158 réponses à ce sujet

[lil yonce]

LobselVith8 wrote...

All mages shouldn't suffer simply because some mages accept slavery under the Chantry and the Order of Templars. Some people believe it's better to die on their feet than live on their knees.

Then those mages should have just left and became apostates. They shouldn't have voted on the issue and dragged every mage in Thedas into their mess.

With your line of thinking, perhaps Andraste and Shartan should have written the Imperium strongly worded letters, instead of fighting for the freedom of their people.

A strongly worded letter is not practical. Successive approximations are.

The same reason some slaves didn't have a problem with slavery; not everyone has the same opinion. That doesn't mean that forcing mages into servitude to the Chantry is right.

I didn't say those mages didn't take issue with the present situation of Circles, I said they don't want to fight templars, so I don't understand your slavery comparison above.

And again, the Separatists could have just left the Circles by themselves.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 10 octobre 2012 - 07:09 .

[LobselVith8]

Youth4Ever wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

All mages shouldn't suffer simply because some mages accept slavery under the Chantry and the Order of Templars. Some people believe it's better to die on their feet than live on their knees.

Then those mages should have just left and became apostates. They shouldn't have voted on the issue and dragged every mage in Thedas into their mess.

It was a democratic vote, which means the elected representatives of the mages democratically decided to break free from an oppressive regime that has brutally enslaved their people for nearly a thousand years. The Chantry shouldn't have forced mages into servitude to begin with.

Youth4Ever wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

With your line of thinking, perhaps Andraste and Shartan should have written the Imperium strongly worded letters, instead of fighting for the freedom of their people. 

A strongly worded letter is not practical. Succesive approximations are.

An authority that thinks it has the right to dominiate you by divine right shouldn't be mollified, it should be overthrown.

Youth4Ever wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

The same reason some slaves didn't have a problem with slavery; not everyone has the same opinion. That doesn't mean that forcing mages into servitude to the Chantry is right.

I didn't say those mages didn't take issue with the present situation of Circles, I said they don't want to fight templars, so I don't understand your slavery comparison above.

And again, the separatists could have just left the Circles by themselves.

A democratic vote was taken to seperate the Circles of Magi from the Chantry of Andraste; why you vilify the mages for taking a vote to break free from the Chantry continues to vex me. And if the templars are attempting to murder the mages for not bending knee to the Chantry, then it isn't the fault of the mages for defending themselves from attempted murder.

[Lazy Jer]

One thing to keep in mind is that the decision by the Circle to break away from the Chantry is not necessarily a decision to go to war against the Chantry. It's just a statement that the Circle will be self-governing rather then being governed by the Chantry. Individual mages who don't agree with the decision may decide to return to the Chantry themselves.

Another thing to consider is that after the events of Asunder there are really three groups. There is the Circle, there's the Chantry and there's the Templars under Lambert. Divine Justinia has proven to be much more sympathetic towards the mages, but also has the whole of the Chantry to worry about, not just the Circle. Lambert has a clear agenda and would probably have went after the Circle separation or no given that he differs enough from Justinia's stance on mages to have separated from the Chantry himself.

These things do have to be considered because even those groups who didn't mind being governed by the Chantry (i.e the loyalists) might not want to join up with the Chantry if Lambert manages to garner enough support to oust Justinia.and install a Divine that more closely matches his hardline stance against the Circle and mages in general.

[The Six Path of Pain]

Doesn't blood magic involve sacrificing ones blood to a demon.I'm pretty sure Templars don't contact demons when making a Phylactery,it just magic that happens to involve blood.So in that regard Templars aren't hypocrites.

[berelinde]

Blood magic does not involve sacrificing one's blood to a demon. It uses the life energy of blood instead of mana. Asunder confirms that phylacteries *are* blood magic. So is the Joining Ritual. Both points have been confirmed by David Gaider.

Mages can learn and use blood magic in ways that do not involve consorting with demons. Jowan learned from a book. Anders asks Merrill if she cut herself and suddenly realized the power rather than actually making a deal with a demon.

Obviously, there are degrees of everything. Some forms of blood magic, e.g. mind control, are undeniably evil, but others, like the use of phylacteries to track escaped mages, seem to be a much paler gray.

Edit: From the Codex entry on the Seekers of Truth:

 It's said they are immune to a blood mage's mind control and possess the ability to read minds or erase memories, but this is likely exaggeration.

If this turns out to be true and not exaggeration, it borders very closely on the most feared blood mage's abilities. 


I do not post this with the intention of condemning the Seekers as "blood templars". Enforcement agencies have always used the tools of the opposition to enhance their effectiveness. Government mints enlist the help of counterfeiters to make their currency more secure. It's just something to think about.

Modifié par berelinde, 11 octobre 2012 - 02:30 .

[TEWR]

Youth4Ever wrote...

Her Seekers do not. The Inquisition does not. And the templars are no longer part of the Chantry.

No longer, yes. But at the time of the contemplation of assassinating the Divine, they were.

The Divine preached to Orlesian nobles about the plight of mages. She sought an alternative to tranquility. She sent Wynne to protect that research. To say that the Chantry itself wants to slaughter every mage in Thedas is wrong. That is not their stance

I never said the Chantry itself wants to slaughter Mages. I said her Templars did.

I've often argued that I view the Divine as the voice of the Chantry and the embodiment of it, for good or ill depending on who it is. I've also said I believe Justinia V is the type of Divine that should be in charge, and not the types like Beatrix III or the one that wanted to kill the Mages that were peacefully protesting in the Cathedral.

Justinia V, being the Chantry itself in my mind, doesn't want to kill the Mages. That means that at this point in time, the Chantry doesn't want to kill the Mages.

But if Beatrix III or the other Divine I mentioned were in charge, then that would mean that they DO want to kill the Mages.

The point being, the Chantry's stance on the Mages is very fluid. It fluctuates from Divine to Divine.

Youth4Ever wrote...

So the Lucrosian philosophy of complete integration into the economy, the accumulation of wealth, and eventual political influence won't help the mages achieve peaceful independence and the "by any means necessary" approach to separation from the Chantry of the extreme Libertarians has nothing to do with the Mages leaving the Circles and fighting templars?

Their approach to life directly impacts how they try to gain autonomy.

It would, if the Chantry didn't control them. Were they already autonomous, then we could see how the ideologies would affect how they operate under their autonomy.

As it is, it's simply them going "Well, I like money".

As for the Libertarian one? Yeah, that happened after the Chantry's authority over the Mages and Templars was reaching the boiling point.

Had it remained at the status quo, war wouldn't have happened and nothing would've changed. The fraternities would continue arguing over what they'd like to happen, but wouldn't actually be able to act on those beliefs due to the Chantry looming overhead.

[lil yonce]

LobselVith8 wrote...

It was a democratic vote, which means the elected representatives of the mages democratically decided to break free from an oppressive regime that has brutally enslaved their people for nearly a thousand years. The Chantry shouldn't have forced mages into servitude to begin with.

You think it's ethical to victimize someone? It's not like the mages were voting whether or not to wear pants instead of robes. The decision to separate the Circles of Magi from the Chantry was hands down the biggest and most important decision in the history of the College of Enchanters. It was seismic. The stakes are high. The formal decision to leave the Chantry guaranteed a monumental change in the lives of every mage in Thedas.

The Separatists acknowledged that the templars would hunt them and still they pressured a decision to dictate the fate of all mages. They wanted every Circle and every mage to fight, and die for if necessary, Separatists values regardless of their own personal beliefs.

Why can't the mages against Separation remain in the Circles? Life will be unbearable. The templars will become stricter than ever before blanketing all mages as Rebels or potential Rebels as the Separation decision was designed to do, and life in the Circles will become many times worse Post-Separation than even the most dramatic Libertarian could have ever imagined. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

The adamant Separatists should have become apostates and fought their own revolution. Their statement against the Chantry should not cost the well being of the mages they claim to stand for.

Also, the mages are not enslaved. They are not property of the Chantry. They are imprisoned, and they agreed to the creation of the Circles of Magi.

An authority that thinks it has the right to dominiate you by divine right shouldn't be mollified, it should be overthrown.

The end result of successive approximations would be peaceful mage independence, not appeasement of the templars or Chantry dogma.

A democratic vote was taken to seperate the Circles of Magi from the Chantry of Andraste; why you vilify the mages for taking a vote to break free from the Chantry continues to vex me. And if the templars are attempting to murder the mages for not bending knee to the Chantry, then it isn't the fault of the mages for defending themselves from attempted murder.

The Separatists expect mages who fundamentally disagree with their beliefs and methods to give up their lives, fight templars, and die if necessary for their revolution. Without a doubt the Separatists are extremists.

The language in your posts indicates this in not solely a matter of mage freedom. "[The Chantry] should be overthrown."

Leaving the Circles informally as apostates I have no issue with. Dragging every mage on the continent into their dogmatic fight with the Chantry is simply wrong.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 11 octobre 2012 - 04:58 .

[LobselVith8]

The Six Path of Pain wrote...

Doesn't blood magic involve sacrificing ones blood to a demon.

No, it doesn't. According to the lore, "Nothing inspires as much wild-eyed terror as the Blood Mage. Mages of this type take the raw energy of life and twist it to their own purposes. They can corrupt and control, and sustain their power by consuming the health of others, willing or not. The effects can be vile, but this specialization isn't limited to madmen and monsters. Many see it as the only form of magic that is truly free, because it's tied to the physical, not favors to spirits or demons."

Furthermore, it's addressed that blood mages "are feared not only for the incredible power of their spells, but also their ability to control minds. Templars hunt blood mages relentlessly, yet despite their efforts, Kirkwall sees more instances of blood magic with each passing year. Some whisper that the Order's relentless hunt has driven good intentioned apostates to blood magic in their desperation to survive and keep their freedom."

The Six Path of Pain wrote...

I'm pretty sure Templars don't contact demons when making a Phylactery,it just magic that happens to involve blood.So in that regard Templars aren't hypocrites.

Demonology involves summoning demons; blood magic doesn't require contact with a demon, although it can be used to summon one or more demons.

[LobselVith8]

Youth4Ever wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

It was a democratic vote, which means the elected representatives of the mages democratically decided to break free from an oppressive regime that has brutally enslaved their people for nearly a thousand years. The Chantry shouldn't have forced mages into servitude to begin with.

You think it's ethical to victimize someone? It's not like the mages were voting whether or not to wear pants instead of robes. The decision to separate the Circles of Magi from the Chantry was hands down the biggest and most important decision in the history of the College of Enchanters. It was seismic. The stakes are high. The formal decision to leave the Chantry guaranteed a monumental change in the lives of every mage in Thedas.

I don't think it's ethical to enslave mages to the Chantry, which is why I support the mages breaking free from the Chantry and the Order of Templars. It's why my Surana Warden asked for the Magi Boon at the conclusion of the Fifth Blight; it's why my apostate Hawke said to Anders that the templars need to be overthrown.

Youth4Ever wrote...

The Separatists acknowledged that the templars would hunt them and still they pressured a decision to dictate the fate of all mages. They wanted every Circle and every mage to fight, and die for if necessary, for Separatists values regardless of their own personal beliefs.

An anti-mage religious organization that enslaved mages for nearly a thousand years shouldn't be coddled, they should be defeated and overthrown.

Youth4Ever wrote...

Why can't the mages against Separation remain in the Circles? Life will be unbearable. The templars will become stricter than ever before blanketing all mages as Rebels or potential Rebels as the Separation decision was designed to do, and life in the Circles will become many times worse Post-Separation than even the most dramatic Libertarian could have ever imagined. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

The majority of the elected leaders chose to emancipate themselves from a tyrannical system. There's no reason to vilify them for refusing to bend knee to the Chantry any longer.

Youth4Ever wrote...

The adamant Separatists should have become apostates and fought their own revolution. Their statement against the Chantry should not cost the well being of the mages they claim to stand for.

Also, the mages are not enslaved. They are not property of the Chantry. They are imprisoned, and they agreed to the creation of the Circles of Magi.

The mages didn't agree to the creation of the Circle of Magi; Emperor Drakon I created the Circle of Magi along with the Order of Templars and the Chantry of Andraste. The mages weren't given a choice; even the creation of the Circle Towers was the end result of a peaceful protest by mages against their lack of rights, where Divine Ambrosia II considered calling an Exalted March against her own cathedral, and had to be talked down from that course of action.

Furthermore, no character in Dragon Age II contests that the Chantry controlled Circles are slavery, even the ones who support the Chantry controlled Circles. Anders and pro-mage Hawke even bring up the fact that the Chantry controlled Circles are slavery, and this argument can be used to persuade Fenris to side with Hawke against the templars.

Youth4Ever wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

An authority that thinks it has the right to dominiate you by divine right shouldn't be mollified, it should be overthrown.

The end result of successive approximations would be peaceful mage independence, not appeasement of the templars or Chantry dogma.

No one should appease an organization that engages in the slavery of mages.

Youth4Ever wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

A democratic vote was taken to seperate the Circles of Magi from the Chantry of Andraste; why you vilify the mages for taking a vote to break free from the Chantry continues to vex me. And if the templars are attempting to murder the mages for not bending knee to the Chantry, then it isn't the fault of the mages for defending themselves from attempted murder.

The Separatists expect mages who fundamentally disagree with their beliefs and methods to give up their lives, fight templars, and die if necessary for their revolution. Without a doubt the Separatists are extremists.

The language in your posts indicates this in not solely a matter of mage freedom. "[The Chantry] should be overthrown."

Leaving the Circles informally as apostates I have no issue with. Dragging every mage on the continent into their dogmatic fight with the Chantry is simply wrong.

Enslaving mages is wrong; democratically choosing to fight for your independence after your people have been forced into servitude for nearly a thousand years is the right course of action.

[Laura Jean]

Youth4Ever wrote...

[The end result of successive approximations would be peaceful mage independence, not appeasement of the templars or Chantry dogma.

.

i hope you realize that for at the last 10 years, since awakening, Wynne has go to the yearly meeeting and has suscessfully talked the Aequartirens(sp) and the other mages into giving the chantry and templars to work with the mages on how to peacefully resoulve the "mage" issue. for the last 5yrs sinse Justin V had been the Divine of the Chantry. If she has pushed for reform it have not shown up in the circle. While she may reject some of the most extreme abuse, Ser Aldrik's "Tranquil Solution" she still has not been able to curb the abuse of seeker and templars. in fact the none of the grand clerics have been able to curb the abuses of the templars. also the Templars have been more abusive as mage try to assure independance.

I don’t think the Chantry is exactly innocent.  I am trying to make the case that the Grand cleric and the Chantry are guilty of murder by neglect by not controlling the Templars better and with no oversite for their abuses. If you talk to Elthaina about the “Tranquill Solution” she only said Ser Alric (sp) was murdered and nothing about his crimes of abusing/raping/killing mages. The mages are completely at the mercy of the Templars.
Jsutina and Elthaina rejection of the tranquill solution was rightly rejected. But other abuses have yet to be stopped.

So my question is how long do the mages have to wait to get their day in court? If it is up to the Templar and Seeker never. The Chantry will delay until mages no longer make it and issue.

Modifié par Laura Jean, 11 octobre 2012 - 05:29 .

[lil yonce]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

No longer, yes. But at the time of the contemplation of assassinating the Divine, they were.

I could argue that as the Chantry has a hierarchiacal top-down structure any templar at odds with the Divine's proposals are not her templars. I believe there is a distinction.

[...] The Chantry's stance on the Mages is very fluid. It fluctuates from Divine to Divine.

And because Justinia V is the current Divine I chastise Circle Separatists. Separation from the Chantry is not necessary. It is during this reign that the mages can realisitically lay the groundwork for and even achieve peaceful independence. Had Separation occured during the reign of Beatrix III I could understand their revolution. In this situation I think the Separatists were rash and too hung up on wording of the Chant of Light to pay attention to Justinia's support.

It would, if the Chantry didn't control them. Were they already autonomous, then we could see how the ideologies would affect how they operate under their autonomy.

As it is, it's simply them going "Well, I like money".

As for the Libertarian one? Yeah, that happened after the Chantry's authority over the Mages and Templars was reaching the boiling point.

Had it remained at the status quo, war wouldn't have happened and nothing would've changed. The fraternities would continue arguing over what they'd like to happen, but wouldn't actually be able to act on those beliefs due to the Chantry looming overhead.

This is where the Divine comes in. Justinia V would little by little ease restrictions on mages and create an environment where a Lucrosian approach could be successful.

I don't think the Fraternities designed philosophies for the heck of it. The Lucrosians need the support of those in power for their system to come to fruition and the Libertarians need the worst of possible senarios to justify separation.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 11 octobre 2012 - 05:49 .

[LobselVith8]

Youth4Ever wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

No longer, yes. But at the time of the contemplation of assassinating the Divine, they were.

I could argue that as the Chantry has a hierarchiacal top-down structure any templar at odds with the Divine's proposals are not her templars. I believe there is a distinction.

Didn't the Seekers and the templars defect from the Chantry en masse?

Youth4Ever wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

[...] The Chantry's stance on the Mages is very fluid. It fluctuates from Divine to Divine. 

And because Justinia V is the current Divine I chastise Circle Separatists. Separation from the Chantry is not necessary. It is during this reign that the mages can realisitically lay the groundwork for and even achieve peaceful independence. Had Separation occured during the reign of Beatrix III I could understand their revolution. In this situation I think the Separatists were rash and too hung up on wording of the Chant of Light to pay attention to Justinia's support.

Why should the mages not want autonomy simply because Divine Justina V now presides over the Chantry? The mages have no basic rights, they can be made tranquil, they can't raise their own children, they are at the mercy of the templars, and abuses can transpire because of the degree of authority that the Chantry and the Order of Templars have over them in the Circles of Magi.

If I was a mage, I wouldn't accept the small concessions offered by Divine Justina V; I would want to be free, or die fighting for my freedom.

Youth4Ever wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

It would, if the Chantry didn't control them. Were they already autonomous, then we could see how the ideologies would affect how they operate under their autonomy.

As it is, it's simply them going "Well, I like money".

As for the Libertarian one? Yeah, that happened after the Chantry's authority over the Mages and Templars was reaching the boiling point.

Had it remained at the status quo, war wouldn't have happened and nothing would've changed. The fraternities would continue arguing over what they'd like to happen, but wouldn't actually be able to act on those beliefs due to the Chantry looming overhead.

This is where the Divine comes in. Justinia V would little by little ease restrictions on mages and create an environment where a Lucrosian approach could be successful.

I don't think the Fraternities designed philosophies for the heck of it. The Lucrosians need the support of those in power for their system to come to fruition and the Libertarians need the worst of possible senarios to justify separation.

So mages should continue to live in servitude to the Chantry because Divine Justina V would offer some small concessions to them?

Modifié par LobselVith8, 11 octobre 2012 - 06:19 .

[lil yonce]

Laura Jean wrote...

i hope you realize that for at the last 10 years, since awakening, Wynne has go to the yearly meeeting and has suscessfully talked the Aequartirens(sp) and the other mages into giving the chantry and templars to work with the mages on how to peacefully resoulve the "mage" issue. for the last 5yrs sinse Justin V had been the Divine of the Chantry. If she has pushed for reform it have not shown up in the circle. While she may reject some of the most extreme abuse, Ser Aldrik's "Tranquil Solution" she still has not been able to curb the abuse of seeker and templars. in fact the none of the grand clerics have been able to curb the abuses of the templars. also the Templars have been more abusive as mage try to assure independance.

And I don’t think the Chantry is exactly innocent.  I am trying to make the case that the Grand cleric and the Chantry are guilty of murder by neglect by not controlling the Templars better and with no oversite for their abuses. If you talk to Elthaina about the “Tranquill Solution” she only said Ser Alric (sp) was murdered and nothing about his crimes of abusing/raping/killing mages. The mages are completely at the mercy of the Templars.
Jsutina and Elthaina rejection of the tranquill solution was rightly rejected. But other abuses have yet to be stopped.

So my question is how long do the mages have to wait to get their day in court? If it is up to the Templar and Seeker never. The Chantry will delay until mages no longer make it and issue.

Unfortunately, permanent change will not occur overnight. The mages now have a Divine sympathetic to their situation and she has only begin her reign. It will take time and it may take not only her regin but also the reign of her well choosen successor to reform and abolish the Circles of Magi.

I don't think you can speak on the situation of every Circle. Actually, we have evidence that restricts the extreme actions of Meredith and Kirkwalls templars to that city. We do not know that in every Circle the templars are so abusive.

Justinia V has just recently come to power and has to bear the burden of inaction by previous regimes. Given time she will reform. Patience will save lives. The Separatists should not choose first the method that will without question cause the most misery and result in the greatest number of deaths when they can realistically achieve a peaceful independence.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 11 octobre 2012 - 08:05 .

[lil yonce]

LobselVith8 wrote...

I don't think it's ethical to enslave mages to the Chantry, which is why I support the mages breaking free from the Chantry and the Order of Templars. It's why my Surana Warden asked for the Magi Boon at the conclusion of the Fifth Blight; it's why my apostate Hawke said to Anders that the templars need to be overthrown.

So? That's your character's extreme opinion of the Chantry. That is not my mage character's opinion. There is a fundamental diagreement so why should mages that share the opinion of my Warden mage give up their lives, fight, and die for someone else's beliefs?

An anti-mage religious organization that enslaved mages for nearly a thousand years shouldn't be coddled, they should be defeated and overthrown.

Except the Chantry is not anti-mage during the current reign of Divine Justinia V, they never enslaved mages, and it's your opinion they should be overthrown.

The majority of the elected leaders chose to emancipate themselves from a tyrannical system. There's no reason to vilify them for refusing to bend knee to the Chantry any longer.

The majority was narrow. I do not subscribe to the theory that the validity of a law or decision is based on the process through which it was made. The tyranny of the majority will cost mages who wished to remain in the Circles of Magi their way of life and may cost them their lives entirely.

The mages didn't agree to the creation of the Circle of Magi; Emperor Drakon I created the Circle of Magi along with the Order of Templars and the Chantry of Andraste. The mages weren't given a choice; even the creation of the Circle Towers was the end result of a peaceful protest by mages against their lack of rights, where Divine Ambrosia II considered calling an Exalted March against her own cathedral, and had to be talked down from that course of action.

Yet they did not fight after the creation of the Circles nor did they fight after the creation of the Circle Towers. They agreed to it.

Furthermore, no character in Dragon Age II contests that the Chantry controlled Circles are slavery, even the ones who support the Chantry controlled Circles. Anders and pro-mage Hawke even bring up the fact that the Chantry controlled Circles are slavery, and this argument can be used to persuade Fenris to side with Hawke against the templars.

I don't recall ever hearing the mage situation refered to in-game as slavery in DA and I wouldn't take anything Anders says too seriously. He was slowly being driven mad by Justice.

No one should appease an organization that engages in the slavery of mages.

It's not appeasement. It's getting what you want without bloodshed.

Enslaving mages is wrong; democratically choosing to fight for your independence after your people have been forced into servitude for nearly a thousand years is the right course of action.

That's an extremist and hypocritical viewpoint. Separatists cannot do to others what as been done to them in the name of the greater good.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 11 octobre 2012 - 11:20 .

[lil yonce]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Didn't the Seekers and the templars defect from the Chantry en masse?

Those Seekers and Templars are insubordinate.

Why should the mages not want autonomy simply because Divine Justina V now presides over the Chantry? The mages have no basic rights, they can be made tranquil, they can't raise their own children, they are at the mercy of the templars, and abuses can transpire because of the degree of authority that the Chantry and the Order of Templars have over them in the Circles of Magi.

I didn't say they shouldn't want or that it was wrong for them to desire autonomy. However, the method the College of Enchanters use to achieve it should be reconsidered.

If I was a mage, I wouldn't accept the small concessions offered by Divine Justina V; I would want to be free, or die fighting for my freedom.

Then become an apostate and allow other mages who value their lives and beliefs to fight for freedom their own way.

So mages should continue to live in servitude to the Chantry because Divine Justina V would offer some small concessions to them?

The mages are not servants of the Chantry. And small concessions? Mage entrepreneurship is not a "small concession". Political influence is not a "small concession". Once in place those reforms will be permanent because the entire culture of Circles will change, and even greater changes will happen when the mages make money and have a voice in government.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 11 octobre 2012 - 08:16 .

[LobselVith8]

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

I don't think it's ethical to enslave mages to the Chantry, which is why I support the mages breaking free from the Chantry and the Order of Templars. It's why my Surana Warden asked for the Magi Boon at the conclusion of the Fifth Blight; it's why my apostate Hawke said to Anders that the templars need to be overthrown.[/quote]

So? That's your character's extreme opinion of the Chantry. That is not my mage character's opinion. There is a fundamental diagreement so why should mages that share the opinion of my Warden mage give up their lives, fight, and die for someone else's beliefs? [/quote]

Why should all mages succumb to slavery simply because a few mages are loyal to the Chantry?

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

An anti-mage religious organization that enslaved mages for nearly a thousand years shouldn't be coddled, they should be defeated and overthrown. [/quote]

Except the Chantry is not anti-mage during the current reign of Divine Justinia V, they never enslaved mages, and it's your opinion they should be overthrown. [/quote]

The Chantry controlled Circles are slavery, and multiple characters and authors voice this, from Aldenon the Wise to Anders and pro-mage Hawke in modern day Thedas. There is no reason that mages should be forced into servitude to the Chantry.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

The majority of the elected leaders chose to emancipate themselves from a tyrannical system. There's no reason to vilify them for refusing to bend knee to the Chantry any longer.[/quote]

The majority was narrow. I do not subscribe to the theory that the validity of a law or decision is based on the process through which it was made. The tyranny of the majority will cost mages who wished to remain in the Circles of Magi their way of life and may cost them their lives entirely. [/quote]

It isn't tyranny to oppose slavery and fight for the freedom of your people.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

The mages didn't agree to the creation of the Circle of Magi; Emperor Drakon I created the Circle of Magi along with the Order of Templars and the Chantry of Andraste. The mages weren't given a choice; even the creation of the Circle Towers was the end result of a peaceful protest by mages against their lack of rights, where Divine Ambrosia II considered calling an Exalted March against her own cathedral, and had to be talked down from that course of action.[/quote]

Yet they did not fight after the creation of the Circles nor did they fight after the creation of the Circle Towers. They agreed to it. [/quote]

Mages have struggled for centuries against the Chantry and the Order of Templars, as we know from the codex entries, including the struggle of Aldenon the Wise and his rebel mages to the recent insurrection against at the Circle of Ferelden.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Furthermore, no character in Dragon Age II contests that the Chantry controlled Circles are slavery, even the ones who support the Chantry controlled Circles. Anders and pro-mage Hawke even bring up the fact that the Chantry controlled Circles are slavery, and this argument can be used to persuade Fenris to side with Hawke against the templars.[/quote]

I don't recall ever hearing the mage situation refered to in-game as slavery in DA and I wouldn't take anything Anders says too seriously. He was slowly being driven mad by Justice. [/quote]

Multiple codex entries have addressed that the Chantry controlled Circles control mages and force mages into servitude to the Chantry. One of the codex entries reads, "Adain of Starkhaven escaped from the Circle of the Magi in the winter of 8:76 Blessed, the coldest winter that the Free Marches had seen in decades. He decided that it was better to die a free man than remain a servant to the Chantry and broke out of the Circle's stronghold, fleeing into an unforgiving blizzard."

Also, pro-mage Hawke calls the Chantry controlled Circle slavery, and historically, Aldenon the Wise called the Chantry controlled Circles slavery: "A civilization cannot be civil if it condones the slavery of another. And that is what this Circle is! But by accident of birth, those mages would be free to live, love, and die as they choose. The Circles will break - if it be one year, a decade, a century, or beyond. Tyrants always fall, and the downtrodden always strive for freedom!"

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

No one should appease an organization that engages in the slavery of mages. [/quote]

It's not appeasement. It's getting what you want without bloodshed. [/quote]

It's been nearly a thousand years, and mages were still forced into servitude to the Chantry. Nothing had changed until the mages emancipated themselves from the Chantry of Andraste and the Order of Templars.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Enslaving mages is wrong; democratically choosing to fight for your independence after your people have been forced into servitude for nearly a thousand years is the right course of action.
[/quote]

That's an extremist and hypocritical viewpoint. Separatists cannot due to others what as been done to them in the name of the greater good.[/quote]

lf it's extremist to oppose slavery, then I don't want to be a Loyalist.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 11 octobre 2012 - 08:23 .

[LobselVith8]

Youth4Ever wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Didn't the Seekers and the templars defect from the Chantry en masse?

Those Seekers and Templars are insubordinate.

That's one way to look at it, I suppose.

Youth4Ever wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Why should the mages not want autonomy simply because Divine Justina V now presides over the Chantry? The mages have no basic rights, they can be made tranquil, they can't raise their own children, they are at the mercy of the templars, and abuses can transpire because of the degree of authority that the Chantry and the Order of Templars have over them in the Circles of Magi.

I didn't say they shouldn't want or that it was wrong for them to desire autonomy. However, the method the College of Enchanters use to achieve it should be reconsidered.

A democratic vote was wrong? Should they have asked the Chantry politely to stop enslaving them?

Youth4Ever wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

If I was a mage, I wouldn't accept the small concessions offered by Divine Justina V; I would want to be free, or die fighting for my freedom.

Then become an apostate and allow other mages who value their lives and beliefs to fight for freedom their own way.

I could care less about anyone who condones slavery.

Youth4Ever wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

So mages should continue to live in servitude to the Chantry because Divine Justina V would offer some small concessions to them?

The mages are not servants of the Chantry.

And yet, the mage protagonist can tell Alistair that the Circle of Magi will do whatever the Chantry tells them to do.

Youth4Ever wrote...

And small concessions? Mage entrepreneurship is not a "small concession". Political influence is not a "small concession". Once in place those reforms will be permanent because the entire culture of Circles will change, and even greater changes will happen when the mages make money and have a voice in government.

Or, instead of appeasing the organization that has subjugated them, mages can fight for their autonomy, and they can refuse to give any concessions to the people who engaged in slavery.

[lil yonce]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Why should all mages succumb to slavery simply because a few mages are loyal to the Chantry?

You can become an apostate and allow everyone else to make their own decisions about their lives and beliefs.

The Chantry controlled Circles are slavery, and multiple characters and authors voice this, from Aldenon the Wise to Anders and pro-mage Hawke in modern day Thedas. There is no reason that mages should be forced into servitude to the Chantry.

I don't believe something simply because someone said it, especially not when that person is a known rebel or extremist. The claim that mages are enslaved is not now nor has it ever been based in fact. David Gaider confirmed this.

David Gaider wrote...

The mages aren't slaves.

Some people might refer to them as such-- Anders, for one, though I don't know if he's the sort of supporting argument you want to use-- but I don't think it's a stretch to suggest that not being free and being a slave are different things.

They are definitely not free. In Kirkwall, they are tantamount to prisoners. According to the law of the Circle of Magi, they have a certain amount of rights if very limited personal freedom. How much those laws are respected will vary from tower to tower. Either way, however, they are not owned by the Chantry, nor are they forced into servitude (meaning they are not forced to perform work or any other service on the Chantry's behalf).

If someone wishes to see the Chantry as heartless oppressors, by all means-- there are many ways to interpret the situation, and that's intentional. If someone tries to argue that there are absolutes involved, or that anything we've written suggests there are, they're quite simply deluded-- not to put too fine a point on it.

Link To The Original Post.

It isn't tyranny to oppose slavery and fight for the freedom of your people.

It is tyrannical to pressure those who fundamentally disagree with you to participate in your revolution.

Mages have struggled for centuries against the Chantry and the Order of Templars, as we know from the codex entries, including the struggle of Aldenon the Wise and his rebel mages to the recent insurrection against at the Circle of Ferelden.

Apostates have defied the Chantry. The Circle mages collectivelly have never done so until now.

Multiple codex entries have addressed that the Chantry controlled Circles control mages and force mages into servitude to the Chantry. One of the codex entries reads, "Adain of Starkhaven escaped from the Circle of the Magi in the winter of 8:76 Blessed, the coldest winter that the Free Marches had seen in decades. He decided that it was better to die a free man than remain a servant to the Chantry and broke out of the Circle's stronghold, fleeing into an unforgiving blizzard."

Also, pro-mage Hawke calls the Chantry controlled Circle slavery, and historically, Aldenon the Wise called the Chantry controlled Circles slavery: "A civilization cannot be civil if it condones the slavery of another. And that is what this Circle is! But by accident of birth, those mages would be free to live, love, and die as they choose. The Circles will break - if it be one year, a decade, a century, or beyond. Tyrants always fall, and the downtrodden always strive for freedom!"

No NPC other than the already identified extremists, apostates, or Separatists call the mage situation slavery and just because they call it that does not prove it factual. They engage in egregious hyperbole.

It's been nearly a thousand years, and mages were still forced into servitude to the Chantry. Nothing had changed until the mages emancipated themselves from the Chantry of Andraste and the Order of Templars.

The mages do not serve the Chantry. And given time Justinia will reform. She has just recently come to power.

lf it's extremist to oppose slavery, then I don't want to be a Loyalist.

Don't twist my words. It is not extremist to oppose slavery. You are engaging in hyperbole when you call the Circles of Magi a system of slavery for it is not as confirmed by David Gaider. And your willingness to victimize the mages you claim to stand for is hypocritical. It's the same line of thinking the Chantry used to justify Circles. They too victimized a minority for a supposed greater good.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 12 octobre 2012 - 07:53 .

[lil yonce]

LobselVith8 wrote...

That's one way to look at it, I suppose.

That's a fact.

A democratic vote was wrong? Should they have asked the Chantry politely to stop enslaving them?

The College of Enchanters should reconsider separation and it's severe consquences as their first method of achieving independence as a less bloody alternative has presented itself.

I could care less about anyone who condones slavery.

Devaluation and intolerance of the beliefs of others. Charming. And again you engage in hyperbole.

Or, instead of appeasing the organization that has subjugated them, mages can fight for their autonomy, and they can refuse to give any concessions to the people who engaged in slavery.

Or the ones that wish to be free of the Chantry can become apostates and allow the remaining mages to follow their own beliefs.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 12 octobre 2012 - 12:15 .

[Rinshikai10]

OP its cool that you started this discussion, I completely agree with you that the Templar as of now has only been doing half the duty.

I find it ironic is that the phrase that they claim is what justifies their duty contradicts what they do. When I see the words "Magic exist to serve men and never to rule over them" I think magic has to be managed so that it can't be used to control others. What is sad to me is the Chantry and Templar Order do use it to rule indirectly. In a nut shell I believe that they break the very code they claim to enforce.

Youth4ever I can agree with you more on the Circle being a prison, then a slave concept.

However, I don't agree with you on the points Justinia. After everything that has happened up until this point Justinia has shown that next to no one trust her. Mage, Templar, Seeker, Clergy, and Nobles. How can she do anything when she can't get anyone of these groups to follow her?

By the time that she puts her plan into motion the boiling point was already reached. It is like trying to sing to an audience that is deaf, sound nice be no one can hear.

If a recall correctly the collage put forward a document the first time that they tried to separate in 9:31 during the awakening game. (I don't know if this is true or not) Regardless this seems like a peaceful method.

Also, you really think that the Templar Order would allow change to a system that they believe is given to them by the Maker. They would sooner kill the Divine then allow that, as shown in DoTS.

Justinia has nice ideas for change but that's all they are, ideas. Unless you not only take the correct action, but act when it is appropriate, you are only going to have problems.

One thing that I disagree with you on is which Templars are technically Justinias. They all are hers weather they want to be or not, simply by chain of command.

But as I say with all post this is just my opinion.

[TEWR]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Didn't the Seekers and the templars defect from the Chantry en masse?

Most of them. Cassandra's faction -- of which they are certainly in the minority -- seem to be more inclined to working with the Divine and understanding that she is the embodiment of the Chantry.

As for the Templars, I'd be inclined to say that Kirkwall's Templars -- with Cullen in charge instituting reforms on the Order -- and Ferelden's did not defect. Cullen wouldn't dare go against the Chantry -- his doubts on whether he was serving the interests of the Order, the Chantry, and the people or simply Meredith's own magophobic paranoid dictatorship speak true to that -- and Gregoir wouldn't either.

Youth4Ever wrote...

And because Justinia V is the current Divine I chastise Circle Separatists

I'd be inclined to agree if they don't realize the potential positive implications this can have. I'll address that after I state the following...

I'd argue that them breaking free shows the Chantry how serious they are and will give Justinia V more cause to listen to them. She's already a supporter for reform, but I think the fact that they broke away might make her think "This is serious and needs immediate attention" and will hear them out.

Now, the positive implications. This is something I've told Lob before. Politically speaking, they could increase the public perception of magic and mages if they used the fact that the Templars have gone rogue from the Chantry -- and this New Inquisition wants her dead -- to approach the Divine and offer their services to protect her in exchange for peace/more rights/whatnot.

The public would then be swayed to the Mages' side because they're protecting the embodiment of the Chantry.

This public perception would improve further if they were also able to use their abilities to help defend the people from lyrium-crazed ex-Templars, heal the injured, and other things.

Youth4Ever wrote...

I don't think the Fraternities designed philosophies for the heck of it. The Lucrosians need the support of those in power for their system to come to fruition and the Libertarians need the worst of possible senarios to justify separation.

I'm not saying they designed them for the heck of it. I'm saying that it has been since the inception of the fraternities a notion that could not be achieved, save for being a Loyalist. That was really the only one that worked, and even then at times it wasn't working perfectly like a Loyalist would think it would.

Will Justinia V change that? I'd like to think so. But until DA3 shows us more, we don't know just what she's planning to do now.

[LobselVith8]

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Why should all mages succumb to slavery simply because a few mages are loyal to the Chantry?[/quote]

You can become an apostate and allow everyone else to make their own decisions about their lives and beliefs. [/quote]

Mages became apostates for centuries, and risked their lives for the chance at freedom. The fact you've spent so much time vilifying the elected representatives of the Circles of Magi for making a democratic vote to move away from a tyrannical system that has brutalized and oppressed them for nearly a millennia is simply outrageous. The mages aren't at fault for making a democratic vote to break free from the Chantry. If the templars decide to try to murder them for refusing to bend knee to the Chantry anymore, then the mages aren't at fault.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

The Chantry controlled Circles are slavery, and multiple characters and authors voice this, from Aldenon the Wise to Anders and pro-mage Hawke in modern day Thedas. There is no reason that mages should be forced into servitude to the Chantry.[/quote]

I don't believe something simply because someone said it, especially not when that person is a known rebel or extremist. The claim that mages are enslaved is not now nor has it ever been based in fact. David Gaider confirmed this. [/quote]

David Gaider has a tendency of making claims about the lore that don't match the actual lore of Dragon Age. He's made statements that explicitly contradicted the Magi Origin, what happened King Maric, how the Chevaliers can abuse their authority, and the existance of atheism in Thedas. He claimed:

[quote]David Gaider wrote...

There is no such thing as atheism in Thedas. Not sure why someone thinks it was an option in DAO-- possibly it's the same kind of interpretation as them thinking Hawke was "forced" into being a devout believer. Either way, it's not really an option we intend to include.[/quote]

Considering that this ignores how Hawke was written to be religiously Andrastian, no matter what the player wanted, and how The Warden can make atheist statements in Origins and Awakening, I think it's safe to say that Gaider isn't always accurate with his statements. In other words, Gaider contradicting the codex entries, the lore, and the characters doesn't mean he's correct. You're welcome to read my thread about the refusal to allow the protagonist to be atheism to see that he isn't omnipotent, especially when he has a habit of being wrong (and he admitted that the fans remember the lore better than he does in another thread).

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

It isn't tyranny to oppose slavery and fight for the freedom of your people.[/quote]

It is tyrannical to pressure those with who fundamentally disagree with you to participate in your revolution. [/quote]

Still vilifying mages for making a democratic vote to be emancipated from a system that has brutalized, raped, tortured, killed, and made their people tranquil?

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Mages have struggled for centuries against the Chantry and the Order of Templars, as we know from the codex entries, including the struggle of Aldenon the Wise and his rebel mages to the recent insurrection against at the Circle of Ferelden.[/quote]

Apostates have defied the Chantry. The Circle mages collectivelly have never done so until now. [/quote]

There were Circle mages who rebelled in the Circle of Ferelden, during the Fifth Blight. Your statement doesn't change the fact that mages have struggled against the Chantry and the templars for centuries.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Multiple codex entries have addressed that the Chantry controlled Circles control mages and force mages into servitude to the Chantry. One of the codex entries reads, "Adain of Starkhaven escaped from the Circle of the Magi in the winter of 8:76 Blessed, the coldest winter that the Free Marches had seen in decades. He decided that it was better to die a free man than remain a servant to the Chantry and broke out of the Circle's stronghold, fleeing into an unforgiving blizzard."

Also, pro-mage Hawke calls the Chantry controlled Circle slavery, and historically, Aldenon the Wise called the Chantry controlled Circles slavery: "A civilization cannot be civil if it condones the slavery of another. And that is what this Circle is! But by accident of birth, those mages would be free to live, love, and die as they choose. The Circles will break - if it be one year, a decade, a century, or beyond. Tyrants always fall, and the downtrodden always strive for freedom!"[/quote]

No NPC other than the already identified extremists, apostates, or Separatists call the mage situation slavery and just because they call it that does not prove it factual. They engage in egregious hyperbole. [/quote]

Let's see: characters, codex entries, and the lore address that mages are in servitude to the Chantry. The Warden from the Circle can address to Alistair that the Circle will do whatever the Chantry tells them to do. Hawke can say that the Chantry controlled Circles are slavery. In other words, the codex entries and the characters support the line of thinking that the Chantry controlled Circles are slavery.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

It's been nearly a thousand years, and mages were still forced into servitude to the Chantry. Nothing had changed until the mages emancipated themselves from the Chantry of Andraste and the Order of Templars.[/quote]

The mages do not serve the Chantry. And given time Justinia will reform. She has just recently come to power. [/quote]

You seem to disagree with the mage protagonist about the first part. And the second part doesn't matter since the mages emancipated themselves from the Chantry. Better to die on your feet than live on your knees.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

lf it's extremist to oppose slavery, then I don't want to be a Loyalist.[/quote]

Don't twist my words. It is not extremist to oppose slavery. You are engaging in hyperbole when you call the Circles of Magi a system of slavery for it is not as confirmed by David Gaider. [/quote]

Since David Gaider has been wrong numerous times about the lore (and even stories he himself has written years ago), that doesn't really persuade me. At all.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

And your willingness to victimize the mages you claim to stand for is hypocritical. It's the same line of thinking the Chantry used to justify Circles. They too victimized a minority for a supposed greater good.[/quote]

It's not hypocritical to stand against slavery.

[LobselVith8]

Youth4Ever wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

A democratic vote was wrong? Should they have asked the Chantry politely to stop enslaving them? 

The College of Enchanters should reconsider separation and it's severe consquences as their first method of achieving independence as a less bloody alternative has presented itself.

Why should it reconsider seperation? Because the templars will attempt to murder innocent men, women, and children for not living on their knees to the Chantry of Andraste and the Order of Templars? Are you blaming the mages for democratically electing to break free from being under the boot of the Chantry? It isn't the fault of the mages if armed and armored drug addicts attempt to murder them. Refusing to be servants to the Chantry was the correct choice.

Youth4Ever wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I could care less about anyone who condones slavery.

Devaluation and intolerance of the beliefs of others. Charming. And again you engage in hyperbole.

You mean I address the situation in the same manner that a number of authors and characters in Thedas do: the Chantry controlled Circles are slavery. Feel free to call it hyperbole, but that doesn't change the fact that even the pro-Chantry and pro-templar characters never contest that the Chantry controlled Circles are slavery. If this is the view held by a plethora of characters about the nature of the Chantry controlled Circles, I don't see how you can dismiss it. Furthermore, I address how I see the situation: forcing mages to live under the rule of the Chantry is wrong.

Youth4Ever wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Or, instead of appeasing the organization that has subjugated them, mages can fight for their autonomy, and they can refuse to give any concessions to the people who engaged in slavery.

Or the ones that wish to be free of the Chantry can become apostates and allow the remaining mages to follow their own beliefs.

If the Loyalists want to continue living on their knees to an anti-mage religious organization that vilifies magic and mages across the continent, no one is stopping them from doing so.

[lil yonce]

Rinshikai10 wrote...

Youth4ever I can agree with you more on the Circle being a prison, then a slave concept.

However, I don't agree with you on the points Justinia. After everything that has happened up until this point Justinia has shown that next to no one trust her. Mage, Templar, Seeker, Clergy, and Nobles. How can she do anything when she can't get anyone of these groups to follow her?

I do not agree that no one trusts her. Has she proven herself untrustworthy? And she has supporters. She is certainly not alone. 

Justinia's reforms must begin small. She first has to enforce the rights of Circle Mages, I doubt many will object because she has Chantry doctrine and law on her side. Abuse will not be tolerated. She must remind the Templars that they exist to defend the mundane from the magical and also to defend the magical from the mundane.

Slowly and assuredly from there, she must create an environment that will institute a cultural change. I would encourage the Lucrosian approach to societal integration. I would ease restrictions that prevent Circle Mages from owning wealth and encourage entrepreneurship.

Mages who make money can pay for the expenses of the Circle. Lyrium used in Harrowings, for example. Because lyrium is expensive, and so much of it is used in a single Harrowing, the Chantry does not allow all mages to undertake the ritual. Those who don't are made Tranquil. The mages themselves could pay the expenses for lyrium and ensure every mage is given the chance to attempt the Harrowing. I doubt many Templars will object if reduced Circle expenses mean bigger salaries and better benefits for them and their families. Or if reduced Circle expenses mean the Chantry can take on more societal projects like building universities, caring for the poor, the elderly, the sick, the disenfranchised, etc.

Also, businesses and business owners pay taxes. You are a much more valued member of society when you pay taxes. Taxpayers have a much easier time gaining representation in government. Eventual representation in government will raise awareness of the Mage Situtation and involve Circle Mages in the general issues of Thedas. Etc. I think you can see the natural evolution of change from here.

One last note. There may objections to allowing Circle Mages any sort of political representation and the Chant of Light may be cited for such objections, but the broad language of the Chant of Light can be interpreted in many ways.

Under previous regimes the line "Magic is meant to serve man and never to rule over him," has meant mages can never hold signigicant power. As Divine, and I would assume Final Arbiter of the Chant of Light during her reign, Justinia can interpret it to mean that magic is meant to serve the good of society and never meant to tyrannize. That interprestation does not exclude mages from representation in government.

By the time that she puts her plan into motion the boiling point was already reached. It is like trying to sing to an audience that is deaf, sound nice be no one can hear.

Justinia has just recently come to power and she is the Divine, not the full-time mouthpiece of the mages. An above poster commented that she has only been Divine for five years and considering most reigns last fifty to sixty years, she has not been in power very long at all. And her first few years as Divine were likely spent learning how to do the job. She needs time to reform and abolish the Circles. The mages should have allowed cooler head to prevail. Patience would have saved many lives.

If a recall correctly the collage put forward a document the first time that they tried to separate in 9:31 during the awakening game. (I don't know if this is true or not) Regardless this seems like a peaceful method.

I think the Circle Mages need to realize that no one in Thedas is going to hand them independence. The govenments are not going to overthrow the Chantry, Rebel Apostates are not going to free them, and strongly worded letters won't get them any closer to what they want. Unfortunately, they have to prove themselves useful to society and earn it.

Also, you really think that the Templar Order would allow change to a system that they believe is given to them by the Maker. They would sooner kill the Divine then allow that, as shown in DoTS.

Permanent change cannot be abrupt. And Justinia will not grant the Circles of Magi independence simply because they ask for it, even if she feels they deserve it. She has an agenda and responsibilities as Divine.

Justinia has nice ideas for change but that's all they are, ideas. Unless you not only take the correct action, but act when it is appropriate, you are only going to have problems.

I think you are being too harsh on Justinia and absolving the Circle Mages of all responsibility. The Separatists are, to a large degree, responsible for the Mage-Templar war.

One thing that I disagree with you on is which Templars are technically Justinias. They all are hers weather they want to be or not, simply by chain of command.

I stated in another post that those Templars and Seekers are insubordinate as they are the Divine's to command. However, they are not philosophically hers, so to say that her Templars want to kill mages would suggest that Justinia wants to kill mages when she does not.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 14 octobre 2012 - 05:37 .

[LobselVith8]

Youth4Ever wrote...

Rinshikai10 wrote...

By the time that she puts her plan into motion the boiling point was already reached. It is like trying to sing to an audience that is deaf, sound nice be no one can hear.

Justinia has just recently come to power and she is the Divine, not the mouthpiece of the mages. An above poster commented that she has only been Divine for five years and considering most reigns last fifty to sixty years, she has not been in power very long at all. And her first few years as Divine were likely spent learning how to do the job. She needs time to reform and abolish the Circles. The mages should have allowed cooler head to prevail. Patience would have saved many lives.

Doing nothing for nearly a millennia hasn't worked on changing the status quo, while the current course of action has lead to autonomy for mages across Thedas.

Youth4Ever wrote...

Rinshikai10 wrote...

If a recall correctly the collage put forward a document the first time that they tried to separate in 9:31 during the awakening game. (I don't know if this is true or not) Regardless this seems like a peaceful method.

I think the Circle Mages need to realize that no one in Thedas is going to hand them independence. The govenments are not going to overthrow the Chantry, Rebel Apostates are not going to free them, and strongly worded letters won't get them any closer to what they want. Unfortunately, they have to prove themselves useful to society and earn it.

Mages did that for centuries, from the Circle mages fighting in all the Blights to defeat the darkspawn and prevent the Archdemons from overtaking all of Thedas, to using their magic against the advanced technology of the Qunari so that all of Thedas didn't fall to the Qun. In fact, it's noted that, "The greatest advantage of the Chantry-led forces was the Circle of Magi. For all their technology, the Qunari appeared to harbor great hatred for magic. Faced with cannons, the Chantry responded with lightning and balls of fire."

The very premise of the Magi Boon is that the ruler publicly addresses that mages have earned the right to govern themselves.

Youth4Ever wrote...

Rinshikai10 wrote...

Also, you really think that the Templar Order would allow change to a system that they believe is given to them by the Maker. They would sooner kill the Divine then allow that, as shown in DoTS.

Permanent change cannot be abrupt. And Justinia will not grant the Circles of Magi independence simply because they ask for it, even if she feels they deserve it. She has an agenda and responsibilities as Divine.

Then the mages should fight for their independence.

Youth4Ever wrote...

Rinshikai10 wrote...

Justinia has nice ideas for change but that's all they are, ideas. Unless you not only take the correct action, but act when it is appropriate, you are only going to have problems.

I think you are being to harsh on Justinia and absolving the Circle Mages of all responsibility. The Separatists are, to a large degree, responsible for the Mage-Templar war.

The Chantry of Andraste and the Order of Templars brutalized and oppressed mages for nearly a millennia. I wouldn't blame the mages for seeking their independence from subjugation.

Youth4Ever wrote...

Rinshikai10 wrote...

One thing that I disagree with you on is which Templars are technically Justinias. They all are hers weather they want to be or not, simply by chain of command.

I stated in another post that those Templars and Seekers are insubordinate as they are the Divine's to command. However, they are not philosophically hers, so to say that her Templars want to kill mages would suggest that Justinia wants to kill mages when she does not.

Which doesn't change the fact that Lambert's Seekers and templars have defected to hunt down the mages. There can't be a compromise between mages who want their autonomy from the Chantry and the templars, and templars who think they have dominion over mages by the will of the Maker.