158 réponses à ce sujet

[lil yonce]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

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.

The Separation decision does indicate a grave severity, however, I think the mages must consider that Justina V has just recently come to power, and as Divine she is not their full-time mouthpiece. She has to be given time to attempt reform.

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.

Absolutely, TEWR. That's a good avenue for the mages against the Separation decision. I don't know that demanding rights in exchange for protection is the right approach, but supporting the Chantry, protecting the Divine and being later rewarded for their efforts will help their situation. Unfortunately, I doubt the most extreme Separatists will follow this advice as they want nothing at all to do with the Chantry.

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.

We do need to see how she rules in other aspects as Divine to project her approach and long term goals for the Circles of Magi, however, there is reason to be very hopeful, and as she currently presents the least bloody avenue to independence, she is a resource the mages should exhaust before resulting to separation and it's dire consequences. Why choose first the option that will cause the most misery and, without question, result in the greatest number of deaths?

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 13 octobre 2012 - 05:07 .

[LobselVith8]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

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.

We don't know what Cassandra's faction is after. She claims she wants peace (to Varric), but what kind of peace? Is she expecting the mages to capitulate to the templars and the Chantry?

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

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.

You and I have discussed this before, and I'm not inclined to agree. The Chantry spent centuries preaching that mages are "cursed," that mages caused their version of 'original sin,' and vilified them to the point where mages are killed if anything goes wrong (as Wynne explains to The Warden). I don't see why the mages should make any concessions to Divine Justina V; they finally have their freedom now, and they can fight to keep their autonomy, or risk another millennia of servitude to the Chantry.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

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.

Didn't Leliana explain to the Champion that Divine Justina V was contemplating an Exalted March on Kirkwall if the mages gained their freedom (in "Faith")?

[Rinshikai10]

This Is off topic but, if we are discussing anything about Justinia I have a discussion board on the Dragon age Wiki for her.

http://dragonage.wik...inia_Discussion

If you wish you can discuss her on there, if you like. It feels like this discussion is going a little off topic.

That's just my opinion.

[TEWR]

Youth4Ever wrote...

The Separation decision does indicate a grave severity, however, I think the mages must consider that Justina V has just recently come to power, and as Divine she is not their full-time mouthpiece. She has to be given time to attempt reform.

She's had time. Reform could've begun by having agents actively investigating the conflict in Kirkwall during Meredith's dictatorship, so as to understand what was wrong.

Faith however, indicated that she was planning to raze Kirkwall to the ground and that quest was not helped by Hawke's nonchalance over the situation by failing to attempt to properly inform Leliana of what was happening.

In fact, it takes Cassandra's group that's aligned with the Divine three years after Kirkwall's RoA to even begin to unravel what was going on. Instead of having people investigating it during the rising tensions, it's 3 years after the fact.

I wouldn't say that the Divine hasn't had enough time. I'd say she's had plenty of time to begin. It's not going to happen overnight, but there were other things she could've done to begin to understand the problems inherent in the system before it all came crashing down.

That said, while Faith indicated she was advocating an Exalted March, it seems that's either been changed -- I hesitate to use the word "retcon", for fear of misuse -- to her not advocating such in Asunder, or realizing the error of her ways in believing such a thing was necessary once the whole picture becomes clear.

Youth4Ever wrote...

I don't know that demanding rights in exchange for protection is the right approach, but supporting the Chantry, protecting the Divine and being later rewarded for their efforts will help their situation. Unfortunately, I doubt the most extreme Separatists will follow this advice as they want nothing at all to do with the Chantry.

The Resolutionists might not, 'tis true. Well, some anyway. Some will no doubt want the Chantry to burn to the ground, others will want Tevinter 2.0, and others still may see reason and abandon the violent approach.

However, I do think demanding rights in exchange for protection is the right approach. The Divine is, at this time, protected by a small contingent of faithful Templars and Seekers. Without a proper army, she can't hope to begin to institute peace talks. She'd be killed by the New Inquisition.

Lack of numbers doesn't necessarily mean immediate loss, but I do think the Mages would be smart to approach her and say they'll help her in exchange for more freedom, but in such a way that doesn't convey surrendering to her but rather using her. She'll get the Mages on her side, an effective army to fight the New Inquisition, and be one step closer to instituting a reformed Circle of Magi.

Youth4Ever wrote...

Why choose first the option that will cause the most misery and without question result in the greatest number of deaths?

Bear in mind that they had no means to contact the Divine when they formed their conclave in the sanctum of Andoral's Reach. And that if they had tried to, the Templars -- soon to be the New Inquisition -- would've killed them, or imprisoned them, or made them Tranquil. They were forced into a situation where the Divine was no longer capable of helping them.

War may not have been the best course of action, but it was the only course of action they could undertake. 

LobselVith8 wrote...

We don't know what Cassandra's faction is after. She claims she wants peace (to Varric), but what kind of peace? Is she expecting the mages to capitulate to the templars and the Chantry?

I doubt it, personally.

Peace, in the context of what she and Varric are talking about, seems to lean more towards a reformed institution where the Templars do not have "divine right over the lives of Mages" by default -- cases of an Annulment being actually necessary for situations like Ferelden's Circle, minus the Warden's presence and what caused Uldred to fight in the first place, being an example of where the Templars would in fact have such authority. 

I think she's certainly leaning more towards the Mages not needing to capitulate, but rather the Templars for beginning this series of events.

Meredith was the central cause of Kirkwall's problems. Lambert, despite thinking he was doing what was right, was the leading factor in why the Mages were driven to rebellion.

LobselVith8 wrote...

The Chantry spent centuries preaching that mages are "cursed," that mages caused their version of 'original sin,' and vilified them to the point where mages are killed if anything goes wrong (as Wynne explains to The Warden). I don't see why the mages should make any concessions to Divine Justina V; they finally have their freedom now, and they can fight to keep their autonomy, or risk another millennia of servitude to the Chantry.

I wouldn't call what they have freedom just yet. Their free from the vicegrip of the Chantry, certainly. But they're also at war. They can't live how they want, for fear of the lyrium-crazed ex-Templars hounding them and fighting them.

As I stated earlier, the Chantry's stance on Mages fluctuates from Divine to Divine. With Justinia V, she is an advocate of acknowledging that Mages are not "cursed" and is against them being persecuted and abused in the name of "righteousness in the eyes of the Maker".

They wouldn't be making concessions to her. They'd be manipulating her for their own ends, though not with as much of a negative connotation as that might lead one to think.

If they say "We can't win, so we'll take our chances with you" to Justinia V then they'd be making concessions towards her. But if they say to her "You want this to end? Then you have to scratch our back and we'll help you end this" then they'd be using her to their advantage.

LobselVith8 wrote...

Didn't Leliana explain to the Champion that Divine Justina V was contemplating an Exalted March on Kirkwall if the mages gained their freedom (in "Faith")?

Well, I'd say that while the wording that quest was very poorly done, it doesn't necessarily mean that an Exalted March would be called if the Mages got their freedom.

I think when Leliana said "If Kirkwall falls to magic" she didn't mean "if the Mages gain their freedom", but rather "If the Resolutionists take Kirkwall".

I'd even argue that "to magic" is ambiguous enough to be interpreted as "to the Templars", since they too use magic.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 14 octobre 2012 - 02:43 .

[lil yonce]

[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]
I do not believe you understand the concept of a "Tyranny of the Majority".

From Wikipedia: The phrase "tyranny of the majority" (or "tyranny of the masses"), used in discussing systems of democracy and majority rule, envisions a scenario in which decisions made by a majority place its interests so far above those of an individual or minority group as to constitute active oppression, comparable to that of tyrants and despots In many cases a disliked ethnic, religious or racial group is deliberately penalized by the majority element acting through the democratic process.

The phrase "tyranny of the majority" was used by John Adams in 1788. The phrase gained prominence after its appearance in 1835 in Democracy in America, by Alexis de Tocqueville, where it is the title of a section. It was further popularised by John Stuart Mill, who cites de Tocqueville, in On Liberty (1859). The Federalist Papers refer to the broad concept, as in Federalist 10, first published in 1787, which speaks of "the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority."

The concept itself was popular with Friedrich Nietzsche and the phrase (in translation) is used at least once in the first sequel to Human, All Too Human (1879). Ayn Rand, Objectivist philosopher and novelist, wrote against such tyranny, saying that individual rights are not subject to a public vote, and that the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and that the smallest minority on earth is the individual). Etc.

A decision of such great importance should not be merely a matter of numerical majority.

[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.[/quote]
Then provide a fact that condradicts his statement. Provide factual information, not opinion, as evidence Circle Mages are the physical property of the Chantry.

Additionally, Circle Mages are not enslaved in a philosophical or metaphorical sense, either. They have a distinct set of rights. It may be that their rights are violated, and though that is unacceptable, a violation of rights does not describe enslavement.

[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]
Does the Majority still tyrannize mages who do not want to give up their lives, fight templars, and die, if necessary, for someone else's revolution?

[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]
The Circles of Magi have never formally nor collectively rebelled against the Chantry. The mages did, in fact, formally and collectively, agree to the creation of the Circles and Circle Towers.

[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]
I stated not already identified Extremists, Rebels, Separatists, and Apostates. Outside of those characters, who has called the Circle system slavery?

[quote]You seem to disagree with the mage protagonist about the first part. [/quote]
Are you finally admitting that the beliefs of a Separatist Mage are simply their own personally held beliefs and nothing more?

[quote]Better to die on your feet than live on your knees.[/quote]This is an opinion, an extreme one, and your extreme opinion should not be forced on others. No one should be pressured to die for something they don't believe in.

*Note - It's extreme because you indulge in hyperbole.

[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]
Then present a fact that condradicts him.

[quote]It's not hypocritical to stand against slavery.[/quote]
Then become an apostate, stand individually for your beliefs, and allow everyone else to make form their own opinion of the Chantry, decide their own values and beliefs, and live their lives in peace.

[quote]Why should it reconsider seperation?[/quote]
To save lives.

[quote]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. [/quote]
The Separatists fully understood the realistic consequences of formal separation. They knew there were Templars crazy enough to come after them, and still they pressured a tyrannical decision.

Why select first the method that will without question cause in the most misery and result the greatest number of deaths when a peaceful independence can realistically be achieved?

[quote]Refusing to be servants to the Chantry was the correct choice.[/quote]
You have no objectivity. This is an opinion, and an extreme one because you engage in hyperbole.

[quote]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.[/quote]
I can dismiss it because it is not a fact. What those characters say is not supported by factual evidence. It is merely their opinion, and I don't give much credence to the opinions of known Extremists, Apostates, Separatists, or Rebels.

[quote]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.[/quote]
The Circles of Magi have formally split from the Chantry to be hide, be hunted, and ostracized like the Magisters of Tevinter. That's truly sustainable independence? That's true freedom?

And the mages have never had a Divine so sympathetic to their situation. This is the opportune time for collaboration and cooperation. Patience could be far more rewarding, and healthy, in the long run.

[quote]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.[/quote]
Not on a large scale they haven't. The efforts of a small number mages, every few centuries is not going to suffice. Paying taxes and providing useful services in large numbers will positively impact their societal value.

And even the efforts of the Grey Wardens has gone unappreciated years after Blights. They became known as free-loaders in Ferelden shortly before being unceremoniously evicted from the country, entirely.

[quote]Then the mages should fight for their independence.[/quote]
An opinionated response.

[quote]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.[/quote]
Those mages who feel so strongly that they have been brutalized and oppressed by the Chantry can become apostates and allow everyone else to form their own opinion of the Chantry and live their lives as they wish.

[quote]Which doesn't change the fact that Lambert's Seekers and templars have defected to hunt down the mages.[/quote]
Did I say it did? No.

And as an aside, technically speaking, the Templars are still formally tied to the Chantry, because for a contract to be properly considered null and void, both parties must agree to it's dissolution. Sending the Divine a letter saying the Templars and Seekers will no longer acknowledge the Chantry's authority does not validate Lambert's dissolution of the Nevarran Accord. So, they aren't really part of the Chantry anymore, but in actuality, they are, thus the rogue Templars and Seekers are insubordinate.

[quote]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.[/quote]
Not all mages want your brand of "autonomy", and not all templars want to control mages because they feel they hold divine power and right. The Templars and Mages you speak of are extremists.

[quote]Didn't Leliana explain to the Champion that Divine Justina V was contemplating an Exalted March on Kirkwall if the mages gained their freedom (in "Faith")? [/quote]
Only if Kirkwall fell to, or was in legitimate danger of falling to magic, and not before accessing the situation with Sister Nightingale. That does not condemn Justinia V as a mage hater. She sought first to eliminate the few mages purposely causing trouble in Kirkwall so she would not have to call an Exalted March on the city.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 14 octobre 2012 - 05:38 .

[lil yonce]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

She's had time. Reform could've begun by having agents actively investigating the conflict in Kirkwall during Meredith's dictatorship, so as to understand what was wrong.

Isn't that what Sister Nightingale was doing? And the situation is Kirkwall is a very difficult one to navigate. I'm certain there were many members within the Chantry delighted by the largest contingent of Templars in Thedas consolidating political and martial power in Kirkwall.

Meredith's rule means a significant and law required revenue stream to the Chantry/Templars. Access to valuable resources. Control over Kirkwall's large and well established trade port. Power to create rules and regulations favorable to the Chantry/Templars. The power to eliminate seditious materials and defiant individuals. The creation of a true and centralized seat of Chantry/Templar authority. The ability to more easily spread Chantry influence. And also the establishment of a useful precedent. Why would any Divine subject this to investigation?

*Note - There is virtually no difference between challenging Meredith's authority as a capable and just Knight-Commander and challenging her ability to rule Kirkwall as Viscountess because to challenge her leadership in any capacity would challenge her leadership in all capacities.

Openly challenging Meredith could have been disastrous for her rule. Justinia does have an agenda and responsiblities as Divine. There are limits and thresholds she cannot cross without repercussion. Sister Nightingale is even referred to as her "left" hand. Leliana investigates issues that would "blacken" the Divine's name. Challenging Chantry/Templar control would certainly "blacken" her name.

Faith however, indicated that she was planning to raze Kirkwall to the ground and that quest was not helped by Hawke's nonchalance over the situation by failing to attempt to properly inform Leliana of what was happening.

So, if Kirkwall falls to magic, she's supposed to do nothing? Justinia is sympathetic to the Circle Mages, but she is still a Chantry official, and to any Chantry official, immediate and severe action must be taken when mages sack a city. Especially when that city is Chantry/Templar controlled. She has to act. Inaction would threaten her entire rule and even the authority of the Chantry itself.

*Note: There is no difference between the mages gaining freedom from a Circle and the mages sacking a city in this situation, because a successful rebellion against the Templars includes sacking the city as Knight-Commander Meredith is the acting Viscountess of Kirkwall. Many in the Chantry will clamor for an Exalted March --even if the mages have since scattered-- to retain control of Kirkwall and overall Chantry authority.

In fact, it takes Cassandra's group that's aligned with the Divine three years after Kirkwall's RoA to even begin to unravel what was going on. Instead of having people investigating it during the rising tensions, it's 3 years after the fact.

I'll reiterate that I don't think the Divine could openly send a contingent of Seekers into Kirkwall and challenge Chantry/Templar control without it being detrimental to her rule, long term. She is the Divine, not the full-time mouth piece of the mages, and her agenda and the interests of the Chantry have to come first.

I am not completely certain as to why Cassandra and her Seekers began their search for Hawke, and their investigation of the events leading up to the RoA three years after the fact, but I'd assume its because Justinia essentially knew of Kirkwall's situation, likely informed by Sister Nightningale, and searching for Hawke and the Warden is much more of a last ditch effort, not the first effort, to help stabalize the situation.

I wouldn't say that the Divine hasn't had enough time. I'd say she's had plenty of time to begin. It's not going to happen overnight, but there were other things she could've done to begin to understand the problems inherent in the system before it all came crashing down.

She can work secretly and in the shadows with trusted agents as she did with Leliana, but her capacity to act in favor of the mages isn't, I don't believe, as great as you think it is. She can certainly help the Mage situation with time and cooperation, but she can't bulldoze it. She'll be snubbed by internal politics and accomplish nothing during her reign. Perhaps be ousted or assassinated. And in the worst case senario, accelerate the split between the Templars and the Chantry. Situation: DEFCON 1 as the largest contingent of Templars in Thedas establish permanant authority over Kirkwall. It would greatly weaken her authority and the overall might of the Chantry.

That said, while Faith indicated she was advocating an Exalted March, it seems that's either been changed -- I hesitate to use the word "retcon", for fear of misuse -- to her not advocating such in Asunder, or realizing the error of her ways in believing such a thing was necessary once the whole picture becomes clear.

She was only contemplating an Exalted March if Kirkwall had fallen, or was in legitimate danger of falling to magic. I don't think that's unreasonable considering her position. Leliana snuffed out the most immediate troublemakers, the Resolutionists, the night she met Hawke, but unfortunately, I think that's all that could be done. I don't believe Kirkwall is Justinia's fault. Kirkwall is the responsibility of Anders/Vengence and the Lyrium Idol.

The Resolutionists might not, 'tis true. Well, some anyway. Some will no doubt want the Chantry to burn to the ground, others will want Tevinter 2.0, and others still may see reason and abandon the violent approach.

However, I do think demanding rights in exchange for protection is the right approach. The Divine is, at this time, protected by a small contingent of faithful Templars and Seekers. Without a proper army, she can't hope to begin to institute peace talks. She'd be killed by the New Inquisition.

Lack of numbers doesn't necessarily mean immediate loss, but I do think the Mages would be smart to approach her and say such a thing. She'll get the Mages on her side, an effective army to fight the New Inquisition, and be one step closer to instituting a reformed Circle of Magi.

I agree with the principle, just not the approach. I don't think demanding an over-abundance of freedoms and rights they've never had from the Divine will be the best way to establish a working relationship, because if she for some reason rejects their support, they virtually have no where else to turn.

They have to be reasonable. The strict enforcement of the rights they had as Circle Mages and a couple new liberties, such as being allowed to serve the Chantry or their country in an active and consistent martial capacity, and the ability to travel Thedas is a good start, as they're currently doing those things admirably in her defense.

The right to marry and have families, or the allowance of all appretices to undertake the Harrowing, I believe those are money issues more than issues of "mageophobia", and I don't think Justinia could agree to such conditions. I'm certain the reasoning behind a number of restrictions and rules the Chantry has applied to mages isn't so black-and-white.

Bear in mind that they had no means to contact the Divine when they formed their conclave in the sanctum of Andoral's Reach. And that if they had tried to, the Templars -- soon to be the New Inquisition -- would've killed them, or imprisoned them, or made them Tranquil. They were forced into a situation where the Divine was no longer capable of helping them.

I think there was a very good reason why the Grand Enchanter before Fiona never allowed such a vote to be tallied and why Justinia V suspended the College of Magi when she suspected they would vote on the issue. They properly weighed the consquences of such serious contemplation, and the even greater consequences of separation itself.

War may not have been the best course of action, but it was the only course of action they could undertake.

I don't think they should have voted on this decision, initially. Those who wanted to leave they Chantry should have done so as apostates. As it is, yes, your are correct, TEWR. Unfortunately, the mages made their bed, and now they have to lie in it.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 15 octobre 2012 - 08:05 .

[Laura Jean]

Youth4Ever wrote...

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.

You say the abused were only in Kirkwall but the mages in the white spire of Val Royeaux have also been locked up and their few privileges revoked in an effort to control the mages. Infact Rhys would be half starving if wynne did not bring him a daily meal, because the Templars surely did not. After the Templar illegal attack on the white spire conclave, the templers at the Circle of Dairsmund obtained the right of Annulment and the entire circle was slain including the First enchanter Rivella. Two importance things here first the First Enchanter Rivella was not in Val Royeaux during the templar attack and the grand cleric agreed to the murder if mages just because mages elsewhere were involved in a battle against templars and seekers. If for some reason she did not agree to the right of Annulment, which is completely against all chantry law, then she is criminal neglect as she has failed to control the templars under her command. This is just one example of an unrelated circle. The books says that in many circle the templars struck first and the mages fought back and died or escaped.

This was before the vote at Andoral’s reach. Also those that voted were consider apostates but they either fled the templars attack on them in the circle or were attack by the lord seeker during there lawful conclave.  On the last page Cole return and tell the Lord Seeker that there was a mage name Cole and when the templars realizes that forgotten him so long that the mage died. They expunged the records to cover up their crime. It seem that a majority of the templars fight first and think later. So we see templar in another circle covering up crimes and a willingness to kill mages before verifying the mages reactions. Some of them might have been slaughter for nothing, by the templars.

The mages have been paitence but the templars have none!

[Laura Jean]

Youth4ever
I do not believe you understand the concept of a "Tyranny of the Majority".

The problem with this theory is David Gaider does not give us enough information. The vote that were casted at Andoral’s reach were weight by the membership of the fraternities. If I remember correctly the Aquaterians are the largest group but do not control a majority, followed by the libatarians then the loyalist, with the lucruzion (sp) and isolationist being the smallest group. If the percentage was a 45-55 split or smaller you might have a case. But if the split was 75-25 your premises is wrong. Because of how Gaider wrote the story we have to believe that the majority of mages wanted separation from the chantry. It was a legitimate vote of the mages

[lil yonce]

Laura Jean wrote...

You say the abused were only in Kirkwall but the mages in the white spire of Val Royeaux have also been locked up and their few privileges revoked in an effort to control the mages.

I did not say mages were abused only in Kirkwall. I said the extremity of the abuse extended only to Kirkwall, as the city is host to a number of unusual and unique issues. Additionally, Divine Justinia V suspended the College of Magi to protect the mages and buy time for Wynne to recover Pharmond's research. She knew a vote of formal separation would soon be tallied and she knew the grave consequences of such serious contemplation, and the even greater consequences of separation itself.

Infact Rhys would be half starving if wynne did not bring him a daily meal, because the Templars surely did not. After the Templar illegal attack on the white spire conclave, the templers at the Circle of Dairsmund obtained the right of Annulment and the entire circle was slain including the First enchanter Rivella.

I am not certain of the legality of the Templars interfering in the Conclave givin the circumstances, but ethically, yes, the Templars' actions at the White Spire were heinous. The Dairsmund annulment was absolutely unfortunate, but the mages should have understood that the Templars had no intention of allowing a full scale revolt and would be considered justified in their use of the RoA.

Two importance things here first the First Enchanter Rivella was not in Val Royeaux during the templar attack and the grand cleric agreed to the murder if mages just because mages elsewhere were involved in a battle against templars and seekers.

The mages became too unruly after the White Spire incident. An unruly Circle is an irredeemable Circle, and an irredeemable Circle can be annuled. That would likely be the line of thinking involved in the decision to annul the Dairsmund Circle.

If for some reason she did not agree to the right of Annulment, which is completely against all chantry law, then she is criminal neglect as she has failed to control the templars under her command. This is just one example of an unrelated circle. The books says that in many circle the templars struck first and the mages fought back and died or escaped.

Do we know that the Grand Cleric did not agree to the the Dairsmund RoA?

This was before the vote at Andoral’s reach. Also those that voted were consider apostates but they either fled the templars attack on them in the circle or were attack by the lord seeker during there lawful conclave. On the last page Cole return and tell the Lord Seeker that there was a mage name Cole and when the templars realizes that forgotten him so long that the mage died. They expunged the records to cover up their crime. It seem that a majority of the templars fight first and think later. So we see templar in another circle covering up crimes and a willingness to kill mages before verifying the mages reactions. Some of them might have been slaughter for nothing, by the templars.

I'm lost. I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Can you explain more clearly?

The mages have been paitence but the templars have none!

If they had patience, the mages would wait on Justinia's reforms.

The problem with this theory is David Gaider does not give us enough information. The vote that were casted at Andoral’s reach were weight by the membership of the fraternities. If I remember correctly the Aquaterians are the largest group but do not control a majority, followed by the libatarians then the loyalist, with the lucruzion (sp) and isolationist being the smallest group. If the percentage was a 45-55 split or smaller you might have a case. But if the split was 75-25 your premises is wrong. Because of how Gaider wrote the story we have to believe that the majority of mages wanted separation from the chantry. It was a legitimate vote of the mages

Individual rights are not subject to public vote, and that the political function of rights is precisely to protect
minorities from oppression by majorities (and that the smallest minority on earth is the individual). A decision that will fundamentally change the lives of all mages in Thedas should not be left simply to a numerical vote. Too much is at stake. You don't pressure someone to give up their life, fight, and die, if necessary, for something they don't believe in. It is entirely tyrannical to do so. Their life should not be subject to someone else's desires.

In 1965, Herbert Marcuse argued the tyranny of the majority in his essay "Repressive Tolerance" on the idea of tolerance in advanced industrial society. He affirmed that "tolerance is extended to policies, conditions, and modes of behavior which should not be tolerated because they are impeding, if not destroying, the chances of creating an existence without fear and misery." and that "this sort of tolerance strengthens the tyranny of the majority against which authentic liberals protested."

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 15 octobre 2012 - 12:37 .

[LobselVith8]

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

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]

I do not believe you understand the concept of a "Tyranny of the Majority".

From Wikipedia: The phrase "tyranny of the majority" (or "tyranny of the masses"), used in discussing systems of democracy and majority rule, envisions a scenario in which decisions made by a majority place its interests so far above those of an individual or minority group as to constitute active oppression, comparable to that of tyrants and despots In many cases a disliked ethnic, religious or racial group is deliberately penalized by the majority element acting through the democratic process.

The phrase "tyranny of the majority" was used by John Adams in 1788. The phrase gained prominence after its appearance in 1835 in Democracy in America, by Alexis de Tocqueville, where it is the title of a section. It was further popularised by John Stuart Mill, who cites de Tocqueville, in On Liberty (1859). The Federalist Papers refer to the broad concept, as in Federalist 10, first published in 1787, which speaks of "the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority."

The concept itself was popular with Friedrich Nietzsche and the phrase (in translation) is used at least once in the first sequel to Human, All Too Human (1879). Ayn Rand, Objectivist philosopher and novelist, wrote against such tyranny, saying that individual rights are not subject to a public vote, and that the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and that the smallest minority on earth is the individual). Etc.

A decision of such great importance should not be merely a matter of numerical majority. [/quote]

Mages have no basic rights in the Circle of Magi. They can be tortured (as the mages who were whipped in the Gallows if they spoke to civilians, the proprietor if someone stole goods from her, or the screams of mages that we can hear from the gate attest to),  they can be made tranquil without the right to contest the charges against them, and they can be outright killed without any evidence against them (as we know from Aneirin). Why should mages be subject to this oppressive regime for another thousand years, when they have the opportunity to emancipate themselves and fight for their freedom?

No man or woman should be forced to bend knee to an anti-mage religious organization that preaches how mages are “cursed,” vilifies mages to the point where the public condemn and murder innocent mages if anything goes wrong, and gives templars dominion over mages in the name of the Maker. The fact that you’re defending an organization that participates in slavery and vilifying the mages who chose to break free is something I find repugnant.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

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.[/quote]

Then provide a fact that condradicts his statement. Provide factual information, not opinion, as evidence Circle Mages are the physical property of the Chantry.

Additionally, Circle Mages are not enslaved in a philosophical or metaphorical sense, either. They have a distinct set of rights. It may be that their rights are violated, and though that is unacceptable, a violation of rights does not describe enslavement. [/quote]

The codex entries, the characters, and the lore already contradict Gaider’s statement.

Furthermore, you seem to have the missed the fact that the Chantry gives templars "dominion over mages by divine right."

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

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]

Does the Majority still tyrannize mages who do not want to give up their lives, fight templars, and die, if necessary, for someone else's revolution? [/quote]

You mean every mage should continue to live in slavery because the Loyalists want to continue living on their knees?

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

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]


The Circles of Magi have never formally nor collectively rebelled against the Chantry. The mages did, in fact, formally and collectively, agree to the creation of the Circles and Circle Towers. [/quote]

The mages didn’t agree to the Circle of Magi; Emperor Drakon I didn’t give them a choice when he formed the Circle of Magi, along with the Order of Templars and the Chantry of Andraste.

In addition, you’re missing the point: historically, there are mages who have resisted living in servitude to the Chantry.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

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]

I stated not already identified Extremists, Rebels, Separatists, and Apostates. Outside of those characters, who has called the Circle system slavery? [/quote]


Aside from in-game authors who described the Circle of Magi as such? First Enchanter Irving’s use of slavery analogy to describe the relationship between the templars and the mages when he thanks the Hero of Ferelden for freeing the mages from their “shackles” at the royal ceremony (post-Magi Boon)? The [i]pro-mage Champion can call it slavery even if he isn’t an apostate.


[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

You seem to disagree with the mage protagonist about the first part. [/quote]

Are you finally admitting that the beliefs of a Separatist Mage are simply their own personally held beliefs and nothing more? [/quote]

The mage protagonist would know what the Circle of Ferelden is. And even Wynne never contests that the Circle is a “prison” or an “oppressive place,” even arguing that the latter can be changed with time if The Warden returns to the Circle and becomes a leader; she stresses that this is her dream, and that she probably won’t live long enough to see it happen.


[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Better to die on your feet than live on your knees.[/quote]

This is an opinion, an extreme one, and your extreme opinion should not be forced on others. No one should be pressured to die for something they don't believe in.

*Note - It's extreme because you indulge in hyperbole. [/quote]

Slavery should never be forced on mages. And it isn’t hyperbole when authors, characters, and the lore address the Chantry controlled Circles as such.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

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]

Then present a fact that condradicts him. [/quote]

The authors, the characters, and the lore already contradict Gaider. Just like the dialogue from the Cousland Warden, the Surana Warden, and Morrigan contradicted him about the existence of atheism in Thedas.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

It's not hypocritical to stand against slavery.[/quote]

Then become an apostate, stand individually for your beliefs, and allow everyone else to make form their own opinion of the Chantry, decide their own values and beliefs, and live their lives in peace. [/quote]

Living in slavery isn't peace, it's subjugation to tyranny. The Enchanters made the right decision to break free from slavery, and the mages should topple the templars and anyone else who tries to force them to live in servitude.


[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Why should it reconsider seperation? [/quote]

To save lives. [/quote]

Freeing slaves is preferable.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

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. [/quote]

The Separatists fully understood the realistic consequences of formal separation. They knew there were Templars crazy enough to come after them, and still they pressured a tyrannical decision.

Why select first the method that will without question cause in the most misery and result the greatest number of deaths when a peaceful independence can realistically be achieved? [/quote]

The former slaves of the Chantry fully understand the consequences of refusing to live in servitude to the Chantry and the templars. The choice is between living in freedom, even if it means their death, and living in servitude. If the templars attempt to murder the mages for refusing to be their slaves, it isn’t their fault if they defend their lives and their freedom.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Refusing to be servants to the Chantry was the correct choice.[/quote]

You have no objectivity. This is an opinion, and an extreme one because you engage in hyperbole. [/quote]

I have no objectivity when it comes to forcing people into slavery; I disagree strongly with the Chantry forcing mages to bend knee to them.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

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.[/quote]

I can dismiss it because it is not a fact. What those characters say is not supported by factual evidence. It is merely their opinion, and I don't give much credence to the opinions of known Extremists, Apostates, Separatists, or Rebels. [/quote]

You can dismiss it because you ignore the in-game authors, characters, and lore that address that there are mages who refuse to live in servitude to the Chantry, who don't want to be controlled by the templars, who don't wish to be servants to the Chantry anymore, and who want to be emancipated from the slavery of the Chantry controlled Circles.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

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.
[/quote]

The Circles of Magi have formally split from the Chantry to be hide, be hunted, and ostracized like the Magisters of Tevinter. That's truly sustainable independence? That's true freedom?

And the mages have never had a Divine so sympathetic to their situation. This is the opportune time for collaboration and cooperation. Patience could be far more rewarding, and healthy, in the long run. [/quote]

It sounds better than living under the regime of the Chantry and the templars, risking torture, rape, and death at the whim of the templars who have dominion over them in the name of the Maker.

And in the words of Fiona: “F**k the Divine.”

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

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.[/quote]

Not on a large scale they haven't. The efforts of a small number mages, every few centuries is not going to suffice. Paying taxes and providing useful services in large numbers will positively impact their societal value.

And even the efforts of the Grey Wardens has gone unappreciated years after Blights. They became known as free-loaders in Ferelden shortly before being unceremoniously evicted from the country, entirely. [/quote]

Which is why, I believe, a continental revolution provides the best hope of long-term autonomy for the mages.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Then the mages should fight for their independence.[/quote]

An opinionated response. [/quote]

A point of view that the Hero of Ferelden and the Champion of Kirkwall can voice. I prefer being proactive to being passive.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

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.[/quote]

Those mages who feel so strongly that they have been brutalized and oppressed by the Chantry can become apostates and allow everyone else to form their own opinion of the Chantry and live their lives as they wish. [/quote]

All mages shouldn’t be forced to live in servitude simply because you think it’s impolite for the mages to democratically choose to free themselves from subjugation.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Which doesn't change the fact that Lambert's Seekers and templars have defected to hunt down the mages.
[/quote]

Did I say it did? No. 

And as an aside, technically speaking, the Templars are still formally tied to the Chantry, because for a contract to be properly considered null and void, both parties must agree to it's dissolution. Sending the Divine a letter saying the Templars and Seekers will no longer acknowledge the Chantry's authority does not validate Lambert's dissolution of the Nevarran Accord. So, they aren't really part of the Chantry anymore, but in actuality, they are, thus the rogue Templars and Seekers are insubordinate. [/quote]

Is that according to Thedas law?

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

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.[/quote]

Not all mages want your brand of "autonomy", and not all templars want to control mages because they feel they hold divine power and right. The Templars and Mages you speak of are extremists. [/quote]

All the Circles of Magi broke free, so apparently the majority of the mages wanted autonomy from the Chantry. No one is forcing the Loyalists to leave the Circle Towers.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Didn't Leliana explain to the Champion that Divine Justina V was contemplating an Exalted March on Kirkwall if the mages gained their freedom (in "Faith")? [/quote]

Only if Kirkwall fell to, or was in legitimate danger of falling to magic, and not before accessing the situation with Sister Nightingale. That does not condemn Justinia V as a mage hater. She sought first to eliminate the few mages purposely causing trouble in Kirkwall so she would not have to call an Exalted March on the city.[/quote]

You mean she ignored the Knight-Commander turned dictator who had illegally seized power, was killing people with a death squad, and was trying to consolidate power for years while blaming mages for what was happening? The same de facto Viscount who managed to get civilians, nobles, mages, and even her own templars turning against her? Divine Justina V seems incompetent.

[lil yonce]

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Mages have no basic rights in the Circle of Magi.[/quote]
Incorrect. David Gaider has confirmed that they do indeed have rights.

[quote]They can be tortured (as the mages who were whipped in the Gallows if they spoke to civilians, the proprietor if someone stole goods from her, or the screams of mages that we can hear from the gate attest to),  they can be made tranquil without the right to contest the charges against them, and they can be outright killed without any evidence against them (as we know from Aneirin).[/quote]
The rights of Circle Mages are being violated when abuse occurs. However, that does not mean they are without rights.

[quote]Why should mages be subject to this oppressive regime for another thousand years, when they have the opportunity to emancipate themselves and fight for their freedom?[/quote]
Because their current method of emanciaption will mean the death of thousands. Death in droves. A fight for basic survival. It will not mean true autonomy. And you do not know that the Circles of Magi will last another thousand years. You do not that they will last fifty years longer after Justinia V attempts reform.

[quote]No man or woman should be forced to bend knee to an anti-mage religious organization that preaches how mages are “cursed,” vilifies mages to the point where the public condemn and murder innocent mages if anything goes wrong, and gives templars dominion over mages in the name of the Maker. The fact that you’re defending an organization that participates in slavery and vilifying the mages who chose to break free is something I find repugnant.[/quote]
Except the Chantry is not anti-mage under Divine Justinia V. The Chant of Light does not describe magical ablility as a curse. And Templars exist to protect the mundane from the magical and also to protect the magical from the mundane. Your facts are incomplete. And how is advocating the least bloodly avenue to realistic Mage Independence an endorsement of the historical Chantry?

[quote]The codex entries, the characters, and the lore already contradict Gaider’s statement.[/quote]
That is not fact. Codex entries from which you derive your argument written from or that include the POV of a Separatist, Rebel, Apostate, or Extremist does not constitute factual information. It is merely that character's opinion.

[quote]Furthermore, you seem to have the missed the fact that the Chantry gives templars "dominion over mages by divine right."[/quote]
I don't endorse that stance, and to suggest every Templar subscribes to this notion would be incorrect.

[quote]You mean every mage should continue to live in slavery because the Loyalists want to continue living on their knees?[/quote]
Mages that wish to leave the Chantry can do so as apostates. And why do you assume only Loyalists want to remain in the Circles of Magi?

[quote]The mages didn’t agree to the Circle of Magi; Emperor Drakon I didn’t give them a choice when he formed the Circle of Magi, along with the Order of Templars and the Chantry of Andraste.[/quote]
Did they fight? No. Did they acquiesce? Yes.

[quote]In addition, you’re missing the point: historically, there are mages who have resisted living in servitude to the Chantry.[/quote]Yes, they are known as apostates. Hint-hint.

[quote]Aside from in-game authors who described the Circle of Magi as such? First Enchanter Irving’s use of slavery analogy to describe the relationship between the templars and the mages when he thanks the Hero of Ferelden for freeing the mages from their “shackles” at the royal ceremony (post-Magi Boon)? The pro-mage Champion can call it slavery even if he isn’t an apostate.[/quote]
An opinion is not a fact. Provide factual evidence.

[quote]The mage protagonist would know what the Circle of Ferelden is. And even Wynne never contests that the Circle is a “prison” or an “oppressive place,” even arguing that the latter can be changed with time if The Warden returns to the Circle and becomes a leader; she stresses that this is her dream, and that she probably won’t live long enough to see it happen.[/quote]
Wynne should know what the Circle of Ferelden is like also. Perhaps better, as she has lived in it longer. She and your Warden Mage disagree. So what? Is this an admission that an opinion is simply an opinion?

[quote]Slavery should never be forced on mages. And it isn’t hyperbole when authors, characters, and the lore address the Chantry controlled Circles as such.[/quote]
Hyperbole. And NEWSFLASH: In-game characters and authors can engage in hyperbole when it suits them. It's simply their opinion. You have no factual evidence the Chantry enslaves mages.

[quote]The authors, the characters, and the lore already contradict Gaider. Just like the dialogue from the Cousland Warden, the Surana Warden, and Morrigan contradicted him about the existence of atheism in Thedas.[/quote]
They do not contradict Gaider as an opinion is not factual evidence of Circle Mage enslavement. Identify a specific piece of lore that factually evidences Mage enslavement. Prove me wrong with facts.

[quote]Living in slavery isn't peace, it's subjugation to tyranny.[/quote]
Hyperbole.

[quote]The Enchanters made the right decision to break free from slavery, and the mages should topple the templars and anyone else who tries to force them to live in servitude.[/quote]
An opinionated response that indulges in hyperbole.

[quote]Freeing slaves is preferable.[/quote]
There are no slaves to free.

[quote]The former slaves of the Chantry fully understand the consequences of refusing to live in servitude to the Chantry and the templars. The choice is between living in freedom, even if it means their death, and living in servitude. If the templars attempt to murder the mages for refusing to be their slaves, it isn’t their fault if they defend their lives and their freedom.[/quote]
Exept the mages were never enslaved by nor were they forced into servitude by the Chantry. Separatists tyrannize mages that don't want any involvemnt in their revolution. And the Mages do not have a legitimate or sustainable independence.

[quote]I have no objectivity when it comes to forcing people into slavery; I disagree strongly with the Chantry forcing mages to bend knee to them.[/quote]
The Circle Mages are not slaves.

[quote]You can dismiss it because you ignore the in-game authors, characters, and lore that address that there are mages who refuse to live in servitude to the Chantry, who don't want to be controlled by the templars, who don't wish to be servants to the Chantry anymore, and who want to be emancipated from the slavery of the Chantry controlled Circles.[/quote]
Opinion =/= Fact. Identify a piece of lore that factually states the Circle Mages are enslaved by the Chantry.

[quote]It sounds better than living under the regime of the Chantry and the templars, risking torture, rape, and death at the whim of the templars who have dominion over them in the name of the Maker.[/quote]
No one is preventing mages who feel so strongly from becoming apostates.

[quote]And in the words of Fiona: “F**k the Divine.”[/quote]
F**K Fiona.

[quote]Which is why, I believe, a continental revolution provides the best hope of long-term autonomy for the mages.[/quote]
Why force your opinion, your choice on all mages?

[quote]A point of view that the Hero of Ferelden and the Champion of Kirkwall can voice. I prefer being proactive to being passive.[/quote]
It is still an opinion and nothing more.

[quote]All mages shouldn’t be forced to live in servitude simply because you think it’s impolite for the mages to democratically choose to free themselves from subjugation.[/quote]
The mages that don't wish to remain in Circles can become apostates.

[quote]Is that according to Thedas law?[/quote]
According to modern business law. It's really just common sense.

[quote]No one is forcing the Loyalists to leave the Circle Towers.[/quote]
Yes they are. The Separatists have destroyed their way of life. To live as they have in the Towers is no longer an option. The options provided to them are to fight or become true prisoners of the Templars. Separatists gave all who disagreed with them that atrocious ultimatium. A true Lose-Lose.

[quote]You mean she ignored the Knight-Commander turned dictator who had illegally seized power, was killing people with a death squad, and was trying to consolidate power for years while blaming mages for what was happening? The same de facto Viscount who managed to get civilians, nobles, mages, and even her own templars turning against her? Divine Justina V seems incompetent.[/quote]
Read my post addressed to TEWR to understand why Justinia could not intervene on behalf of the Circle Mages in Kirkwall. You can blame the Battle of Kirkwall on two things. Anders/Vengence and the Lyrium Idol.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 15 octobre 2012 - 01:31 .

[Rinshikai10]

Youth4ever

A few questions that I need to ask you just so I can get an understanding from your POV

1) Do you really believe that is the the Templars would ever allow Mages to leave they Circle? Second reading the end of the Asunder book tells you want would have likely happen to those who stayed, they would likely be punished for those who had run.

2) Justinia is not the Chantry, she is one woman within who may not have even earned her place. She may have even planed to have the last divine killed so that she to gain power. The Chant of Light and the Chantry are two very different things.

3) You keep taking about how if the Mages had listened to her things would be different. Why should they listen to her when she did not listen to them?

4) How can you prove that she disbanded the conclave to protect the Mages? The way it was shown looks more like an act of desperation the careful planing, that reulted in her beling disliked even more. What I mean when I say this is it went against her idealist plan.

5) You say that I am being too harsh on Justinia yet not placing any blame on the Mages. Yet at the same time you are not placing any blame on the Divine, Chantry, Templar or Meredeth. And placing blame on the Idol that only added to an already emotionally Woman and Anders/vengence which can be partially blamed on the Chantry governing of the Circles.

You and I will likely not agree on her but in my view she is an Idealist looking for the Perfect solution to this problem. Now she has her people looking for two individuals who may not help her in end. How can she be trusted to lead when in the long run she has not accomplished anything that will reform the system. You talk about if she had more time, but you don't seem to realize that by the time the conclave meet she was already not trusted by a vast amount of people from within her own Chantry.

this is just my opinion

http://social.biowar...ndex/13948358/1

This discussion can shade a little more light on the Circles founding.

Modifié par Rinshikai10, 16 octobre 2012 - 02:37 .

[The Six Path of Pain]

LobselVith8 wrote...

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.

Interesting thanks for the insight...gonna look more into the Mage lore now :happy:

[LobselVith8]

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quoteMages have no basic rights in the Circle of Magi.[/quote] 

Incorrect. David Gaider has confirmed that they indeed do have rights. [/quote]

Let's see: Aneirin was going to be killed because the templars claimed he was maleficar (with no evidence to support this, apparently, since Wynne mentioned she could talk to Irving about allowing him to return), Jowan didn't have the right to contest the charges against him, Greagoir was going to punish the mage protagonist even if he was following Irving's orders, the Kirkwall mages were getting beaten and whipped for speaking to civilians, the mages could be prohibited from having relationships or being able to get married, they can't raise their own children, and they can be killed en mass even if they didn't do anything wrong (see: Meredith's Right of Annulment against the Circle of Kirkwall). I don't see where they have any basic rights.

Then again, Gaider also claimed that tranquil mages were pretty much the same as before, even though we know this is completely ludicrious.



[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

They can be tortured (as the mages who were whipped in the Gallows if they spoke to civilians, the proprietor if someone stole goods from her, or the screams of mages that we can hear from the gate attest to),  they can be made tranquil without the right to contest the charges against them, and they can be outright killed without any evidence against them (as we know from Aneirin).[/quote]

When abuse occurs, their rights are being violated. However, that does not mean they are without rights. [/quote]

They have certain privileges depending on the Circle of Magi they are in, like any prisoner; they don't have rights.


[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Why should mages be subject to this oppressive regime for another thousand years, when they have the opportunity to emancipate themselves and fight for their freedom?[/quote]

Because their emanciapte will mean the death of thousands. Death in droves. A fight for basic survial. It will not mean autonomy. And you do not know that the Circles of Magi will last another thousand years. You do not that they will last fifty years longer after Justinia V reforms. [/quote]

People die in war. People have also died because of the Chantry controlled Circles - suicide, tranquility, and execution. How many more mages would be killed because of the status quo? How many more men, women, and children would perish at the hands of the templars?

You don't know that Divine Justina V would implement any genuine reforms, or that the status quo would change without a revolution.


[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

No man or woman should be forced to bend knee to an anti-mage religious organization that preaches how mages are “cursed,” vilifies mages to the point where the public condemn and murder innocent mages if anything goes wrong, and gives templars dominion over mages in the name of the Maker. The fact that you’re defending an organization that participates in slavery and vilifying the mages who chose to break free is something I find repugnant.[/quote]

The Chantry is not anti-mage under Divine Justinia V. The Chant of Light does not describe magical ablility as a curse. And Templars exist to protect the mundane from the magical and also to protect the magical from the mundane. Your facts are incomplete.

How is advocating the least bloodly avenue to Mage Independence an endorsement of the historical Chantry? [/quote]

The Chantry describes magic as a curse; you only need to hear Greagoir, Keili, Bethany, and Meredith to realize this. It's not exactly subtle.

My facts aren't incomplete; don't you remember how Cullen talks about how some templars talk about killing mages with glee (to the mage protagonist in the Circle of Ferelden)? How he can rule over the Circle of Ferelden in fear in one of the outcomes of Origins? How Meredith's templars tortured a da'len (child) hunter, how Karras implied he would rape the female Hawke, how Hawke can be ambused by templars for killing Karras in self-defense, how a death squad of templars can murder people in broad daylight, how Alain was raped by templars, and Cullen talking about how mages can't be treated like people and how they are weapons. Not every templar is like Greagoir, and that means mages live at the mercy of the templars who have absolute authority over their lives and their humanity.

Furthermore, your suggestion doesn't guarantee independence for mages; it promotes trusting Divine Justina V, leaving mages at the mercy of the templars and the Chantry.


[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

The codex entries, the characters, and the lore already contradict Gaider’s statement.[/quote]

That is not fact. Codex entries from which you derive your arguement written from or that include the POV of a Separatist, Rebel, Apostate, or Extremist does not constitute factual information. It is merely that character's opinion. [/quote]

Let me assure you, Gaider contradicting the codex entries, the characters, and the lore isn't fact. You're welcome to vilify the mages for refusing to be slaves, but I'm not inclined to agree with your suggestion that mages should have capitulated to Divine Justina V, instead of deciding to fight for their rights and their autonomy.


[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Furthermore, you seem to have the missed the fact that the Chantry gives templars "dominion over mages by divine right."[/quote]

I don't endorse that stance, and to suggest every Templar subscribes to this notion would be incorrect. [/quote]

That's not a "stance," that's the status quo of the Chantry controlled Circles.


[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

You mean every mage should continue to live in slavery because the Loyalists want to continue living on their knees?[/quote]

Mages that wish to leave the Chantry can do so as apostates. And why do you assume only the Loyalists want to remain in the Circles of Magi? [/quote]

Mages that wish to stay could have done so; they didn't need to leave with everyone else who rebelled against the Chantry and the templars.


[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

The mages didn’t agree to the Circle of Magi; Emperor Drakon I didn’t give them a choice when he formed the Circle of Magi, along with the Order of Templars and the Chantry of Andraste.[/quote]

Did they fight? No. Did they acquiesce? Yes. [/quote]

In other words, Drakon didn't give them a choice. Capitulating to servitude instead of the headsman's axe.


[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

In addition, you’re missing the point: historically, there are mages who have resisted living in servitude to the Chantry.[/quote]

Yes, they are known as apostates. Hint-hint. [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/wink.png[/smilie] [/quote]

Considering that all the Circles of Magi broke free from Chantry control in the Andrastian nations, it seems that everyone is an apostate now.


[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Aside from in-game authors who described the Circle of Magi as such? First Enchanter Irving’s use of slavery analogy to describe the relationship between the templars and the mages when he thanks the Hero of Ferelden for freeing the mages from their “shackles” at the royal ceremony (post-Magi Boon)? The pro-mage Champion can call it slavery even if he isn’t an apostate.[/quote]

An opinion is not a fact. Provide factual evidence. [/quote]

If you're going to ignore the codex entries, the characters, and the lore, there isn't much point to this discussion.


[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

The mage protagonist would know what the Circle of Ferelden is. And even Wynne never contests that the Circle is a “prison” or an “oppressive place,” even arguing that the latter can be changed with time if The Warden returns to the Circle and becomes a leader; she stresses that this is her dream, and that she probably won’t live long enough to see it happen.[/quote]

Wynne should know what the Circle of Ferelden is also, perhaps better as she has lived in it longer. She and your Warden Mage disagree. So what? Is this an admission that an opinion is simply an opinion? [/quote]

Wynne doesn't disagree; she says The Warden can change the Circle of Ferelden from being an oppressive place, with time. She says this is her dream.


[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Slavery should never be forced on mages. And it isn’t hyperbole when authors, characters, and the lore address the Chantry controlled Circles as such.[/quote]

Hyperbole. News flash: In-game characters, authors, and codex entries can engage in hyperbole when it suits them. It's simply their opinion. You have no factual evidence the Chantry enslaves mages. [/quote]

So all the codex entries, characters, and lore stipulating that you're wrong should be dismissed because it proves you're wrong? That's an interesting approach to a debate.


I have no evidence... aside from the existance of the Chantry controlled Circles forcing mages to live in servitude with the threat of tranquility or execution, of course.


[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

The authors, the characters, and the lore already contradict Gaider. Just like the dialogue from the Cousland Warden, the Surana Warden, and Morrigan contradicted him about the existence of atheism in Thedas.[/quote]

They do not contradict Gaider as an opinion is not factual evidence of Circle Mage enslavement. Identify a specific piece of lore that factually evidences Mage enslavement. Prove me wrong with facts. [/quote]

You know what? Instead of you ignoring the codex entries, the characters, and the lore that stipulated that it's slavery, why don't you try proving me with facts backing up your statement? Because, according to you, the entire world of Thedas is wrong, and you alone are right.

This isn't like the dichotomy between the Andrastians and the Dalish over what really happened to start the war between the Chantry & Orlais v. the Dales, or the conflicting stories about the inception of blood magic; this is multiple sources all stating the same point of view about the Chantry controlled Circles being slavery. Even the pro-Chantry characters never dispute this point of view, and one of them can be persuaded to side with the mages because Hawke brings up the fact that Fenris is against slavery.


[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Living in slavery isn't peace, it's subjugation to tyranny.[/quote]

Hyperbole. [/quote]

It's the reality of the situation, whether you want to admit it or not.


[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...


The Enchanters made the right decision to break free from slavery, and the mages should topple the templars and anyone else who tries to force them to live in servitude.[/quote]

An opinionated response that indulges in hyperbole. [/quote]

Apparently, the entire world of Thedas engages in hyperbole because no one there seems to share your view on the Chantry controlled Circles.


[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Freeing slaves is preferable.[/quote]

There are no slaves to free. [/quote]

Aldenon the Wise, Anders, and pro-mage Hawke would beg to differ.


[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

The former slaves of the Chantry fully understand the consequences of refusing to live in servitude to the Chantry and the templars. The choice is between living in freedom, even if it means their death, and living in servitude. If the templars attempt to murder the mages for refusing to be their slaves, it isn’t their fault if they defend their lives and their freedom.[/quote]

Exept the mages were never enslaved by  the Chantry or forced into servitude. Separatists tyrannize mages that don't want any involvemnt in their revolution. They do not have a legitimate or sustainable independence. [/quote]

While you're busy vilifying the mages who don't want to at risk getting tortured, raped, made tranquil, or killed by the templars who have absolute authority over them in the Chantry controlled Circles, I'll continue to advocate for mages to have their autonomy from an anti-mage religious organization.


[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

I have no objectivity when it comes to forcing people into slavery; I disagree strongly with the Chantry forcing mages to bend knee to them.[/quote]

The Circle Mages are not slaves. [/quote]

Except for the codex entries, the characters, and the lore that states and reads otherwise.


[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

You can dismiss it because you ignore the in-game authors, characters, and lore that address that there are mages who refuse to live in servitude to the Chantry, who don't want to be controlled by the templars, who don't wish to be servants to the Chantry anymore, and who want to be emancipated from the slavery of the Chantry controlled Circles.[/quote]

Opinion =/= Fact. [/quote]

Coming from someone who disagrees with multiple characters, codex entries, and lore about the Chantry controlled Circles.


[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

It sounds better than living under the regime of the Chantry and the templars, risking torture, rape, and death at the whim of the templars who have dominion over them in the name of the Maker.[/quote]

No one is preventing mages who feel so strongly from becoming apostates. [/quote]

No one was forcing the mages to leave the Chantry controlled Circles. The Circles all broke free anyway. I guess they didn't have much enthusiasm for living under the boot of the templars.


[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

And in the words of Fiona: “F**k the Divine.”[/quote]

F**K Fiona. [/quote]

The person who thought the Circle of Magi was worse than her life as an Orlesian slave sex... I'd say she knew best when she argued in favor for the Circles of Magi to break free from the Chantry.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Which is why, I believe, a continental revolution provides the best hope of long-term autonomy for the mages.[/quote]

Why force your opinion, your choice on all mages? [/quote]

Which is ironic coming from you, since you think all mages should be forced to live in slavery to the Chantry and the templars.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

A point of view that the Hero of Ferelden and the Champion of Kirkwall can voice. I prefer being proactive to being passive.[/quote]

It is still an opinion and nothing more. [/quote]

An opinion held by a myraid of authors and characters, of course.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

All mages shouldn’t be forced to live in servitude simply because you think it’s impolite for the mages to democratically choose to free themselves from subjugation. [/quote]

The mages that don't wish to remain in Circles can become apostates. [/quote]

Still vilifying the mages for their democratic vote, I see.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Is that according to Thedas law?[/quote]

According to modern business law. It's really just common sense. [/quote]

In other words, you pulled it from Imagination Land.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

No one is forcing the Loyalists to leave the Circle Towers. [/quote]

Yes they are. They've destroyed their way of life. Their options are to fight or become true prisoners of the Templars. Separatists gave them that atrocious ultimatium. A true Lose-Lose. [/quote]

I care more about the mages who are fighting for equality, for their basic rights, for the opportunity to live and love without being labelled as a monster by the Chantry or controlled by the templars.

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

You mean she ignored the Knight-Commander turned dictator who had illegally seized power, was killing people with a death squad, and was trying to consolidate power for years while blaming mages for what was happening? The same de facto Viscount who managed to get civilians, nobles, mages, and even her own templars turning against her? Divine Justina V seems incompetent. [/quote]

Read my post addressed to TEWR to understand why Justinia could not intervene on behalf of the Circle Mages in Kirkwall. You can blame the Battle of Kirkwall on two things. Anders/Vengence and the Lyrium Idol.
[/quote]

I blame it on the Knight-Commander who decided to murder hundreds of men, women, and children to appease a hypothetical mob, and the templars who were "just following orders."

[Rinshikai10]

Hypocrisy
a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.

I thought that if we had the definition of hypocrisy on this discussion we could break down peoples points to see if they are or not.

Modifié par Rinshikai10, 16 octobre 2012 - 02:12 .

[ShadowLordXII]

I second the OP

[TEWR]

[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

Isn't that what Sister Nightingale was doing?[/quote]

Her statements seem to imply she was content to blame the entire situation on the Resolutionists. While it's true they were making problems worse in Kirkwall, they certainly weren't the main problem.



[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

And the situation is Kirkwall is a very difficult one to navigate. I'm certain there were many members within the Chantry delighted by the largest contingent of Templars in Thedas consolidating political and martial power in Kirkwall. [/quote]

I'd certainly imagine so, as they've unofficially ruled the city since Divine Beatrix III had the Templars pressure Perrin Threnhold and as a result, a bloody battle raged on that ended with Knight-Commander Guylian's death.

Incidentally, Guylian was a Knight-Commander who, from what we know of him, understood the proper placement of the Templars. What his stances on the Mages of Kirkwall were is unknown, but based on the statements of Tobrius, Thrask, Orsino, and others when he was in charge Kirkwall's Circle was a better place then when Meredith took over.

So with Meredith in the seat of the Viscount, I'm sure many priests were giddy at the fact. However, Meredith sent word to the Divine pleading for an Annulment to be approved of after Elthina refused such a request. 

I would think that'd set off some warning bells to Justinia V, if someone's asking her for approval on a matter that should concern the Grand Cleric, as that's the logical progression of things.

If Elthina refused, she clearly views the Circle as not being beyond saving, which means the call for an Annulment isn't necessary. If Meredith is going to the one person with higher authority then Elthina on the matter, that means she's asking for approval on something that was quite obviously refused.

So I'd say that, given the rising tensions between Mages and Templars at this time and the years preceding it, her failing to properly investigate -- or attempt to, as had she known the root of Kirkwall's problems the framed narrative wouldn't work too well -- is one of her failures as the Divine.

Really this stems more from how Faith was handled, as it doesn't allow Hawke to attempt to explain what he/she believes the problem in Kirkwall to be.

Doesn't mean he has to actually tell her everything. I would've been fine had Hawke given his views on the necessity of an Exalted March, and then if he says "Yay or nay" Leliana probes him as to his thoughts on the matter. And then as Hawke attempted to say who he believes the problem was and before he actually gets to that part, more Resolutionists show up and in the confusion Leliana fled the scene.

Then Hawke receives a missive from her stating that she was unable to finish her investigation and had to leave Kirkwall due to the Resolutionists now looking for her. It would then say that Divine Justinia V is paying attention and Leliana says that Elthina needs to leave, saying much the same thing she says in-game. That if Kirkwall falls to magic, no one is safe.

It would then state that Leliana will continue discussions with the Divine about how to handle Kirkwall based on what she does know -- which would encompass how the Resolutionists are exacerbating the tensions, but she's unsure if they're indeed the root of the problem -- and that as Champion he should try and keep Kirkwall from descending into chaos.

And in addition, a secret bit of information to a pro-Mage Hawke that says the Divine does not condone the Knight-Commander's presence in the Viscount's seat -- which wouldn't really mean she knows what Meredith's been doing. Only that her presence there isn't condoned -- but cannot jeopardize her power as Divine by openly criticizing it without first trying to gain key support in a discreet fashion.

In essence, she wants Kirkwall to be safe, doesn't believe Meredith should be where she is, but is also sorely lacking on the facts and the required support necessary to take proper action.

That would denote to me an earnest attempt on the part of Leliana and the Divine to understanding Kirkwall's problems and why Kirkwall descended into madness without the Divine being unable to do anything.



[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

Meredith's rule means a significant and law required revenue stream to the Chantry/Templars. Access to valuable resources. Control over Kirkwall's large and well established trade port. Power to create rules and regulations favorable to the Chantry/Templars. The power to eliminate seditious materials and defiant individuals. The creation of a true and centralized seat of Chantry/Templar authority. The ability to more easily spread Chantry influence. And also the establishment of a useful precedent. Why would any Divine subject this to investigation?[/quote]

Because it's subject to massive abuses of power. This isn't something I see Divine Justinia V condoning.



[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

*Note - There is virtually no difference between challenging Meredith's authority as a capable and just Knight-Commander and challenging her ability to rule Kirkwall as Viscountess because to challenge her leadership in any capacity would challenge her leadership in all capacities.[/quote]

You see, I both agree and disagree with this.

The one doesn't necessarily relate to the other, I feel. But then again, it does. It really depends on how you challenge her on it, I think.

If you challenge how she's going against the law of the Chantry -- where Templars can't hold worldly power and must renounce all claims to becoming a noble of a land if they were one prior (Irminric) -- by becoming the Viscountess of the state and preventing the city from ruling itself, that doesn't necessarily mean you're criticizing her as a Knight-Commander, unless you openly state such.

Something along those lines anyway. I can't phrase it properly, aside from "approach matters".


[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

Openly challenging Meredith could have been disastrous for her rule. Justinia does have an agenda and responsiblities as Divine. There are limits and thresholds she cannot cross without repercussion. Sister Nightingale is even referred to as her "left" hand. Leliana investigates issues that would "blacken" the Divine's name. Challenging Chantry/Templar control would certainly "blacken" her name.[/quote]

That's a fair point on why she couldn't directly intervene. Certainly, it's something I've contemplated before.



[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

So, if Kirkwall falls to magic, she's supposed to do nothing?[/quote]

I'm not saying she shouldn't do anything. But just how it falls to magic is critical. My issue is that Hawke is nonchalant over the situation, unable to give his opinion on who is at fault for Kirkwall's mess.

If it falls to the Resolutionists, an Exalted March would be justified. If it falls to Circle Mages fighting against an unjustified RoA, then it wouldn't be justified. 

She would need to launch an investigation afterwards and if she found sufficient evidence condemning the Mages of acts against the Chantry, then it would be justified.


[quote]Youth4Ever wrote...

Justinia is sympathetic to the Circle Mages, but she is still a Chantry official, and to any Chantry official, immediate and severe action must be taken when mages sack a city. Especially when that city is Chantry/Templar controlled. She has to act. Inaction would threaten her entire rule and even the authority of the Chantry itself.

*Note: There is no difference between the mages gaining freedom from a Circle and the mages sacking a city in this situation, because a successful rebellion against the Templars includes sacking the city as Knight-Commander Meredith is the acting Viscountess of Kirkwall. Many in the Chantry will clamor for an Exalted March --even if the mages have since scattered-- to retain control of Kirkwall and overall Chantry authority.[/quote]

I disagree. Context matters. If Meredith calls for an unjustified RoA on the Mages for the actions of an apostate and the Mages gain their freedom and seek to inform the other Circles of what transpired, then it is completely different.

She would be compelled to investigate the Right of Annulment -- something David Gaider said she would even do because Meredith was morally/ethically compelled to appeal to the Divine before calling for the RoA, but wasn't legally bound to do -- to understand it.

David Gaider said that Meredith could be called to the mat afterwards.




[quote]I'll reiterate that I don't think the Divine could openly send a contingent of Seekers into Kirkwall and challenge Chantry/Templar control without it being detrimental to her rule, long term. She is the Divine, not the full-time mouth piece of the mages, and her agenda and the interests of the Chantry have to come first.[/quote]

She doesn't necessarily have to send a contingent of Seekers that would openly declare who they're investigating. 

In such matters as this, discretion is key. 







[quote]She was only contemplating an Exalted March if Kirkwall had fallen, or was in legitimate danger of falling to magic. I don't think that's unreasonable considering her position.[/quote]

It is if you don't have all of the facts and the Champion that's pleading with you to refrain from the Exalted March isn't attempting to give his two cents on the matter.


[quote]Leliana snuffed out the most immediate troublemakers, the Resolutionists, the night she met Hawke, but unfortunately, I think that's all that could be done. I don't believe Kirkwall is Justinia's fault. Kirkwall is the responsibility of Anders/Vengence and the Lyrium Idol.[/quote]

Meredith, actually. Anders was only the catalyst, as was the lyrium idol I'd argue. They're certainly factors in it, but Meredith's the real problem Kirkwall had and Kirkwall's chaos is the result of her.

Additionally, I doubt Leliana "snuffed out" the Resolutionists. The ones we fought were only 5 total. I really doubt an entire offshoot of the Libertarian fraternity would only have five members in Kirkwall.

I'd say she snuffed out the assassins the Resolutionists sent to kill Leliana. She did not, however, remove the Resolutionists from the picture.

Not when Kirkwall's Circle had hundreds and hundreds of Mages prior to the influx of Starkhaven's Circle's Mages.

[quote]

I agree with the principle, just not the approach. I don't think demanding an over-abundance of freedoms and rights they've never had from the Divine will be the best way to establish a working relationship, because if she for some reason rejects their support, they virtually have no where else to turn. [/quote]

I never said they should demand total freedom. Just that they should offer their support to her in exchange for more freedom.

However, marriage is something the Circle of Ferelden allowed Wilhelm. And it allowed Wilhelm and Wynne freedom to roam. Historically, there was a time after Andraste's Exalted March and prior to the creation of the institution of the Circles -- a period of 100-200 years -- that they were in fact free.


[quote]
They have to be reasonable. The strict enforcement of the rights they had as Circle Mages and a couple new liberties, such as being allowed to serve the Chantry or their country in an active and consistent martial capacity, and the ability to travel Thedas is a good start, as they're currently doing those things admirably in her defense.

The right to marry and have families, or the allowance of all appretices to undertake the Harrowing, I believe those are money issues more than issues of "mageophobia", and I don't think Justinia could agree to such conditions. I'm certain the reasoning behind a number of restrictions and rules the Chantry has applied to mages isn't so black-and-white.[/quote]

All apprentices should be able to take the Harrowing. The Tranquil aren't completely necessary for the economic well-being of the Circle. The Formari -- of which the Tranquil are part of -- aren't composed entirely of Tranquil. Solivitus is a Formari enchanter who creates enchanted goods and isn't one of the Tranquil.

They help, but Dwarven smiths could just as easily replace the Tranquil. In fact, I'd argue that Dwarven smiths would be better then the Tranquil.

And marriage and families have in fact happened for certain Circle Mages before, with the Chantry's permission. I think this should be a right that all Mages should have. 



[quote]. As it is, yes, your are correct, TEWR. Unfortunately, the mages made their bed, and now they have to lie in it.
[/quote]

To be clear, I don't view it as a bad decision -- I think it's been a long time coming, personally. My post was mainly meant to say that it may not have been the best decision for you, but it was the only one.

The Mages have systematically been oppressed by the Chantry for a millenia, sacrificing their rights in exchange for their lives. To the point where they've lost virtually any right that is inherent to human beings in some areas.

I think this war has been fought over the course of the millenia the Circle has existed. It just existed behind closed doors, and the events of Kirkwall and Asunder merely brought it to the notice of the populus.

[DKJaigen]

Youth4ever

What you want is not possible. The current divine may want to reform the circles it doesnt change the fact that she still represents a religious dogma that is very hostile to mages. It only takes one anti mage divine to undo all the reforms of Justina. Religion is perhaps the ultimate status quo of a human live. Its nearly impossible to alter it without violence. I cannot remember a single alteration in religion that didnt come without its bloodshed. So their is only one path for the mages and that is violence and war.

[vortex216]

as much as anti-mages protest that mages have immense power and destroy cities and enslave people, what about warriors and rogues. last time i checked warrior and rogues hawke and warden kicked just as much ass. the templars are hypocritical and the way i see it mages should be free. have the choice of going to the circle and not be treated like 3rd class citizens. have the templars mixed in with common gaurds and viola, you got yourself a solution

[lil yonce]

[quote]The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Her statements seem to imply she was content to blame the entire situation on the Resolutionists.[/quote]
I disagree. I believe Leliana stated she was investigating the possibility of a rebellion in Kirkwall. In my opinion, her use of the word investigation implies she would inquire, discover, and examine the facts of the situation, to access the possibility of a Circle rebellion, and to establish the reasoning behind it, before reporting to the Divine. Not that she would simply blame unrest on the Resolutionists. Leliana does state that group is likely behind it, but she does not make the judgement they are the sole cause.

[quote]However, Meredith sent word to the Divine pleading for an Annulment to be approved of after Elthina refused such a request. I would think that'd set off some warning bells to Justinia V, if someone's asking her for approval on a matter that should concern the Grand Cleric, as that's the logical progression of things.[/quote]
Does a formal appellate process exist within the Chantry? I suspect there would because an unsettled disagreement between a Grand Cleric and a Knight-Commander could be highly troubling. If so, hearing and judging appellate cases would be a routine responsibility of the Divine's.

[quote]If Elthina refused, she clearly views the Circle as not being beyond saving, which means the call for an Annulment isn't necessary.[/quote]
Not necessarily. Elthina's judgment may be that the lives and well being of the Mages, collectively, are of greater importance than Meredith's concern over the spreading knowledge and use of blood magic within the Circle and within Kirkwall, or that more violence will harm Kirkwall, long term. That would be an ethical judgment. The judgment of the Divine may have been practical. Not likely in Justinia's case, but perhaps. It would be worth appealing.

[quote]If Meredith is going to the one person with higher authority then Elthina on the matter, that means she's asking for approval on something that was quite obviously refused.[/quote]
I do not advocate it personally, but, simply being refused the RoA does not necessarily mean Meredith was wrong in requesting it or that Elthina was right to deny it.

[quote][Faith] doesn't allow Hawke to attempt to explain what he/she believes the problem in Kirkwall to be. Doesn't mean he has to actually tell her everything. I would've been fine had Hawke given his views on the necessity of an Exalted March, and then if he says "Yay or nay" Leliana probes him as to his thoughts on the matter. And then as Hawke attempted to say who he believes the problem was and before he actually gets to that part, more Resolutionists show up and in the confusion Leliana fled the scene.[/quote]
I would have liked to have given Hawke's opinion to Leliana, however, beyond that, I've no real issue with "Faith".

[quote][...] And in addition, a secret bit of information to a pro-Mage Hawke that says the Divine does not condone the Knight-Commander's presence in the Viscount's seat -- which wouldn't really mean she knows what Meredith's been doing. Only that her presence there isn't condoned -- but cannot jeopardize her power as Divine by openly criticizing it without first trying to gain key support in a discreet fashion.[/quote]
I think it would be dangerous for the Divine to inform Hawke she disapproves of Meredith as Viscountess, because if that information is somehow made public it will upset too many Clergyman and Templars, and the internal politics of the Chantry would jeopardize Justinia's rule. I don't think that's worth the risk.

[quote][...]That would denote to me an earnest attempt on the part of Leliana and the Divine to understanding Kirkwall's problems and why Kirkwall descended into madness without the Divine being unable to do anything.[/quote]
I think we just have to trust that an agent of the Divine would be smart enough to do her job thoroughly, considering that Justinia is undecided on the proper course of action of a major issue.

[quote]Because it's subject to massive abuses of power. This isn't something I see Divine Justinia V condoning.[/quote]
But a substantial number of Chantry clergymen, officals whom were apponted by an ambitious Beatrix III, and Templars would. Justinia may not agree with and want to change the objectives and modus operandi of the Chantry/Templar Order, but she has nominal control.

[quote]You see, I both agree and disagree with this. The one doesn't necessarily relate to the other, I feel. But then again, it does. It really depends on how you challenge her on it, I think.
If you challenge how she's going against the law of the Chantry -- where Templars can't hold worldly power and must renounce all claims to becoming a noble of a land if they were one prior (Irminric) -- by becoming the Viscountess of the state and preventing the city from ruling itself, that doesn't necessarily mean you're criticizing her as a Knight-Commander, unless you openly state such. Something along those lines anyway. I can't phrase it properly, aside from "approach matters".[/quote]
There is an issue with your approach, however. The Divine is directly challenging Meredith's right to rule and that, I believe, would ruffle too many feathers in the Chantry. Justinia would lose support from Chantry officials, Meredith would be infuriated, and the Templar Order as a whole may become difficult to manage after one of their most highly respected and powerful Knight-Commanders is snubbed by an internal investigation.

Additionally, I think an investigation into Meredith's performance as Knight-Commander would also challenge her position as Viscountess, because the indentified injustices of Kirkwall's Circle of Magi would include Meredith's obession with containing the spread of blood magic. Her assumption of the Viscount's chair is officially based on the premise that the Templars are rooting out blood magic in the city, so to investigate her solely as Knight-Commander would evenutally strike at the legitimacy of her rule.

[quote]I'm not saying she shouldn't do anything. But just how it falls to magic is critical. My issue is that Hawke is nonchalant over the situation, unable to give his opinion on who is at fault for Kirkwall's mess. If it falls to the Resolutionists, an Exalted March would be justified. If it falls to Circle Mages fighting against an unjustified RoA, then it wouldn't be justified. She would need to launch an investigation afterwards and if she found sufficient evidence condemning the Mages of acts against the Chantry, then it would be justified.[/quote]
But you're addressing the ethical justification, not the practical justification for the RoA and an Exalted March which is likely the justification the majority of Chantry officials will subscribe to.

[quote]I disagree. Context matters. If Meredith calls for an unjustified RoA on the Mages for the actions of an apostate and the Mages gain their freedom and seek to inform the other Circles of what transpired, then it is completely different. She would be compelled to investigate the Right of Annulment -- something David Gaider said she would even do because Meredith was morally/ethically compelled to appeal to the Divine before calling for the RoA, but wasn't legally bound to do -- to understand it. David Gaider said that Meredith could be called to the mat afterwards.[/quote]
The Divine may be ethically compelled to investigate the Kirkwall RoA before calling an Exalted March, but not practically. Doing so may even result in a divisional split within the Chantry she won't be able to overcome.

[quote]She doesn't necessarily have to send a contingent of Seekers that would openly declare who they're investigating. In such matters as this, discretion is key.[/quote]
Sending one Seeker would anger Meredith and cause more trouble than it would solve, I believe, as Seekers exist officially only as a check on Templar authority.

[quote]Meredith, actually. Anders was only the catalyst, as was the lyrium idol I'd argue. They're certainly factors in it, but Meredith's the real problem Kirkwall had and Kirkwall's chaos is the result of her.[/quote]
I disagree. She was strict and ambitious, but reasonable before obtaining the Lyrium Idol. She did not approve Alrick's final solution, for example. Anders'/Vengeance deliberate actions provoked an insane woman into a predictable response.

[quote]Additionally, I doubt Leliana "snuffed out" the Resolutionists. The ones we fought were only 5 total. I really doubt an entire offshoot of the Libertarian fraternity would only have five members in Kirkwall. I'd say she snuffed out the assassins the Resolutionists sent to kill Leliana. She did not, however, remove the Resolutionists from the picture. Not when Kirkwall's Circle had hundreds and hundreds of Mages prior to the influx of Starkhaven's Circle's Mages.[/quote]
I did not mean to suggest Leliana eliminated all of Kirkwall's Resolutionists that night, I referenced their name to identify the "immediate trouble-makers".

[quote]I never said they should demand total freedom. Just that they should offer their support to her in exchange for more freedom. However, marriage is something the Circle of Ferelden allowed Wilhelm. And it allowed Wilhelm and Wynne freedom to roam. Historically, there was a time after Andraste's Exalted March and prior to the creation of the institution of the Circles -- a period of 100-200 years -- that they were in fact free.[/quote]
Yes, but Wilhelm is only one mage, and I did not receive the impression the Chantry supported him and his family in Honnleath. I don't think the Chantry wants to support more mages than necessary.

[quote]All apprentices should be able to take the Harrowing. The Tranquil aren't completely necessary for the economic well-being of the Circle. The Formari -- of which the Tranquil are part of -- aren't composed entirely of Tranquil. Solivitus is a Formari enchanter who creates enchanted goods and isn't one of the Tranquil. They help, but Dwarven smiths could just as easily replace the Tranquil. In fact, I'd argue that Dwarven smiths would be better then the Tranquil. And marriage and families have in fact happened for certain Circle Mages before, with the Chantry's permission. I think this should be a right that all Mages should have. [/quote]
I did not mean to suggest the Chantry does not have or cannot obtain the funds to support the Harrowing of every apprentice or the children produced from Circle marriages, I'm sure they do and can. I'm certain, however, they don't want to spend more money on mages than necessary. And I don't think Dwaren Smiths are necessarily better than the Tranquil as the Chantry would have to pay them for their labor.

[quote]To be clear, I don't view it as a bad decision -- I think it's been a long time coming, personally. My post was mainly meant to say that it may not have been the best decision for you, but it was the only one. The Mages have systematically been oppressed by the Chantry for a millenia, sacrificing their rights in exchange for their lives. To the point where they've lost virtually any right that is inherent to human beings in some areas. I think this war has been fought over the course of the millenia the Circle has existed. It just existed behind closed doors, and the events of Kirkwall and Asunder merely brought it to the notice of the populus.[/quote]
I think it was a bad decision due to timing. I would have given Justinia V a chance to reform before accepting the serious consequences of formal separation.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 18 octobre 2012 - 07:27 .

[lil yonce]

DKJaigen wrote...

What you want is not possible.

I think that is just an opinion.

The current divine may want to reform the circles it doesnt change the fact that she still represents a religious dogma that is very hostile to mages.

The Chant of Light is not hostile in it's description of magical talent.

It only takes one anti mage divine to undo all the reforms of Justina.

Not if the reform is cultural. Change would then be difficult to undo.

I posted this on the last page:

Justinia's reforms must begin small. She first has to enforce the rightsof 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 Situation 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 significant 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 interpretation does not exclude mages from representation in government.

Religion is perhaps the ultimate status quo of a human live. Its nearly impossible to alter it without violence. I cannot remember a single alteration in religion that didnt come without its bloodshed. So their is only one path for the mages and that is violence and war.

Change on this scale cannot be abrupt. It cannot be forced in the manner you suggest, I don't believe.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 16 octobre 2012 - 08:01 .

[lil yonce]

Rinshikai10 wrote...

1) Do you really believe that is the the Templars would ever allow Mages to leave they Circle?

Are you asking if I legitimately believe Justinia can reform, or are you asking if I'm off my rocker?

In the first case, yes. After a cultural change, I believe the Templars will allow the mages to leave the Circles. They won't have much of a choice.

Second reading the end of the Asunder book tells you want would have likely happen to those who stayed, they would likely be punished for those who had run.

The Templars would likely become stricter if the mages abandoned the Circles of Magi in the same numbers, but I believe the number of mages willling to become apostates and defy the Chantry would shrink greatly in the absense of the formal decision to separate.

2) Justinia is not the Chantry, she is one woman within who may not have even earned her place. She may have even planed to have the last divine killed so that she to gain power. The Chant of Light and the Chantry are two very different things.

Firstly, Justinia's actions appear ethical and just. Secondly, I doubt she had the last Divine assassinated to mediate a situation over which she has very little control. Thridly, if she can demonstrate the benefits of greater mage freedoms to her subordinates, things will go her way.

3) You keep taking about how if the Mages had listened to her things would be different. Why should they listen to her when she did not listen to them?

When did she choose not listen to them?

4) How can you prove that she disbanded the conclave to protect the Mages? The way it was shown looks more like an act of desperation the careful planing, that reulted in her beling disliked even more. What I mean when I say this is it went against her idealist plan.

The College of Magi didn't like it because they distrust most Chantry officials. If Justinia wanted the mages suffer she would have allowed their scheduled meeting and she would have informed Lambert of their intentions.

5) You say that I am being too harsh on Justinia yet not placing any blame on the Mages. Yet at the same time you are not placing any blame on the Divine, Chantry, Templar or Meredeth. And placing blame on the Idol that only added to an already emotionally Woman and Anders/vengence which can be partially blamed on the Chantry governing of the Circles.

I don't believe Justinia is at fault. What could she do that she didn't? I do blame the historical Chantry/Templar Order for the current situation. And I do not blame Meredith, because before obtaining the Idol she was rather reasonable.

You and I will likely not agree on her but in my view she is an Idealist looking for the Perfect solution to this problem. Now she has her people looking for two individuals who may not help her in end. How can she be trusted to lead when in the long run she has not accomplished anything that will reform the system.

No, I do not agree with that assessment of Justinia. She's only been Divine for five years and the situation before her was a nightmare to navigate.

You talk about if she had more time, but you don't seem to realize that
by the time the conclave meet she was already not trusted by a vast
amount of people from within her own Chantry.

If she had more time to show them the benefits of greater mage freedoms, I think they would eventually come around. She can't expect them to fall in line simply because she is the Divine, however.

this is just my opinion

Thank you for sharing.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 17 octobre 2012 - 05:43 .

[Rinshikai10]

Youth4ever
I already have a discussion about Justinia on the Dragon age Wiki. Would it be better to talk there so that we won't be off topic from this threads Original topic.

On a side note I think that you are overestimating Justinia and underestimating how far the situation has fallen. It feels like after everything that has happened Mages, Templars, Seeker and so on don't see her as a means to futher their views about what they think in right.  Most in these groups do not trust her and she appears to expect them to follow her regardless of what has transpired since she became Divine.

I also don't beleive that has she had more time things would have changed. Her Chantry was already failing and divided in view. Had she tried to solidify that she was the authority of the Chantry things may have been different. 

Saying that she has only be in power five years and give her some time says to me that she may have become Divine against the norm and was unprepared for the task she set out for. Codexs say that not all agreed to her being in power, and the previous Divine despite putting her name forward, was not a mage simpathizer. This points to something dirty happening in the election process.  

Modifié par Rinshikai10, 17 octobre 2012 - 01:35 .

[DKJaigen]

Youth4ever you underestimate how little power and how much resistance their is to the reforms. If you read Asunder you know that what you wanted is not possible. But its pointless to discuss it. The only option now is to eredicate the templar order.

[LobselVith8]

Youth4Ever wrote...

The Etheral Writer Redux wrote...

I never said they should demand total freedom. Just that they should offer their support to her in exchange for more freedom. However, marriage is something the Circle of Ferelden allowed Wilhelm. And it allowed Wilhelm and Wynne freedom to roam. Historically, there was a time after Andraste's Exalted March and prior to the creation of the institution of the Circles -- a period of 100-200 years -- that they were in fact free.

Yes, but Wilhelm is only one mage, and I did not receive the impression the Chantry supported him and his family in Honnleath. I don't think the Chantry wants to support more mages than necessary.

I agree. I don't think that the Chantry had anything to do with Wilhelm's freedom. He was a war hero under the Rebel Queen Moira and Prince Maric the Saviour during the Orlesian occupation of Ferelden; he may have been given a royal boon for his efforts, considering how it's prohibited for Circle mages to raise their own children. Wilhelm raising his own child is evidence that he wasn't operating under the auspicies of the Chantry controlled Circle, as well as living with his wife outside of Kinloch Hold.