1297 réponses à ce sujet

[Herr Uhl]

silentassassin264 wrote...

So what you are saying is that regardless of who is control, whoever is in power can be a person of mass destruction?

I'm guessing you're angling at a mageocracy.

And the blight helping does not change the fact unless you are going to discount demon intervention in making mages dangerous.

Blights are exceedingly more rare. He failed in defending against a hostile force (as that was the majority of the damage), did the kings of the Dwarves also single handedly destroy their empire?

[frankf43]

I'm just saying that I could never play as pro Chantry/Templar. I just can't support treating people as sub-human because of an accident of birth.

Modifié par frankf43, 27 novembre 2012 - 11:25 .

[silentassassin264]

[quote]Herr Uhl wrote...

[quote]silentassassin264 wrote...

So what you are saying is that regardless of who is control, whoever is in power can be a person of mass destruction?[/quote]
I'm guessing you're angling at a mageocracy.
[/quote]

No.  I am pointing out the fallacy of this argument.  The magisters of Tevinter are not evil because they are mages with power, they are evil because are evil...and have power.  Suppose Empress Celine mixes in dragon blood with her wyvern poison drink and becomes a Reaver from the dragon blood.  Reavers get stronger by reveling in death so what if she decides she likes being drunk on power and decides to mass murder people and to get more power.  She could end up just like the Magisters without being a mage.  Of course she would have to be a degenerate pyschopath, like the magisters, to do that.  

Tevinter is not a mageocracy.  Tevinter is an oligarchy of psychopaths...who happen to have power.  The enslave other mages (see Feynriel) and have circles where non magister mages are treated just like they are in the rest of Thedas.  To the above paragraph, if Celine was a normal psychopath, she could still enslave people and have mass murdering blood orgies to sate her insanity.  Magic is not necessary for that.  If mages ended up taking over society and making a real "mageocracy" it would be no different than the normal feudal system already in Thedas.  Good mage leaders would be like Arl Eamon, Bryce Cousland and Bad ones would be like Vaughn/Howe/(insane)Loghain/Raleigh.  

I have no clue where I was going with that.  Rambling I suppose take what you wish.

 [quote]Herr Uhl wrote...
[quote]And the blight helping does not change the fact unless you are going to discount demon intervention in making mages dangerous.[/quote]

Blights are exceedingly more rare. He failed in defending against a hostile force (as that was the majority of the damage), did the kings of the Dwarves also single handedly destroy their empire?[/quote]
[/quote]
Except Loghain didn't fail in defending against a hostile force.  Loghain killed his King that was going to defeat the hostile force easily by doing what was needed (aka call the Grey Wardens), caused a civil war killing people who wouldn't bow to him, poisoned others who could stand against him, etc etc.  Loghain didn't even try to fight the blight after he retreated from Ostagar because he more insane things to do like try to take over the country.  The situation is not even remotely close to the Dwarves.  Loghain let over half his country burn in a mad attempt to take the throne.  That beats blood mages turning into abominations any day.  Loghain had power (without magic) and was mad and caused mass destruction.  

Modifié par silentassassin264, 27 novembre 2012 - 11:31 .

[Herr Uhl]

silentassassin264 wrote...

No.  I am pointing out the fallacy of this argument.  The magisters of Tevinter are not evil because they are mages with power, they are evil because are evil...and have power.  Suppose Empress Celine mixes in dragon blood with her wyvern poison drink and becomes a Reaver from the dragon blood.  Reavers get stronger by reveling in death so what if she decides she likes being drunk on power and decides to mass murder people and to get more power.  She could end up just like the Magisters without being a mage.  Of course she would have to be a degenerate pyschopath, like the magisters, to do that.  

Tevinter is not a mageocracy.  Tevinter is an oligarchy of psychopaths...who happen to have power.  The enslave other mages (see Feynriel) and have circles where non magister mages are treated just like they are in the rest of Thedas.  To the above paragraph, if Celine was a normal psychopath, she could still enslave people and have mass murdering blood orgies to sate her insanity.  Magic is not necessary for that.  If mages ended up taking over society and making a real "mageocracy" it would be no different than the normal feudal system already in Thedas.  Good mage leaders would be like Arl Eamon, Bryce Cousland and Bad ones would be like Vaughn/Howe/(insane)Loghain/Raleigh.  

I have no clue where I was going with that.  Rambling I suppose take what you wish.

That amount of swaying power is still restricted to very few people. Once you reach that point, the mageness of you doesn't matter much. However, the original argument was that mages have a higher potential for destruction. Any mage could wipe out a village by themselves if they become an abomination. You need to be a highly specialized mundane to get the same swaying power or battle prowess. That was my argument.

Except Loghain didn't fail in defending against a hostile force.  Loghain killed his King that was going to defeat the hostile force easily by doing what was needed (aka call the Grey Wardens), caused a civil war killing people who wouldn't bow to him, poisoned others who could stand against him, etc etc.  Loghain didn't even try to fight the blight after he retreated from Ostagar because he more insane things to do like try to take over the country.  The situation is not even remotely close to the Dwarves.  Loghain let over half his country burn in a mad attempt to take the throne.  That beats blood mages turning into abominations any day.  Loghain had power (without magic) and was mad and caused mass destruction.

Your interpretation of events is highly debatable, but I shall avoid going deeper in order to avoid getting more off-topic.

[silentassassin264]

Herr Uhl wrote...

That amount of swaying power is still restricted to very few people. Once you reach that point, the mageness of you doesn't matter much. However, the original argument was that mages have a higher potential for destruction. Any mage could wipe out a village by themselves if they become an abomination. You need to be a highly specialized mundane to get the same swaying power or battle prowess. That was my argument.

One guy with a sword can wipe out a village, too.  Leave your companions behind, go to Haven, kill everyone.  

Joking aside, what I originally proposed was not getting rid of templars.  My proposition was having mages and enchanters work together to run schools attached/near/with the Chantries so that all mages had mandatory classes at the Chantry Mage School but were allowed to return to their families.  The Templars and Echanters would police their districts for magical crime much like how they do now anyway and would be present to fight abominations.  What is currently the "Circle" would be a college for mages to go beyond the say no to demons and how not to burn down your house type training.  It would also be available for mages who did not want to live with the mundanes.  

I am not saying get rid of all anti magical protection and go nuts.  I am saying that forcing people into circles and stripping away all rights and liberties is wrong.  If the current system worked, Elthina wouldn't have gotten blown to bits.

[frankf43]

As was pointed out in another thread, The Chantry supported by its Templars not only enslaves the mages but also support the subjugation of the city elves.

[Auintus]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Most of the good a mage can do, can still be done within the Circle. Most of the evil a mage can do, can't be done within the Circle.
A mage is never 100% resistant to demons, and a mage fighting an Abomination is extremely risky, since if the Abomination wins, it may create another Abomination. That is also partly the reason the Templars prefer not to involve the mages when it comes to policing magic.

Bull. Mages can't do much at all within the Circle. Anders was a healer, Leyvn was, effectively, a bodyguard. Both outside the Circle. What good have mages done within the Circle? They light lamps, I think. They even had to be let out to combat the Blight.
Not mage vs abomination one-on-one. Besides, the mages in Broken Circle were able to resist and had to be subdued and tortured one by one. With a team of mages and templars, I see far less risk to all participants. You're right, a mage is never completely safe from demonic influences, which they are taught in the Circle. Consequently, they are on their guard.

[Dave of Canada]

They merchant magical goods and serve as healers in the Circle, not much else you can do with magic that's practical outside of Circles.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 28 novembre 2012 - 02:32 .

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Dave of Canada wrote...

They merchant magical goods and serve as healers.

Not much else you can do with magic.

They can serve as law enforcement, fight in the army, or serve as bodyguards for lords or diplomats. Am I missing anything else legal?

[Inquisitor Arc]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

They merchant magical goods and serve as healers.

Not much else you can do with magic.

They can serve as law enforcement, fight in the army, or serve as bodyguards for lords or diplomats. Am I missing anything else legal?

Construction! The Imperial highway was created by using magic.

[Fredward]

BlueMagitek wrote...

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
Are mundanes as dangerous when they go nuts as mages are?

NOPE!

But that's not what we're discussing here. I want to point out that the MAJORITY of heinous, heinous acts (outside of the Imperium which really fosters such things) have all been to overthrow the templars/Chantry/Circle. Remove that and we have real minorities like crazy Quentin to contend with. Can the Circle system be justified then? Locking mages up for a true minority?

Of course, the vast majority of mages are only surrounded by Templar and as such don't really have any other target (aside from other mages). 

The mages outside the Circle who commit atrocities (Flemeth, Connor) tend to be larger in scale.

We actually have blow all evidence that Flemmy ever did anything really awful. Not even that Connibar thing seeing as she denies that it ever happened. Or wait is that the Chasind thing? Either way Connibar totally had it coming. Connor was a child and like all children who committ crimes cannot be held fully responsible for his actions.

I feel like this is a good place to mention (again) that I think the Circles should act as schools and after the Harrowing mages should be allowed to leave. Attendance is mandatory and phylacteries are still kept. Anyway point is that even with a MASSIVELY lessened Circle the Connor thing still shouldn't have happened; that was one woman's stupidity.

And yes mages destroy in a larger scale. They also help in a larger scale. BALANCE PEOPLE.

[Dave of Canada]

Connor's situation isn't only Isolde's stupidity but Connor's emotions taking the reigns. Emotions are bad.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...
I haven't played Awakenings to the Baronness yet so I'll give you that one (unless she was insane). Quentin was insane all on his own, no abominationess required just plain ol' insanity of which mundanes are also susceptible. And Marethari never REALLY did anything horrible did she? She always tried to help (stupidly) and even saved Feynriel.

Baroness is just a powerhungry b****.
And Marethari? She would have destroyed her clan in the end.

But that's not what we're discussing here. I want to point out that
the MAJORITY of heinous, heinous acts (outside of the Imperium which
really fosters such things) have all been to overthrow the
templars/Chantry/Circle. Remove that and we have real minorities like
crazy Quentin to contend with. Can the Circle system be justified then? Locking mages up for a true minority?

Really? Nope.
Once out of the Circles, an entire new range of reasons and temptations would open up for the mages.
Remove one reason, add 10 new ones.

The majority of the henius mage acts are because mages are stupid and self-entilteled.

[Lotion Soronarr]

frankf43 wrote...

I have a major problem with the whole Chantry/Templar view of mages and how to handle their power.
They teach that mages have an unrivalled power that if it goes rouge is uncontrollable. This is total tosh. I have far more problem fighting a group of Assassins than I ever had fighting either mages or abominations.
Once a mage becomes an abomination it’s a piece of cake to dispatch.

The whole mages are capable of destroying the world is just bigoted propaganda that I personally have had a major problem with since the Chantry was first introduced in DA:O.

Looks like someone has problem seeing the difference between gameplay/encounter design and fluff.

Fluff-wise abominations can destroy entire cities.
Fluff wise, they can take out armies.
Fluff-wise, bandits don't rain from heavens.
FLuff-wise, you are not in the same cavern you visited 10 times already.

Fluff >>> gameplay

[Lotion Soronarr]

silentassassin264 wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...

silentassassin264 wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Are mundanes as dangerous when they go nuts as mages are?

Loghain nearly destroyed an entire country by going nuts and he lacked any magic whatsoever.  I think near destruction of an entire country beats mage damage.

That requires being in a place of power to begin with. And the blight helped him.

So what you are saying is that regardless of who is control, whoever is in power can be a person of mass destruction?  

And the blight helping does not change the fact unless you are going to discount demon intervention in making mages dangerous.

People like Loghain require the obedince of thousands to do anything.
They don't have any real power other than what other allow them (or what they think they have).

They aren't a person of mass destruction, because they don't destroy anything themselves.
All it takes to stop them is for people to say "no".

[Lotion Soronarr]

silentassassin264 wrote...
No.  I am pointing out the fallacy of this argument.  The magisters of Tevinter are not evil because they are mages with power, they are evil because are evil...and have power.  Suppose Empress Celine mixes in dragon blood with her wyvern poison drink and becomes a Reaver from the dragon blood.  Reavers get stronger by reveling in death so what if she decides she likes being drunk on power and decides to mass murder people and to get more power.  She could end up just like the Magisters without being a mage.  Of course she would have to be a degenerate pyschopath, like the magisters, to do that. 

Reavers are no where near as powerfull as mages or abominations.

Also, reavers can't mind-force peopel into obedince nor tear open the veil or summon demons.

[Fredward]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Foopydoopydoo wrote...
I haven't played Awakenings to the Baronness yet so I'll give you that one (unless she was insane). Quentin was insane all on his own, no abominationess required just plain ol' insanity of which mundanes are also susceptible. And Marethari never REALLY did anything horrible did she? She always tried to help (stupidly) and even saved Feynriel.

Baroness is just a powerhungry b****.
And Marethari? She would have destroyed her clan in the end.

But that's not what we're discussing here. I want to point out that
the MAJORITY of heinous, heinous acts (outside of the Imperium which
really fosters such things) have all been to overthrow the
templars/Chantry/Circle. Remove that and we have real minorities like
crazy Quentin to contend with. Can the Circle system be justified then? Locking mages up for a true minority?

Really? Nope.
Once out of the Circles, an entire new range of reasons and temptations would open up for the mages.
Remove one reason, add 10 new ones.

The majority of the henius mage acts are because mages are stupid and self-entilteled.

Ahem.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Proof?
Oh right, you got none.
I so love it when people use their oppinions on motivations of other people as facts.

-coughhypocritecough-

And nothing Marethari did endangered her clan, she gave her life trying to protect someone who abandoned it years ago. Stupidly, but her intentions were good.

So far only three mages really jump out at me as being evil/morally questionable just for the heck of it. This is Velenna, Zathrian (arguably justified, initially anyway) and the Baroness. Two of these are Dalish and arguably have different moral systems, which is again a cultural thing, but I think it's fair to mention them still.

[FDrage]

as long as I'm not force to be "pro-mage" or "anti-chantry" ...

[Lotion Soronarr]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...
-coughhypocritecough-

What? Mages being stupid and self-entilted whiners is a fact.

But seriously, mages rebeling agaisnt the Chantry are mostly morons. They do have it better than most mundanes do..but I guess it is in human nature to always want more.

And nothing Marethari did endangered her clan, she gave her life trying to protect someone who abandoned it years ago. Stupidly, but her intentions were good. 

So that abomination didn't endanger the clan?
Tell me - what would happen if Hawke wasn't there to stop it?

[DKJaigen]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

silentassassin264 wrote...
No.  I am pointing out the fallacy of this argument.  The magisters of Tevinter are not evil because they are mages with power, they are evil because are evil...and have power.  Suppose Empress Celine mixes in dragon blood with her wyvern poison drink and becomes a Reaver from the dragon blood.  Reavers get stronger by reveling in death so what if she decides she likes being drunk on power and decides to mass murder people and to get more power.  She could end up just like the Magisters without being a mage.  Of course she would have to be a degenerate pyschopath, like the magisters, to do that. 

Reavers are no where near as powerfull as mages or abominations.

Also, reavers can't mind-force peopel into obedince nor tear open the veil or summon demons.

Reavers have no counter except throwing a large amount of bodies against a reaver. that makes them much more powerful then a mage because templars can nullify a mages power. And the thing is an army of reavers would be a terrifying thing indeed . furthermore reavers can be created .

Take a look at Fenris the man is a one man army. Templar supporters are not concerned that the tevinter imperium can create such soldiers and im like : WTF is this? Despite saying that mundanes are frail they the options to become to become equal to the mages. That the chantry forbids it is not my concern.

Its funny to see how templar supporters ignore the facts that could contradict them. Thats why they focus on mages and templars. Because any argument the templars supporters may have is made utterly  irrelevant with this simple statement: mages are vital for the protection of thedas. The end. If you treat a people that are vital to the defense of thedas so badly that they rebel then you have failed to protect Thedas as a whole.

[frankf43]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

frankf43 wrote...

I have a major problem with the whole Chantry/Templar view of mages and how to handle their power.
They teach that mages have an unrivalled power that if it goes rouge is uncontrollable. This is total tosh. I have far more problem fighting a group of Assassins than I ever had fighting either mages or abominations.
Once a mage becomes an abomination it’s a piece of cake to dispatch.

The whole mages are capable of destroying the world is just bigoted propaganda that I personally have had a major problem with since the Chantry was first introduced in DA:O.

Looks like someone has problem seeing the difference between gameplay/encounter design and fluff.

Fluff-wise abominations can destroy entire cities.
Fluff wise, they can take out armies.
Fluff-wise, bandits don't rain from heavens.
FLuff-wise, you are not in the same cavern you visited 10 times already.

Fluff >>> gameplay

I’m sorry but all the Abominations in the game are weak and ineffectual. If they want people to believe that they are this major treat on society than make them rarer and mega bosses, make them able to tear down buildings with a single bolt of lightning or something.
 
The reason is that in the game the average mage doesn’t have that kind of power.
 
The biggest treat to civilisation in the game were the Arishok and Meredith both of whom had no magic and were opposed to it wholeheartedly.
 
You may call it fluff but it’s the mechanics of the game.
 
 Meredith is a raving lunatic who is willing to kill thousands of people on a whim and tares down half of the city when you won’t let her.
The Arishok is a major control freak who tries to destroy the entire city because it doesn’t conform to his world view.
 
Those two are the big-bads in DA:2 IMHO not the mages it’s people like that that need to be controlled and watched over at every turn not the average mage.

[Lotion Soronarr]

DKJaigen wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Reavers are no where near as powerfull as mages or abominations.

Also, reavers can't mind-force peopel into obedince nor tear open the veil or summon demons.

Reavers have no counter except throwing a large amount of bodies against a reaver. that makes them much more powerful then a mage because templars can nullify a mages power. And the thing is an army of reavers would be a terrifying thing indeed . furthermore reavers can be created .

Gameplay balance is not an argument for anything.

Reavers aren't that powerfull or intimidating.

Despite saying that mundanes are frail they the options to become to become equal to the mages.

They don't. They arne't equals.

Its funny to see how templar supporters ignore the facts that could contradict them. Thats why they focus on mages and templars. Because any argument the templars supporters may have is made utterly  irrelevant with this simple statement: mages are vital for the protection of thedas. The end. If you treat a people that are vital to the defense of thedas so badly that they rebel then you have failed to protect Thedas as a whole.

Start brining in some real facts and then we can talk.
The type of mage supporters like you are blind and live in a dream world, lacking any perspective and a sense of practicality.

Oh - mages aren't vital to the protection of Thedas. If it lives, it can be killed.
Wether a dragon or qunari.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 28 novembre 2012 - 12:42 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

frankf43 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Looks like someone has problem seeing the difference between gameplay/encounter design and fluff.

Fluff-wise abominations can destroy entire cities.
Fluff wise, they can take out armies.
Fluff-wise, bandits don't rain from heavens.
FLuff-wise, you are not in the same cavern you visited 10 times already.

Fluff >>> gameplay

I’m sorry but all the Abominations in the game are weak and ineffectual. If they want people to believe that they are this major treat on society than make them rarer and mega bosses, make them able to tear down buildings with a single bolt of lightning or something.

And that is what they shold have done. But bad game design lead to a lot of silyl things -
like civilians that do not react to magic, tempalrs that cannot tell a mage flinging fireball next to them, and so on.

Fluff wise, both mages and (especially) abominations are more powerfull.

The biggest treat to civilisation in the game were the Arishok and Meredith both of whom had no magic and were opposed to it wholeheartedly.

Arishok? He's a HP sponge, but realisticly the qunari made a suicide attack. They had no chance of wining. none.

 

You may call it fluff but it’s the mechanics of the game.

What? No, I would never call ti that. Those two things often have NOTHING in common.

[MichaelStuart]

I always thought that the fluff was in-universe propaganda.

[frankf43]

MichaelStuart wrote...

I always thought that the fluff was in-universe propaganda.

Ok yes but this in-universe propaganda is the lies spouted by the Chantry and their Templars that mages are these powerful psycopaths hellbent on destroying the world if we don't treat them like dogs.

I for one don't and wont buy into it.
there is an old saying "You can only kick a dog so many times before they bite back!"

Modifié par frankf43, 28 novembre 2012 - 12:37 .