2177 réponses à ce sujet

[dragonflight288]

Obviously. The new system would need to have different policies. But you asked for examples and I have given them.

Yes but I was hoping for pertinent examples.  You see, the point I was trying to get at was that no faction of society can function productively without checks and balances on it's power.  Mages can't be allowed to govern themselves because no faction of society can be allowed to govern itself.

Okay. This seems relatively easy to respond to.

The short answer is that there are no pertinent examples. The history of thedas simply doesn't have any. We have the elves of ancient Arlathan, the Tevinter Empire, the current Dalish Elves, some mentions of the Seers of the Rivaini and the shamans of the Chasid (no examples of how things work for those two groups,) the Circle System and the templars.

There is no in-game or in-novel precedent.

What we do have is a broken system with several flaws. Do the mages need watching or have some form or regulation on magic, yes. Do the mages need to have a required training period? Yes.

But the templars have proven they are not capable of acting as an impartial police force. There is 1000 years of religious propaganda supporting their divine authority over mages. And that phrase came from Cullen. But templars didn't even exist during the time of Andraste. There wasn't even an inquisition then, from which the templars were formed. We had the Tevinter Magisters and their slaves, the darkspawn and the Grey Wardens (who had just been newly formed.)

Because templars didn't even exist during the time of Andraste, you won't find anything in the precious Chant of Light supporting that argument. It's simply a Chantry policy. Add in the lyrium addiction and the templar recruiting practices, we have drug addcited religious zealots responsible for overseeing an entire group of people that they despise already.

We need another group that isn't the templars that share their abilities. Or we need a group that watches the templars and only the templars. The Seekers are supposed to do that...but Lord High Seeker Lambert felt it was more important to be a templar and be prejudiced against all mages despite what the Divine is saying than actually investigating templar corruption.

The Chanty cannot be involved. They teach magic is a curse (Gregoire does say it's also a gift, but that part seems lost in the preaching.) They teach it was mages who created darkspawn and everyone is expecting that if the mages are free or have more rights, it inevitably means the rise of another Imperium.

In the end, I can't give concrete examples of mages working with another group (beyond Thrask's failed rebellion against Meredith, but that was the first time mages and templars willingly worked together.) I can however, point to in-game history to show that the freedom of mages does not mean the rise of a tevinter 2.0,

Modifié par dragonflight288, 12 octobre 2012 - 06:29 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Cultist wrote...

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))

The Chantry - like every organiazion ever run by humans - is far from perfect. Adn it never will be. But taht is beside the point.

What we do see every day is people on forums telling us how wonderfull and trustworthy mages are (despite having absolutely nothing to back it up with), and how everything would be peachy-fine if mages are let to run free and all the deaths that would inevitabley result from that are perfectly acceptable and people should just "deal with it", since it's for "the best".
But if mages suffer then they shouldnt' "deal with it", no. Then it's time for a bloody revolution, right?

Mages have proven to be too voilatile and dangerous. As any human being they are prone to emotional outbursts and loss of self-control and bad judgement calls. And for a mage, each such occurance can mean not only the death of a mage, but many, many people around him... and worse.

You every post proves that templars are needed to keep that danger in check to protect that 99% of the population that is far more important than the measly 1% of mages.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Xilizhra wrote...

There's a bit of a problem with that because with Mages, there really isn't a need to cause harm or anything. All it takes is one bad day, one failed spell, one burst of overconfidence and suddenly everyone in the village is being assaulted by undead while you mutilate your elves.

I filed that under "protecting mages." Though it doesn't seem to be as bad as you make it out to be.

To you, a mage could be wading trough a river fo blood and corpses and it wouldn't be bad.

Warrior Creass wrote...
only after they have been proven dangerous.  Not prior, not just becuase they could be dangerous. Anyone could be dangerous.

Mages have been proven to be dangerous. All of them. By their very nature.
Far more dangerous than any normal human being.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Warrior Craess wrote...
If Isolde hadn't been terrified that she'd lose her only sun, If a qualified teacher was available, If Lord logain hadn't tried to kill off his political enemy, then it's entirely likely that the tragedy at redcliff would have never happened. 

laying the blame for all the bad things that have happened soley at the feet of mages is juvenile.  The Culture of Thedas is not at all healthy for magic.  There are lots of ways for magic to serve mankind, with out being looked at as evil. Or having to be enslaved to the whims of religious zealots.

Typical mage apologists. Ignoring the danger of mages and every time one of them becomes an abomination and kills poeple, they try to throw hte blame at the Chantry.

People are fallible. People are moody. People are prone to bouts of anger, loss of self control and temptation.
Mages are no exception to that rule, and the Chantry or the tempalrs has 0 to do with it.
A mage - a well intentioned, trained mage - can still easily fall and cause the death of thousands.

Redcliffe is a good example of it - and all of your "what If's" are utterly irrelevant. Temptation and human nature remain. Mages like Connor have fallen and will fall regardless of what you do. The only way to protect the poeple is to not have mages among them when they do fall.

Laying the blame of all the bad things that happened soley at the feet of the Chantry is even more juvenile.
Mages shirk from their responsibilities and endanger everyone as a result.

Wrong, people, mages included can not be reasonably held responsible for what MIGHT happen.
Are brilliant but absent minded people held responsible becuase someday
they might blow up the chem lab? Or leave a bacteria culture unsecured?
Are scientists held responsible for what weapon, or explosive that they
MIGHT create?

Wrong.
Mages are at more danger to fall than anyone else. And the potential fallout is devastating.

Blowing up a chem lab is irrelevant in comparison. And scientists are dependant on resoources, funding and oversight from other peopel who cna pull the plug on their project. Scientists are only a potential risk when in the lab (and labs have security and failsafes, especially when working on dagerous stuff). Mages are dangerous 24/7.

If anything, mages are closer to peoply carrying a deadly desease than your comparison with scientists.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Warrior Craess wrote...

LOL so we have the Qun, who are more repressive, but at least they are repressive to everyone.

The Elves whose current system seems to work just fine, but we know nothing of what it was like before.

Pretty sure I remember something about hedge mages in Revain, and nothing really bad happening there. Sadly though nothing really is explained about it.

And the Tevinter empire.

The elves system doesn't work "fine". Of the two clans we have seen both were led to destruction by their Keepers.  2 out of 2. That's  a 100% disaster record.
Add to that clans that just dissapear (abomination)...no, their system isnt' "fine"

Revain has a Circle. The few witches are more like Morrigan roaming the wilds than anything else.

This isn't a case of if it aint broke don't fix it. The Circle/Chantry/Templar system is definately broke.

Your oppinion.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Xilizhra wrote...

In the Dalish we have the mad Keeper of DA:O and in DA2 we have Marethari and Merril(of which at least one is a major screwup). In Awakening we have the vengeance mad Velanna.

Zathrian and Marethari were highly isolated incidents based on special circumstances, and Velanna wasn't all that bad (and unrelated to Dalish society in general, as she'd been exiled).

Prove it. I demand proof.
We have 100% history of dalish clans being fubared because of their stance on mages. Heck, the dalish clans are primitive, roaving bands, with entire clans dissapearing without a trace (abominations much?).
That isn't a system that works.


If you can't prove it, then I declare that any incident involving the templars/Chatnry is an isolated one, and there's nothing really wrong.

[Cultist]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Cultist wrote...

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))

The Chantry - like every organiazion ever run by humans - is far from perfect. Adn it never will be. But taht is beside the point.

What we do see every day is people on forums telling us how wonderfull and trustworthy mages are (despite having absolutely nothing to back it up with), and how everything would be peachy-fine if mages are let to run free and all the deaths that would inevitabley result from that are perfectly acceptable and people should just "deal with it", since it's for "the best".
But if mages suffer then they shouldnt' "deal with it", no. Then it's time for a bloody revolution, right?

Mages have proven to be too voilatile and dangerous. As any human being they are prone to emotional outbursts and loss of self-control and bad judgement calls. And for a mage, each such occurance can mean not only the death of a mage, but many, many people around him... and worse.

You every post proves that templars are needed to keep that danger in check to protect that 99% of the population that is far more important than the measly 1% of mages.

Oh really? Yet you you can't back your statements as well, because noone ever allowed mages to "run free" in post-Imperium Thedas. And if Chantry persecuted, killed, abused, murdered, raped and indoctrinated mages with the idea of their inferiority for thousand years, they shouldn't be surprised at bloody revolution.

You still practice in your excuses for genocide. It is thanks to Chantry and Templar policies mages turn to Blood Magic. Because when everyone conciders you guilty because of what you are, and treat you like a rabid beast, you will defend yourself with every means possible. Yet you cry "How dare they!?" when victim decides to oppose the killers.
Not only you endose slavery, but state, that the very thought of freedom is a crime and a mortal sin against everloving and merciful Chantry and should be punished by death. Also, those non-mages who sympathise with them should be killed as well, according to your words.

Even Tevinter Imperium with all its Blood Magic practices pales in comparison with your ideas of widespread  genocide and ethnic cleansing in a name of greater good.

[Dave of Canada]

Cultist wrote...

Oh really? Yet you you can't back your statements as well, because noone ever allowed mages to "run free" in post-Imperium Thedas.

Except, you know, they did. That was the entire purpose behind the original Inquisition and why the Circles were created.

And if Chantry persecuted, killed, abused, murdered, raped and indoctrinated mages with the idea of their inferiority for thousand years, they shouldn't be surprised at bloody revolution.

Oh no, buzz words!

Welcome to Thedas, this happens to everyone except nobility. SURPRISE! You know the ironic part of it? The only people which should (under ideal circumstances) be responsible for these acts are Templar, guards and nobility don't give two ****s about anybody else while the Chantry does take care of their mages.

You still practice in your excuses for genocide. It is thanks to Chantry and Templar policies mages turn to Blood Magic.

Except this is not the case and even then the powers of blood magic is potent enough to keep mages on a short leash.

Surprise! People don't like the thought that they might be mind controlled, killed by demons or raised into undeath!

Because when everyone conciders you guilty because of what you are, and treat you like a rabid beast, you will defend yourself with every means possible.

Except, you know, Templar don't treat mages like rabid beasts unless the mage shows signs which they should be treated as such. They're infact treated better than a significant portion of Thedas.

Those poor mages, poor tortured souls!

Yet you cry "How dare they!?" when victim decides to oppose the killers.

Victims of what, exactly? Locked away in one of the finest establishments on Thedas, allowed to do as they please provided they follow regulations?

Not only you endose slavery

How are mages "slaves"? They're not forced to do anything outside of learning magic and staying in the Circles, a mage who follows the Circle's very loose rules ends up with the ability to leave the Circles and do as they please provided they check-in on occasion.

The only mages which should fear the wrath of the Templar are those who deserve it.

but state, that the very thought of freedom is a crime and a mortal sin against everloving and merciful Chantry and should be punished by death.

Freedom is an abstract concept, it holds no weight and mages only value it because they cannot have it. A citizen of Thedas who doesn't follow the law is punished by rape, torture and death.

Does anyone weep for them? Does anyone weep when the poor starve on the streets, the plagued are left to die, the citizens are abused by guards? No. No-one cares about the widespread state of Thedas because it doesn't bother them, it doesn't occur to a minority.

Appeasing the minority which is treated better than everyone else is far better than accepting that Thedas isn't modern-day society with it's laws and concepts of human rights. Mages are just stupid super humans except for the rare exceptions (Wynne, Finn, Bethany.)

Even Tevinter Imperium with all its Blood Magic practices pales in comparison with your ideas of widespread  genocide and ethnic cleansing in a name of greater good.

Yes, everything that happened under Kirkwall was insignficant. 

[Lotion Soronarr]

Cultist wrote...
Oh really? Yet you you can't back your statements as well, because noone ever allowed mages to "run free" in post-Imperium Thedas. And if Chantry persecuted, killed, abused, murdered, raped and indoctrinated mages with the idea of their inferiority for thousand years, they shouldn't be surprised at bloody revolution.

Oh noes. Every act of human malice is planned and sign of a clear evil that is Chantry.
Everyone is brainwashed by their evil (except for me)!

If it weren't so funny it would be sad.

You still practice in your excuses for genocide. It is thanks to Chantry and Templar policies mages turn to Blood Magic. Because when everyone conciders you guilty because of what you are, and treat you like a rabid beast, you will defend yourself with every means possible. Yet you cry "How dare they!?" when victim decides to oppose the killers.

You still practice your excuse of mage behavior, by shifting the blame to the templars/Chantry for everything.
You constantly overblow the treatment of mages and the teachings of the Chantry to the point of redicule.

Mages are actually treated better than most. They have lives better tha most.

Victims? Ha!
When people rise up and lock up mages for all the damage and danger they cause, it is you who cry "how dare they try to protect their lives and families!"

Not only you endose slavery, but state, that the very thought of freedom is a crime and a mortal sin against everloving and merciful Chantry and should be punished by death. Also, those non-mages who sympathise with them should be killed as well, according to your words.

Obviously you take everything way too seriously.

A reasonable and responsible mage should know that total freedom is not a possiblity for him.
Those that try to break free, despite knowing the danger tehy posses, are not evil...most of the time. But they still need to be hauled back.
Regrettable, but necessary.

Even Tevinter Imperium with all its Blood Magic practices pales in comparison with your ideas of widespread  genocide and ethnic cleansing in a name of greater good.

Not even close.
For one, the mages are a very small minority, so even if all the mages were to be killed, it would still be a FAR smaller bodycount that what Tevinter or mages are capable off (and will eventually cause).

And if you say "kill all the templars" in the name of the "greater freedom/good" you're doing the exact same thing.

[The Elder King]

I don't get the people who said that the Chantry thinks apostate=maleficarum. If they actually have that law, Anders would've been killed seven times.

[TEWR]

hhh89 wrote...

I don't get the people who said that the Chantry thinks apostate=maleficarum. If they actually have that law, Anders would've been killed seven times.

The Chantry has often tried to conflate the two, and this is actual fact in-game. It's true that apostates are often maleficarum, but this isn't the case.

Never mind that maleficar is a Tevinter word which translates to "one who is depraved", so it being used solely to describe bad mages is kinda twisting its original meaning to something else.

Should it be used to describe malicious blood mages? Certainly. Should it only be used in such a way? Certainly not.

[DPSSOC]

Cultist wrote...
Oh really? Yet you you can't back your statements as well, because noone ever allowed mages to "run free" in post-Imperium Thedas.

 
Except, you know, Tevinter.  Tevinter where the Templars are run by the mages and universally accepted as a paper tiger.  Where magisters use blood magic to entertain guests or fuel magical duels in the streets.  Yeah they let mages run free and, well I'll let you draw your own conclusions.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Tevinter is run by mages, but even the amgisters - as depraved as they are - kept the Circle system.

Most mages in Tevinter do not run around free. Only the priviliged mages do.
Pretty much everyone else is a slave

[berelinde]

Except for the fact that Tevinter has an established culture which includes domination by mages. This culture predates Andrastianism, and the introduction of religion did little to change peoples' sensibilities. Ferelden and most of the rest of Thedas does not have that kind of culutre, never did, and has resisted every attempt at introducing that form of government. Ferelden, for example, seems to have a cultural predisposition toward a constitutional monarchy with a "congress" of banns. Its citizens place great store in freedom and self-governance. You aren't going to have the same outcome where the very culture of the people inclines them against authoritarian rule.

Modifié par berelinde, 12 octobre 2012 - 11:25 .

[BlueMagitek]

Warrior Craess wrote...

it's not functioning. We have the mutitude of abuses demonstrated in kirkwall, and the Templars who felt they were above the word of a king, and the right of conscription in Awakening as proof. 

Yes blood magic is a bad idea. personally I never found it to be all that appealing.. I could do more damage faster with the primal spells, and much better CC in the spirit and creation colleges.  Should it be studied? Yes, but only the best, strongest and most moral of mages. Why? Because with out the knowledge gained by research, it's impossible to develope counters to it.  

No one is saying that magic doesn't have the potential to be extremely dangerous. I'm simply saying that it's the people that use it that make magic dangerous. just like it was the people that used Mustard gas, Just like it was people that burned down chicago, London (multiple times), New York etc.  Given the right circumstances everything is dangerous.  Even magic. 

Work to prevent the circumstance, not punich the people for what might happen.

You're using Kirkwall as an example?  Kirkwall seems to be pretty unique amongst Circles.  You have the tears in the Fade, crazy magical items causing trouble, Qunari, templar who believe Mage Hawke isn't a mage;  yes, Kirkwall had a lot of issues, but you're using possibly the worst example (except for perhaps Aenor).

It's not about what you can do with it in game mechanics, but what it can do in story.  Demon summoning and mind control are much more effective if you want your way than the Primal school.  Avernus admits it and we see him summon demons. 

And we tend to restrict dangerous materials.  Keeping mages away from personal volatile situations, like what Connor was in, should be done.  Hopefully they'd have fewer issues. >.>

By placing mages away from the general public until they've, like, taken a test that proves they can handle the dangers of the fade?

[The Elder King]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

I don't get the people who said that the Chantry thinks apostate=maleficarum. If they actually have that law, Anders would've been killed seven times.

The Chantry has often tried to conflate the two, and this is actual fact in-game. It's true that apostates are often maleficarum, but this isn't the case.

Never mind that maleficar is a Tevinter word which translates to "one who is depraved", so it being used solely to describe bad mages is kinda twisting its original meaning to something else.

Should it be used to describe malicious blood mages? Certainly. Should it only be used in such a way? Certainly not.

When? In DA2?
Anyway, I don't think there's a Chantry rule that says that an apostate should be considered a maleficarum. For what I understand, a templar should kill a maleficarum, and not not bring him back to the Circle (since it's considered too danguerous). In Ferelden, not only Anders was brought back to the Circle seven times, but even Jowan (who is a blood mage) was supposed to be brought back in the Circle.
It's true that some templars and priests consider apostates and maleficarum as the same, but I think that that's an individual act (which shouldn't be permitted, since an apostate doesn't deserve the same fate of a maleficarum) than the act of the Chantry as an organization.

[Xilizhra]

Except, you know, Templar don't treat mages like rabid beasts unless the mage shows signs which they should be treated as such. They're infact treated better than a significant portion of Thedas.

Those poor mages, poor tortured souls!

The fact that some mages live in a vague state of affluence does not qualify their treatment as "better." If you'd like to claim that the most common death for ordinary humans on Thedas is also suicide, feel free, but I don't see anything showing that. And I don't even see how that's relevant; if Thedas' other people are being as badly oppressed, then they have every reason to rise up as well. I'm certainly not stopping anyone. Hell, I'd probably endorse it, especially for the city elves.

[General User]

Warrior Craess wrote...

lol so clueless.  I happen to work in EMS, and I certainly take precaution against contacting diseases, and illness from my patients. I do not lock up anyone who might possible contact Hep C at some point (which would be everyone). I do not segregate people who might come into contact with Viral menigitis (which would also be anyone). We do not make those people who might contact TB go live in a tower. 

It's not until after we determine that a patient may be suffering from symptoms that indicate those types of disease that we isolate them. Even that is only until they are tested, and if positive then treated. Then they go right back into society free to do whatever they want. 

If you're familiar with the concept of taking precautions, then just think; what precautions do you imagine persons who work with explosives or other dangerous chemicals take?  They lock those materials in a secure facility of course, with the apparatus and procedures on hand to deal with a catastrophe.  And they only take them out or work with them under tightly controlled and regulated conditions.  So it is with magic and mages.  They're too dangerous to be allowed to freely move about society, so mages must be collected, secured, controlled, and regulated for everyone's best interests.

Modifié par General User, 12 octobre 2012 - 07:22 .

[Xilizhra]

General User wrote...

Warrior Craess wrote...

lol so clueless.  I happen to work in EMS, and I certainly take precaution against contacting diseases, and illness from my patients. I do not lock up anyone who might possible contact Hep C at some point (which would be everyone). I do not segregate people who might come into contact with Viral menigitis (which would also be anyone). We do not make those people who might contact TB go live in a tower. 

It's not until after we determine that a patient may be suffering from symptoms that indicate those types of disease that we isolate them. Even that is only until they are tested, and if positive then treated. Then they go right back into society free to do whatever they want. 

If you're familiar with the concept of taking precautions, then just think; what precautions do you imagine persons who work with explosives or other dangerous chemicals take?  They lock them in a secure facility of course, with the apparatus and procedures on hand to deal with a catastrophe.  And they only take them out or work with them under tightly controlled and regulated conditions.  So it is with magic and mages.  They're too dangerous to be allowed to freely move about society, so mages must be collected, secured, controlled, and regulated for everyone's best interests.

Mages aren't inherently dangerous outside of thin-Veil areas, and aren't really comparable to explosives in most areas so long as they don't deliberately use dangerous magic. Which is potentially problematic, but again, not something worth preemptively imprisoning them over. They may be watched over, which is fine, but the current Circle goes much too far in its implementation.

[General User]

Dave of Canada wrote...

A citizen of Thedas who doesn't follow the law is punished by rape, torture and death.

Does anyone weep for them? Does anyone weep when the poor starve on the streets, the plagued are left to die, the citizens are abused by guards?

The Chantry does.  They provide ministerial services and charitable relief to even the most poor and downtrodden.

Modifié par General User, 12 octobre 2012 - 12:39 .

[Xilizhra]

General User wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

A citizen of Thedas who doesn't follow the law is punished by rape, torture and death.

Does anyone weep for them? Does anyone weep when the poor starve on the streets, the plagued are left to die, the citizens are abused by guards?

The Chantry does.  They provide ministerial services and charitable relief to even the most poor and downtrodden.

Well, in Kirkwall, the Chantry mostly seems to shake them down for money. And unlike the templars, there's no indication that the Chantry here is particularly different from anywhere else; certainly, the grand cleric is extremely popular, for vague reasons.

Also, the "most poor and downtrodden" seem to be elves for the most part, and I've never seen the Chantry do anything at all for them. Come to think of it, in Kirkwall, where that term mostly fits the populace of Darktown, the Chantry never does anything there either.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 12 octobre 2012 - 12:42 .

[dragonflight288]

hhh89 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

I don't get the people who said that the Chantry thinks apostate=maleficarum. If they actually have that law, Anders would've been killed seven times.

The Chantry has often tried to conflate the two, and this is actual fact in-game. It's true that apostates are often maleficarum, but this isn't the case.

Never mind that maleficar is a Tevinter word which translates to "one who is depraved", so it being used solely to describe bad mages is kinda twisting its original meaning to something else.

Should it be used to describe malicious blood mages? Certainly. Should it only be used in such a way? Certainly not.

When? In DA2?
Anyway, I don't think there's a Chantry rule that says that an apostate should be considered a maleficarum. For what I understand, a templar should kill a maleficarum, and not not bring him back to the Circle (since it's considered too danguerous). In Ferelden, not only Anders was brought back to the Circle seven times, but even Jowan (who is a blood mage) was supposed to be brought back in the Circle.
It's true that some templars and priests consider apostates and maleficarum as the same, but I think that that's an individual act (which shouldn't be permitted, since an apostate doesn't deserve the same fate of a maleficarum) than the act of the Chantry as an organization.

It's stated in codex entries that the two are often convoluted. Morrigan backs it up,

A maleficar pretty much refes to blood mages in general. But it has been confirmed that the Chantry generally believes any mage who practices magic that the Circle (which is controlled by the Chantry) doesn't practice is a maleficar.

Wynne calls Morrigan a maleficar, and Morrigan isn't even a blood mage. She's a shapeshifter and a hedge mage, growing up outside the Chantry. Her shapeshifting is a form of magic that isn't practiced by the Chantry at all. And so she is considered maleficar.

The School of Spirit's own description says that it's often mistaken for blood magic, when it simply isn't the case. Animating the dead being an example of such confusion.

[General User]

Xilizhra wrote...

General User wrote...

Warrior Craess wrote...

lol so clueless.  I happen to work in EMS, and I certainly take precaution against contacting diseases, and illness from my patients. I do not lock up anyone who might possible contact Hep C at some point (which would be everyone). I do not segregate people who might come into contact with Viral menigitis (which would also be anyone). We do not make those people who might contact TB go live in a tower. 

It's not until after we determine that a patient may be suffering from symptoms that indicate those types of disease that we isolate them. Even that is only until they are tested, and if positive then treated. Then they go right back into society free to do whatever they want. 

If you're familiar with the concept of taking precautions, then just think; what precautions do you imagine persons who work with explosives or other dangerous chemicals take?  They lock them in a secure facility of course, with the apparatus and procedures on hand to deal with a catastrophe.  And they only take them out or work with them under tightly controlled and regulated conditions.  So it is with magic and mages.  They're too dangerous to be allowed to freely move about society, so mages must be collected, secured, controlled, and regulated for everyone's best interests.

Mages aren't inherently dangerous outside of thin-Veil areas, and aren't really comparable to explosives in most areas so long as they don't deliberately use dangerous magic. Which is potentially problematic, but again, not something worth preemptively imprisoning them over. They may be watched over, which is fine, but the current Circle goes much too far in its implementation.

Couple things.  First once a mage had proven themselves trustworthy and capable, they were simply watched over.  Some even could forego that for periodic checking in.

Second, and more importantly, it is impossible to predict what will prompt a mage to use "dangerous magic."  The world is messy and dangerous all over.  How can you be sure a mage won't turn to bloodmagic just to cheat at cards?  How do you know a mage won't summon a demon to stop herself from getting mugged or raped?  Or use the cover of a thunderstorm to murder his neighbor with a lightning bolt because they were rowing over the hedges or something?  Power corrupts, and magic is a very powerful a force.  Out in the world, the temptations to use it for bad and the incentives to use it for personal gain will be so great that few will be able to resist for long.

Modifié par General User, 12 octobre 2012 - 12:53 .

[Xilizhra]

Couple things. First once a mage had proven themselves trustworthy and capable, they were simply watched over. Some even could forego that for periodic checking in.

We have a grand total of one Circle that we see allowing that (neither the Gallows nor the White Spire seem to). And Wynne was, in large part, a complete Chantry bootlicker, although not quite as bad as the Loyalists.

Second, and more importatnly, it is impossible to predict what will prompt a mage to use "dangerous magic." The world is messy and dangerous all over. How can you be sure a mage won't turn to bloodmagic just to cheat at cards? How do you know a mage won't summon a demon to stop herself from getting mugged or raped? Or use the cover of a thunderstorm to murder his neighbor with a lightning bolt because they were rowing over the hedges or something? Power corrupts, and magic is a very powerful a force. Out in the world, the temptations to use it for bad and the incentives to use it for personal gain will be so great that few will be able to resist for long.

Anyone might become corrupt and kill at any point. We don't lock up everyone just because of what they might do. If someone commits a crime, than deal with that, but don't imprison everyone based on precrime assumptions. In any case, my plan here involved towns built up around the Circles that would be the only places mages had full run of; they'd still be in some variety of confinement, but would have a far better chance at integration into a basically normal life while still being under the protection of my sentinels.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Xilizhra wrote...

Except, you know, Templar don't treat mages like rabid beasts unless the mage shows signs which they should be treated as such. They're infact treated better than a significant portion of Thedas.

Those poor mages, poor tortured souls!

The fact that some mages live in a vague state of affluence does not qualify their treatment as "better."

Actually, I'd say it does.

Mages aren't inherently dangerous outside of thin-Veil areas, and aren't
really comparable to explosives in most areas so long as they don't
deliberately use dangerous magic. Which is potentially problematic, but
again, not something worth preemptively imprisoning them over. They may
be watched over, which is fine, but the current Circle goes much too far
in its implementation.

Yes they are.
You can try to downplay their danger all you want, but mages are extreemly dangerous by their own nature.

Warrior Crases wrote..
It's not until after we determine that a patient may be suffering from
symptoms that indicate those types of disease that we isolate them. Even
that is only until they are tested, and if positive then treated. Then
they go right back into society free to do whatever they want.

What do you do if it's a deadly desease and there is no cure?
How do you "treat" a mage...other than tranquilisation that is?