobselVith8]

Vandicus wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I think the Right of Annulment, the Rite of Tranquility, and giving templars "dominion over mages by divine right" make the situation a little different. 

Given that he would accept the death of every member of the Democrat party in the 19th century, I think the situation is exactly as I described it. 

Didn't he say he wouldn't condemn slaves for killing the people who were enslaving them?

[KainD]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Didn't he say he wouldn't condemn slaves for killing the people who were enslaving them?

I said that I wouldn't condemn slaves if they killed the democrat party IF there was no other way to be free. 

[Vandicus]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Vandicus wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I think the Right of Annulment, the Rite of Tranquility, and giving templars "dominion over mages by divine right" make the situation a little different. 

Given that he would accept the death of every member of the Democrat party in the 19th century, I think the situation is exactly as I described it. 

Didn't he say he wouldn't condemn slaves for killing the people who were enslaving them?

He said he would accept their killing of every member of the Democrat party in the process of securing their freedom(to what degree of freedom is unknown). This follows the logic of guilt by association in that the average member of the Democrat party was not a slaveholder, but support a slaveholding organization. .

[Vandicus]

KainD wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Didn't he say he wouldn't condemn slaves for killing the people who were enslaving them?

I said that I wouldn't condemn slaves if they killed the democrat party IF there was no other way to be free. 

How do you justify what Anders did then? Its well possible to become as free as is held to be normal in Thedas. Simply a matter of earning trust. Anders doesn't pursue the "other" option, he shortcuts it.

[Xilizhra]

He said he would accept their killing of every member of the Democrat party in the process of securing their freedom(to what degree of freedom is unknown). This follows the logic of guilt by association in that the average member of the Democrat party was not a slaveholder, but support a slaveholding organization. .

Do note that the party as a whole was remarkably narrowminded, racist and violent at the time. Even the non-slaveholders had quite a few members guilty of various race-based atrocities. Not that every member of the party did this, but it's not as though slaveholders were the only guilty ones.

[Vandicus]

Xilizhra wrote...

He said he would accept their killing of every member of the Democrat party in the process of securing their freedom(to what degree of freedom is unknown). This follows the logic of guilt by association in that the average member of the Democrat party was not a slaveholder, but support a slaveholding organization. .

Do note that the party as a whole was remarkably narrowminded, racist and violent at the time. Even the non-slaveholders had quite a few members guilty of various race-based atrocities. Not that every member of the party did this, but it's not as though slaveholders were the only guilty ones.

The common portrayal of Southerners, both then and now. "Quite a few members" would not constitute a very significant percentage of the population of Democrats at the time. Moreover, last I checked, racism or racist beliefs were not considered punishable, nor is stupidity or ignorance. Violence would be, but the dramatized modern portrayal of the South is not nearly an accurate one.

[KainD]

Vandicus wrote...

How do you justify what Anders did then? Its well possible to become as free as is held to be normal in Thedas. Simply a matter of earning trust. Anders doesn't pursue the "other" option, he shortcuts it.

Can you have a family and children as a mage? No. 
Can you own property as a mage? No.
Can you move from place to place without other peoples regulations upon you as a mage? No.

No matter how much trust you gain, you can never be truly free as a mage unless you follow Anders path. 

[General User]

KainD wrote...

Can you move from place to place without other peoples regulations upon you as a mage? No.

It's this one that sticks in my craw.  What is so unacceptable about regulating magic?

[KainD]

General User wrote...

KainD wrote...

Can you move from place to place without other peoples regulations upon you as a mage? No.

It's this one that sticks in my craw.  What is so unacceptable about regulating magic?

There are no problems with regulating magic, there are problems with regulating mages. Those two are different. 

Same as regulating drug use is different from having an ever watchful eye on every person at all times who MIGHT use drugs. That's invading privacy and human rights. 

[Vandicus]

KainD wrote...

Vandicus wrote...

How do you justify what Anders did then? Its well possible to become as free as is held to be normal in Thedas. Simply a matter of earning trust. Anders doesn't pursue the "other" option, he shortcuts it.

Can you have a family and children as a mage? No. 
Can you own property as a mage? No.
Can you move from place to place without other peoples regulations upon you as a mage? No.

No matter how much trust you gain, you can never be truly free as a mage unless you follow Anders path. 

First off, the way in which you define freedom is ultimately arbitrary(especially in kingdoms ).

Secondly, I do not believe the first two have been established, and the third has its regulations in real life, and in the game for both the common man and a mage(and as such I feel is invalid as it is a nonexistant standard of freedom).

Third, your statement that Anders' path was the only one ignores any possibility of negotiation or slower methods of progress. If you held the Democrat part of the 19th century US to the same standard, you would again be justifying their wholesale slaughter.

[Xilizhra]

The common portrayal of Southerners, both then and now. "Quite a few members" would not constitute a very significant percentage of the population of Democrats at the time. Moreover, last I checked, racism or racist beliefs were not considered punishable, nor is stupidity or ignorance. Violence would be, but the dramatized modern portrayal of the South is not nearly an accurate one.

Not the entire South. The Reconstruction period was quite vicious because of that, actually, with Democrat partisans attacking blacks, northerners, and even Southern white Republicans, frequently killing them, until the whole thing fell apart and the Republicans gave up on their racial idealism.

[KainD]

Vandicus wrote...

First off, the way in which you define freedom is ultimately arbitrary(especially in kingdoms ).

Secondly, I do not believe the first two have been established, and the third has its regulations in real life, and in the game for both the common man and a mage(and as such I feel is invalid as it is a nonexistant standard of freedom).

Third, your statement that Anders' path was the only one ignores any possibility of negotiation or slower methods of progress. If you held the Democrat part of the 19th century US to the same standard, you would again be justifying their wholesale slaughter.

1) Well it is MY opinion right? 

2) Talked about real life. Common man needs to have those freedoms too, but we are talking about the mages now aren't we? And let's face it common man does have by all standards more freedom than a mage, even if it's not full.

3) Progress didn't move for a thousand years, even Anders tried other ways through out the game and books before blowing upo the chantry. Enough was enough. 

If US DEMOCRATIC party freaking owned slaves for a thousand years, a slaughter woudl be welcome. 

[Vandicus]

Xilizhra wrote...

The common portrayal of Southerners, both then and now. "Quite a few members" would not constitute a very significant percentage of the population of Democrats at the time. Moreover, last I checked, racism or racist beliefs were not considered punishable, nor is stupidity or ignorance. Violence would be, but the dramatized modern portrayal of the South is not nearly an accurate one.

Not the entire South. The Reconstruction period was quite vicious because of that, actually, with Democrat partisans attacking blacks, northerners, and even Southern white Republicans, frequently killing them, until the whole thing fell apart and the Republicans gave up on their racial idealism.

The Republicans actually ended Reconstruction as a result of a political deal, I believe the office in question was the Presidency, but I can't quite recall. I am a Republican, and I don't mean this as any sort've insult against the party, but historically the end of Reconstruction was a political maneuver. Moreover, Reconstruction itself involved widespread corruption, martial law, and abuse of various powers to appropriate property or punish ex-Confederates/members of the Democrat party(if anything, the sort've treatment that I thought you would support violence as a response to, much like the mages of Thedas). I find the modern portrayal of the Civil War and its aftermath as a clear good vs evil scenario as lacking, to say the least.

[Xilizhra]

The Republicans actually ended Reconstruction as a result of a political deal, I believe the office in question was the Presidency, but I can't quite recall. I am a Republican, and I don't mean this as any sort've insult against the party, but historically the end of Reconstruction was a political maneuver. Moreover, Reconstruction itself involved widespread corruption, martial law, and abuse of various powers to appropriate property or punish ex-Confederates/members of the Democrat party(if anything, the sort've treatment that I thought you would support violence as a response to, much like the mages of Thedas). I find the modern portrayal of the Civil War and its aftermath as a clear good vs evil scenario as lacking, to say the least.

I myself am a Democrat, but I don't let that stop me from acknowledging that my party was a bastion of tremendous evil not so long ago. Reconstruction had its political issues with some Republican leadership, but by far the biggest problem was Democratic violence, and it was everywhere, contrasting sharply with what were at the time vastly improved race relations on the Republican side.
And the Confederates were the worst traitors in our nation's history. I'm not even that patriotic, but the Confederate "cause" was nothing less than vile treason on a vast scale for the purpose of maintaining an abusive racial hegemony.

[Maclimes]

Careful! This is probably the longest-running non-romance thread on the board. Don't endanger it with political stuff. Tread lightly.

[Shadow Fox]

Maclimes wrote...

Careful! This is probably the longest-running non-romance thread on the board. Don't endanger it with political stuff. Tread lightly.

No! this thread has to die for the greater good of BSN!

[Cultist]

Please, don't stop, Lotion! Not every day we see people on forums telling us that Chantry is good and merciful and in its beneficent grace should start a genocide of mages and all their supporters.
In fact every your post proves that mages' lives, human lives, could not be entrusted to the templars, because they may end under authority of people such as you, that treat them like animals, who should be caged, trained and slaughtered at their masters' whims.
Way to go, man! Way to go))

[Cultist]

Please, no real-life politics. BSN is bad enough already even without this crap.

[Shadow Fox]

Too late.