1297 réponses à ce sujet

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
If only we had a system of towers where mages can live separated and safe, watched over by warriors capable of delaing with them should things go worng....

OH WAIT!

That is, in fact, the point of the Circle. The problem is that the Templars are abusing their power. This is what should stop, or at least be sharply curbed. (Because it's never going to stop completely.) The fact remains, however that unqualified mage freedom is unsafe, at least until the Circle has finished driving it home that the mage should not abuse their power, seeing whether or not that lesson took, and testing their aptitude for resisting demons. Not being a Thedosian mage myself, I'm not sure how good the Harrowing is for that, but it's better than Amelia Stannard got.

No, the point is that templars aren't abusing their power any more than anyone else in Thedas is.
Mages AREN'T worse off than a commoner but they whine very loudly.

You realize that an argument not to improve a system just because there are worse systems out there is logically fallacious? Edit: And that until something is either worked out or forced that ends this war, the mages can't really do anything to help the commoners, which is the only suggestion I can think of which would lead to that argument making sense?

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 25 novembre 2012 - 10:19 .

[BlueMagitek]

Auintus wrote...
The dialogue implied that it was something out of the ordinary, something beyond the measures that should(and probably would) have been put in place following several storyline events. Nothing happens immediately previously to the last straw that would provoke such an act. Nothing changed after Best Served Cold. Nothing changed after On the Loose. Why just then? Nothing significant seemed to have happened. Adequate measures should have been put into place ages ago, rather than on a whim.

You're entirely right.  They should have been put in place before.  But they weren't, due to incompetance, most like, so really, they might as well do it, it may have saved us all a lot of hassle (or showed that the Circle was in fact due for an Anullment or some other form of cleansing given all the monstrous things that go down in Kirkwall). 

As for 12 mages who want power, how about (not counting all of the nameless ones):

Flemeth
Morrigan (these two are debatable, but I think you would agree that body hopping is not a good thing,yeah)
Caladrius (elf slave guy)
Uldred (and his cronies)
The Baroness
Tahrone
Quentin (power over life and death to resurrect his wife by using others)
Idunna

I suppose that makes 8, but again it doesn't count all of the nameless ones.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
You realize that an argument not to improve a system just because there are worse systems out there is logically fallacious? Edit: And that until something is either worked out or forced that ends this war, the mages can't really do anything to help the commoners, which is the only suggestion I can think of which would lead to that argument making sense?

And my argument isn't that the system shouldn't be improved, but that mages whine to much, and that most of the "improvement" ideas people throw around aren't improvements at all.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
You realize that an argument not to improve a system just because there are worse systems out there is logically fallacious? Edit: And that until something is either worked out or forced that ends this war, the mages can't really do anything to help the commoners, which is the only suggestion I can think of which would lead to that argument making sense?

And my argument isn't that the system shouldn't be improved, but that mages whine to much, and that most of the "improvement" ideas people throw around aren't improvements at all.

Which has what to do with the point I'd made?

[Warden661]

Adanu wrote...

Not for him. People like him only see the potentia land maybes and seek prevention, not reaction. People like him are why the mages rebelled.

Ok captain Ad Hominem.

[Auintus]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Auintus wrote...
Should I allow myself to suffer because to resist would cause conflict?

Yes?
After all, it is morally right to sacrifice your own well-bing for others.

Sacrifice my own freedom, submit myself to a prison where treatment can range from life-threatening to mildly pleasant on the off chance that I would be possessed?
That's expecting a bit too much.

The fact that he plants that bomb long before the last straw and Meredith only resorted to annulment after the explosion.

How does this prove Meredith would have order the annulment if Anders didn't do his little act of terrorism?
It doesn't.

When did I say it did? I said Anders' plan would have gone off no matter if Orsino had submitted to Meredith's search from the begining.

[Auintus]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

We already established they aren't slaves, so there's no point in arguing in that direction.

And as we ALSO established, mages aren't like other people.
We DO lock up people who we deem are too dangerous b.t.w.

I...That was a parallel. Slave uprisings because they did not like their treatment. The mages are no different.

True, but many people are not like other people. It's called being unique. It comes with good and bad.
Agreed. We simply draw different lines for "too dangerous."

Modifié par Auintus, 26 novembre 2012 - 01:33 .

[Auintus]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
What do they say about making fun of fundies by using sarcasm again?
My powst was deliberately written mimicking the pro-mage zealots.

But as for your second part: No.
I can judge a man by his extra-ordinary abilities.

Oh. Oh, good. I though you were serious. Can't hear sarcasm over the internet.

I seem to recall a musician who could compose masterpieces despite being deaf. Certainly that is not an ordinary ability. Besides, the ability itself is no threat in trained hands.

[Auintus]

Palidane wrote...

A question to the pro-mages:

Would you be alright with a modified circle system where the Templars and Mages were equal partners, but in most other ways similar to the current one?

Hmm. Not quite.
I want a system where the Circle is a mandatory system of education, specifically in demon-resisting. Templars would still have to watch over the Circles and Phalactaries would still be made, but a "graduated" mage would be free.

[silentassassin264]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

We already established they aren't slaves, so there's no point in arguing in that direction.

No WE didn't.  No one presented a convincing argument for me to change my position.  Some people feel it is slavery and some, like you, do not.  There is no point arguing because neither side is going to budge, not because someone has proved something.

[Auintus]

BlueMagitek wrote...

You're entirely right.  They should have been put in place before.  But they weren't, due to incompetance, most like, so really, they might as well do it, it may have saved us all a lot of hassle (or showed that the Circle was in fact due for an Anullment or some other form of cleansing given all the monstrous things that go down in Kirkwall). 

As for 12 mages who want power, how about (not counting all of the nameless ones):

Flemeth
Morrigan (these two are debatable, but I think you would agree that body hopping is not a good thing,yeah)
Caladrius (elf slave guy)
Uldred (and his cronies)
The Baroness
Tahrone
Quentin (power over life and death to resurrect his wife by using others)
Idunna

I suppose that makes 8, but again it doesn't count all of the nameless ones.

I always assumed that Meredith was already doing basic sweeps and just wanted something more invasive for spite, or paranoia.
Many of the mages only fought in self-defense. There was no outstanding reason to completely annul the Circle.

Flemeth's a bit of an odd card. She could really tear things up, if she wanted to, but she doesn't. However, with the body-surfing and all, I'll allow this one.
Morrigan too, she talks up self-serving and doesn't support helping others, but never actively goes out of her way to bring them harm.
Caladrius is a Tevinter. They are raised that way, so they're off the table.
We never get a look in to Uldred's pre-possession mind-set, but Ines suggests that he only wanted to be left alone. However, allowing oneself to be possessed is probably going too far, yes.
I agree 100% on the last four. Except you missed Grace, from Best Served Cold. Alain not so much.

There are also mages like Jowan and Malcolm Hawke who do good. Note that both were once in a Circle and attained freedom later. I think that, in addition to the actions of most mages in Broken Circle, speaks volumes as to what most Circle mages are like. Unfortunately, we only have a small batch to examine.

[Auintus]

silentassassin264 wrote...

No WE didn't.  No one presented a convincing argument for me to change my position.  Some people feel it is slavery and some, like you, do not.  There is no point arguing because neither side is going to budge, not because someone has proved something.

I had a conversation with a third party and would like to ask: How do you define slave?

[silentassassin264]

While I have my computer back and can sit a debate with you Auintus, when it comes down to it, we are simply not going to agree. We spent like 3 pages and did not come to any sort of consensus. Bringing it up again will not solve it either.

Plus now I have Skyrim back. 

Modifié par silentassassin264, 26 novembre 2012 - 02:01 .

[The Hierophant]

silentassassin264 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

We already established they aren't slaves, so there's no point in arguing in that direction.

No WE didn't.  No one presented a convincing argument for me to change my position.  Some people feel it is slavery and some, like you, do not.  There is no point arguing because neither side is going to budge, not because someone has proved something.

Aside from being held against their will like prisoners, mages are not sold or purchased, forced into manual labor, servitude, or sexual service without compensation like irl slaves are or were subjected to.

As we have seen so far mages unlike slaves are allowed to write & read, an education, communicate with each other, allowed to assemble meetings and vote about their future under the Chantry, travel without Templar escort for various purposes, allowed to live outside a Circle and have a family, if they meet certain qualifications DG never specified.

The mages are in a perpetual quarantine ala Typhoid Mary. It's tiring to see people b@st@rdize the term slavery in order to gain the upperhand in a petty debate, it s**** on the actual victims of slavery which continues to exist to this day.

Modifié par The Hierophant, 26 novembre 2012 - 02:14 .

[Auintus]

silentassassin264 wrote...

While I have my computer back and can sit a debate with you Auintus, when it comes down to it, we are simply not going to agree. We spent like 3 pages and did not come to any sort of consensus. Bringing it up again will not solve it either.

Plus now I have Skyrim back. 

Not true. My third party understood mages as slaves and under her definition, it makes sense. There is no reason that your definition would not do the same.
We were arguing conditions for three pages. The conditions of mages do not change not matter who looks at it. A personal usage of "slave" versus "prisoner" does change. I am only interested in understanding, not debate.

Uh, yay?

[Fuggyt]

Palidane wrote...

A question to the pro-mages:

Would you be alright with a modified circle system where the Templars and Mages were equal partners, but in most other ways similar to the current one?

As long as the abductees are somehow equal partners to their state-sanctioned kidnappers?  

No.

Freedom is indivisible.  You either have it or you don't.  It's also non-negotiable.  Never settle for anything less.

[EmperorSahlertz]

silentassassin264 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

We already established they aren't slaves, so there's no point in arguing in that direction.

No WE didn't.  No one presented a convincing argument for me to change my position.  Some people feel it is slavery and some, like you, do not.  There is no point arguing because neither side is going to budge, not because someone has proved something.

You have also proven dfead set on disregarding the commonly accepted defenition of slavery, and isntead cling to your own. We can't really do anyhting about that..

[Auintus]

Fuggyt wrote...

As long as the abductees are somehow equal partners to their state-sanctioned kidnappers?  

No.

Freedom is indivisible.  You either have it or you don't.  It's also non-negotiable.  Never settle for anything less.

Would you agree that training should be mandatory, so long as freedom is given upon completion?

[Adanu]

BoBear wrote...

Adanu wrote...

Not for him. People like him only see the potentia land maybes and seek prevention, not reaction. People like him are why the mages rebelled.

Ok captain Ad Hominem.

I stopped caring about appealing to a high intellectual kind of debate when people like lotion started attacking me, and refused to see the Circles as prettied up slavery.

[CaptainBlackGold]

This thread is an almost classic example of what psychologists of learning call, "selective attention" or "the tendency to attune to data which conforms to your beliefs, and to dismiss, devalue or ignore data that would overturn them."

So let me see if I have grasped the arguments presented thus far:

"Mages need freedom."
"Mages are dangerous to have freedom."
"They are only dangerous because they don't have freedom."
"If they were not dangerous, they could have freedom."
"Nuh-hah."
"Uh-hah."
"You stink!"
"No, you stink!"

And on, and on, and on and on...

Just for interest, has anyone, anywhere, anyhow ever won an internet debate? I mean, do we take a poll? Cut cards? Flip a coin? Agree to meet in a neutral city and have a dance off or something?

To keep these comments on topic; my personal view - if I was an average person in Thedas, I would consider the mages to be too dangerous to let wander freely, without Templar supervision.

If I was a mage in Thedas, I would escape the circles as soon as possible and resist any restriction of my freedom with every skill at my disposal. When they came to get me, they had better bring a whole army. They can have my staff when they pry it from my cold, dead fingers.

You see, it all depends upon your point of view...

Modifié par CaptainBlackGold, 26 novembre 2012 - 03:00 .

[BlueMagitek]

Auintus wrote...
I always assumed that Meredith was already doing basic sweeps and just wanted something more invasive for spite, or paranoia.
Many of the mages only fought in self-defense. There was no outstanding reason to completely annul the Circle.

Flemeth's a bit of an odd card. She could really tear things up, if she wanted to, but she doesn't. However, with the body-surfing and all, I'll allow this one.
Morrigan too, she talks up self-serving and doesn't support helping others, but never actively goes out of her way to bring them harm.
Caladrius is a Tevinter. They are raised that way, so they're off the table.
We never get a look in to Uldred's pre-possession mind-set, but Ines suggests that he only wanted to be left alone. However, allowing oneself to be possessed is probably going too far, yes.
I agree 100% on the last four. Except you missed Grace, from Best Served Cold. Alain not so much.

There are also mages like Jowan and Malcolm Hawke who do good. Note that both were once in a Circle and attained freedom later. I think that, in addition to the actions of most mages in Broken Circle, speaks volumes as to what most Circle mages are like. Unfortunately, we only have a small batch to examine.

Ah, I wasn't under that impression.  And perhaps she should have kept a closer look on their correspondance, given Orsino and Quentin. 
Well, the reason for anullment seems to vary from time to time and place to place.  I think you would agree that in DA:O, anullment was is a fair thing to call for.  The Circle has gone to hell, a lot of mages are dead or abominations or blood mages and the First Enchanter is missing.   The first anullment was called for a single abomination in a tower.  Given the multiple abomination, attempts at rebellion and blood magic, I think the argument for an anullment can be made.

Morrigan goes out of her way to obtain the soul of an Old God.  Is that not the accumulation of power?  She also approves of deals with demons (Desire demon in Honnleathe) and some of her 'pragmatic options' aren't pragmatic at all.

Caladrius is not a magister though, he's just a blood mage.
And yet he calls upon a Pride Demon and ruins the lives of countless mages in a grab for power of the Circle.
Ah, well, I'm not perfect.

Malcolm is good, I agree.  He was also forced into blood magic by the Wardens.  Jowan is also... okay.  And I believe that mission is glitched.

[Fuggyt]

Auintus wrote...

Fuggyt wrote...

As long as the abductees are somehow equal partners to their state-sanctioned kidnappers?  

No.

Freedom is indivisible.  You either have it or you don't.  It's also non-negotiable.  Never settle for anything less.

Would you agree that training should be mandatory, so long as freedom is given upon completion?

No.  My mage children, like Malcolm Hawke's, will be home-schooled.

[BlueMagitek]

Fuggyt wrote...

As long as the abductees are somehow equal partners to their state-sanctioned kidnappers?  

No.

Freedom is indivisible.  You either have it or you don't.  It's also non-negotiable.  Never settle for anything less.

The vast majority of Thedas has it worse off than Circle mages, with less freedom and more abuse and troubles heaped on them.  What about them?

[Adanu]

CaptainBlackGold wrote...

This thread is an almost classic example of what psychologists of learning call, "selective attention" or "the tendency to attune to data which conforms to your beliefs, and to dismiss, devalue or ignore data that would overturn them."

So let me see if I have grasped the arguments presented thus far:

"Mages need freedom."
"Mages are dangerous to have freedom."
"They are only dangerous because they don't have freedom."
"If they were not dangerous, they could have freedom."
"Nuh-hah."
"Uh-hah."
"You stink!"
"No, you stink!"

And on, and on, and on and on...

I already gave a solution; Build a new system of schools with Templars as police, not as jailers. You don't restrict their movements, and you don't try to keep research forbidden. You monitor and you teach. Encourage and enrich.

You treat them with respect, not with suspicion. If they attack or break the law, you bring the Templars and mages down on their head. You deal with mages on a case by case basis... not with every single mage being a potential threat all the time, everywhere.

BlueMagitek wrote...

Fuggyt wrote...

As long as the abductees are somehow equal partners to their state-sanctioned kidnappers?  

No.

Freedom is indivisible.  You either have it or you don't.  It's also non-negotiable.  Never settle for anything less.

The
vast majority of Thedas has it worse off than Circle mages, with less
freedom and more abuse and troubles heaped on them.  What about them?

The vast majority of Thedas has a choice in how they live their lives. Mages do not.

Modifié par Adanu, 26 novembre 2012 - 03:13 .

[Fuggyt]

BlueMagitek wrote...

Fuggyt wrote...

As long as the abductees are somehow equal partners to their state-sanctioned kidnappers?  

No.

Freedom is indivisible.  You either have it or you don't.  It's also non-negotiable.  Never settle for anything less.

The vast majority of Thedas has it worse off than Circle mages, with less freedom and more abuse and troubles heaped on them.  What about them?

Yes, you're right!  Because there are peasants and wars and plagues and famines and poverty, that makes legal kidnapping, forced relocation, and breaking up families perfectly legitimate!  Two wrongs do in fact make a right!  Thank you for removing the scales from my eyes! That explains why so many homeless people in our society are volunteering for state prison.