656 réponses à ce sujet

[MisterJB]

I agree with this.

The mage issue dips its toes into civil rights all the time but it's got nothing else in common with it. For one mages and non-mages are never going to be equal. Full stop. Mages have abilities far beyond normal beings. A normal guy need a lot of time, some friends, and some heavy equipment to level a house a mage needs to stand outside of its blast radius.

They're not equals.

I must agree with this. Personally, while abominations are dangerous, my greatest fear when it comes to mage freedom is quite simply their propensity to turn mundanes into second class citizens.

Modifié par MisterJB, 23 octobre 2012 - 07:08 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

There are mages, and there are non-mages. Each has different capabilities. There is no reason for non-mages to resent the magical powers of mages any more than there is reason for rabbits to resent the abilities of eagles to fly and prey upon rabbits.

Resent the existence of?  No, I don't think there is.

Fear the potential abuses of?  Absolutely.

What's an abuse, in this context?  If the mages use their abilities to serve their own interests (much as the eagle does), at what point is that abuse?

[Palipride47]

hhh89 wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

You know, you don't need to make a topic for this. In fact, any topic that mentions mages, magic, the Chantry, templars, or class specializations will automatically become it over time.

No one agrees on this issue. Some people believe mages deserve their autonomy from the Chantry and the templars, and other people support the Chantry controlled Circles and the Order of Templars. There will never be a consensus when it comes to the schism between the two ideologies.

And there are people in the middle, who don't complerely agree with both groups.

Yeah, I'm in the "undecided, both have decent points and flaws" camp.

I side with mages consistently in DA2 because the Templars there were out of control and the people in power who should've stepped up either were complacent (Elthina), or encouraged the "bad behavior" (Meredith). Orsino was just a sad panda that no one listened to. 

It took the Chantry being destroyed for people to finally DO something, take a stand, and have the debate (it was violent and awful, but it reflects badly on everyone that Anders's actions are what prompted the talk that should've been happening the first 17 times a Circle was annulled before 9:30 Dragon)

I'd fear a Tevinter Imperium, but I'd also fear a Qunari dictatorship (even if I don't hate the Qun).

Magic is not required for brutality.

The mages need training, but do they need to be "locked up" to do it? I think Anders has a line somewhere in something where he wants a world where a mage child can go home to his parents after getting trained in proper use of powers. 

No matter what, there were be a sense of the "other." 

And they can do other things besides hurt people. Who was your party healer? (Wynne and Anders! Or You as Mage, Wynne and Anders!)

Modifié par Palipride47, 23 octobre 2012 - 07:23 .

[Terrorize69]

People always decide to fear the worse magic has to offer, yet never admire the good that can come out of it, like healing for example. Imagine mages were free and able to preform healing services for all?

Why not praise them for that instead of fearing the worst that they can do?

Everyone deserves to be free, and everyone is capable of good and bad deeds. Yet should we go around our whole lifes fearing everyone for the worst things they are capable of?

[blueumi]

I can see it from both sides

think about it we in real life have no magic if some people could burn you just by looking at you then you would want knights who could stop or kill them to keep you safe

then I see why Anders hates them because he never did anything wrong when he was a small child when they took him and put him in solitary confinement for a year where he made friends with mr bigglesworth

they need to find a better way to deal with the mages becuse as we see in dragon age 2 that the black city was bad that mages had done things to make people fear them

there is no true right or wrong thats what I loved about dragon age both sides were well defined

I side with the mage side of things but alistair and cullen are good men who take no joy from hurting any mage they just want to protect people

[upsettingshorts]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

What's an abuse, in this context?  If the mages use their abilities to serve their own interests (much as the eagle does), at what point is that abuse?

Nope, see gun control analogy on previous page.  Abuses would be similar to those as described in the context of gun control.

Having a gun and using it to disable an intruder during a home invasion is not necessarily abuse, depending on your state or ethical principles, but having a guy and using it to threaten someone into giving you their money or property is abuse.  Etc.  That's without something as simple as, "using Blood Magic to control and kill scores of people."

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 23 octobre 2012 - 07:18 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

MisterJB wrote...

I must agree with this. Personally, while abominations are dangerous, my greatest fear when it comes to mage freedom is quite simply their propensity to turn mundanes into second class citizens.

Do you fear that humans might do that to cattle?

If mages are demonstrably superior, why shouldn't they behave as if they're superior?

Following this line of reasoning leads to some very interesting questions about what makes a person a person.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Nope, see gun control analogy on previous page.  Abuses would be similar to those as described in the context of gun control.

I don't like that analogy.  Gun ownership is voluntary.  If you find the restrictions placed on gun owners too onerous, you're free not to be one.

I think we'd be better off comparing more intelligent people to less intelligent people.  Or able-bodied people to disabled people.  In each case, one group has clear competitive advantages over the other, and those advantages are inate.  There, we allow the able-bodied to out-compete the disabled athletically.  We allow the intelligent to outwit the less intelligent in business.  People's advantages are routinely used to further their interests at the expense of those less capable.  Are those abuses?

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 23 octobre 2012 - 07:21 .

[hoorayforicecream]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Do you fear that humans might do that to cattle?

I would probably care a lot more in this case if I were a cow.

Modifié par hoorayforicecream, 23 octobre 2012 - 07:21 .

[upsettingshorts]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I don't like that analogy.  Gun ownership is voluntary.  If you find the restrictions placed on gun owners too onerous, you're free not to be one.

Then you didn't read the analogy, or aren't acknowledging the specifics of it.  Since the non-voluntary aspect of being a mage was addressed.

As Aveline points out to Bethany, she can put her sword down.  Mages can't do that.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 23 octobre 2012 - 07:20 .

[Foolsfolly]

Terrorize69 wrote...

People always decide to fear the worse magic has to offer, yet never admire the good that can come out of it, like healing for example. Imagine mages were free and able to preform healing services for all?

Why not praise them for that instead of fearing the worst that they can do?

Everyone deserves to be free, and everyone is capable of good and bad deeds. Yet should we go around our whole lifes fearing everyone for the worst things they are capable of?

Because it's power. It's raw absolute power. Yes it can be wielded for good or ill but it's power. Kings held absolute final say in their time. There surely were good kings who did good things for their country. But they were far more capable of terrible things with that power. And while certain political problems would go away if someone had absolute authority the drawback is much to unappealing.

It's the same with mages. Yeah they can do good. But humans, elves, dwarves are capable of some really terrible acts and a mage is capable of even larger crimes. Their abilities are so great it's like handing people full automatic weapons back in the 12th Century. How many non-Templar (magic resistent and rigorously trained standing army) guards does it take to take down a handful of skilled mages?

I can see why this arguement exists. I don't see a nice third option yet. I just see more cycles of violence. Violence I understand, of course, but violence nontheless.

[Foolsfolly]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

I must agree with this. Personally, while abominations are dangerous, my greatest fear when it comes to mage freedom is quite simply their propensity to turn mundanes into second class citizens.

Do you fear that humans might do that to cattle?

If mages are demonstrably superior, why shouldn't they behave as if they're superior?

Following this line of reasoning leads to some very interesting questions about what makes a person a person.

They did.

The Chantry was the answer the oppressed came up with.

[MisterJB]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
Do you fear that humans might do that to cattle?

If mages are demonstrably superior, why shouldn't they behave as if they're superior?

Following this line of reasoning leads to some very interesting questions about what makes a person a person.

As someone who possesses no magic whatsoever, I identify with mundanes and a race has the right to fight against extinction.
I could try to claim that mages should feel empathy for the lives of other humans beings whose intellect and emotional range are equal to theirs, but I don't think it's realistic to expect that to happen.

[mousestalker]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Do you fear that humans might do that to cattle?

I would probably care a lot more in this case if I were a cow.

It's come up before

Modifié par mousestalker, 23 octobre 2012 - 07:31 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
There are mages, and there are non-mages. Each has different capabilities. There is no reason for non-mages to resent the magical powers of mages any more than there is reason for rabbits to resent the abilities of eagles to fly and prey upon rabbits.

Are you saying that rabbits shouldn't fear eagles? 

[Terrorize69]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
There are mages, and there are non-mages. Each has different capabilities. There is no reason for non-mages to resent the magical powers of mages any more than there is reason for rabbits to resent the abilities of eagles to fly and prey upon rabbits.

Are you saying that rabbits shouldn't fear eagles? 

How many rabbits kill eagles in return although? lol

[Sylvius the Mad]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Do you fear that humans might do that to cattle?

I would probably care a lot more in this case if I were a cow.

You're not a mundane, either.  You don't live in a world with mages.

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Then you didn't read the analogy, or aren't acknowledging the specifics of it.  Since the non-voluntary aspect of being a mage was addressed.

Not well enough.  I think that difference is sufficient to render the analogy inapplicable.

Foolsfolly wrote...

They did.

The Chantry was the answer the oppressed came up with.

And that answer was to oppress them right back.  It seems to me that we're in a state of open war between the mages and non-mages, and have been for centuries.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 23 octobre 2012 - 07:25 .

[TheJediSaint]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
There are mages, and there are non-mages. Each has different capabilities. There is no reason for non-mages to resent the magical powers of mages any more than there is reason for rabbits to resent the abilities of eagles to fly and prey upon rabbits.

Are you saying that rabbits shouldn't fear eagles? 

Well, what if there reallly badass rabbits?

[Sylvius the Mad]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
There are mages, and there are non-mages. Each has different capabilities. There is no reason for non-mages to resent the magical powers of mages any more than there is reason for rabbits to resent the abilities of eagles to fly and prey upon rabbits.

Are you saying that rabbits shouldn't fear eagles? 

I'm saying rabbits shouldn't hate eagles just for being eagles.  Rabbits should accept their lot in life.

[upsettingshorts]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Not well enough.  I think that difference is sufficient to render the analogy inapplicable.

By that standrard any real-world analogy will be inapplicable, up to and including examples from civil and human rights movements, because mages do not exist.

[TheJediSaint]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
There are mages, and there are non-mages. Each has different capabilities. There is no reason for non-mages to resent the magical powers of mages any more than there is reason for rabbits to resent the abilities of eagles to fly and prey upon rabbits.

Are you saying that rabbits shouldn't fear eagles? 

I'm saying rabbits shouldn't hate eagles just for being eagles.  Rabbits should accept their lot in life.

I for one, would resent someone trying to swoop down on me and eat me.   Swooping is bad, after all.

[The Elder King]

Palipride47 wrote...


Yeah, I'm in the "undecided, both have decent points and flaws" camp.

I side with mages consistently in DA2 because the Templars there were out of control and the people in power who should've stepped up either were complacent (Elthina), or encouraged the "bad behavior" (Meredith). Orsino was just a sad panda that no one listened to. 

It took the Chantry being destroyed for people to finally DO something, take a stand, and have the debate (it was violent and awful, but it reflects badly on everyone that Anders's actions are what prompted the talk that should've been happening the first 17 times a Circle was annulled before 9:30 Dragon)

I'd fear a Tevinter Imperium, but I'd also fear a Qunari dictatorship (even if I don't hate the Qun).

Magic is not required for brutality.

The mages need training, but do they need to be "locked up" to do it? I think Anders has a line somewhere in something where he wants a world where a mage child can go home to his parents after getting trained in proper use of powers. 

No matter what, there were be a sense of the "other." 

And they can do other things besides hurt people. Who was your party healer? (Wynne and Anders! Or You as Mage, Wynne and Anders!)

I had more difficulty in choosing a side in DA2, considering they were badly portrayed. The shown mostly their worst side in DA2. I chose the mage in my (only so far) playthrough because the Circle wasn't involved in Anders's actions. It wasn't their fault if Anders destroyed the Chantry. Anders was never a member of the Kirkwall's Circle.

[Foolsfolly]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
There are mages, and there are non-mages. Each has different capabilities. There is no reason for non-mages to resent the magical powers of mages any more than there is reason for rabbits to resent the abilities of eagles to fly and prey upon rabbits.

Are you saying that rabbits shouldn't fear eagles? 

I'm saying rabbits shouldn't hate eagles just for being eagles.  Rabbits should accept their lot in life.

So you're a follower of the qun now?

[Terrorize69]

I wouldn't object to Merrill/Morrigan/FemHawke/Beth trying to eat me, not all at once lol... although maybe.. hm..

[hoorayforicecream]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
There are mages, and there are non-mages. Each has different capabilities. There is no reason for non-mages to resent the magical powers of mages any more than there is reason for rabbits to resent the abilities of eagles to fly and prey upon rabbits.

Are you saying that rabbits shouldn't fear eagles? 

I'm saying rabbits shouldn't hate eagles just for being eagles.  Rabbits should accept their lot in life.

Does this mean the eagles should accept their lot in life if they have been subjugated by the rabbits?