271 réponses à ce sujet

[Dave of Canada]

Xilizhra wrote...

I would do this too, but minus the Chantry.

Chantry is the only thing keeping mages free from the control of monarchs, though. Remove the Chantry and we'd have monarchs coming in to try and control the mages and whoever has the most mages wins wars against rival nations. Imagine the devastation that'd cause.

[Xilizhra]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

I would do this too, but minus the Chantry.

Chantry is the only thing keeping mages free from the control of monarchs, though. Remove the Chantry and we'd have monarchs coming in to try and control the mages and whoever has the most mages wins wars against rival nations. Imagine the devastation that'd cause.

Let the Circles possess an international body of their own strong enough to resist conscription. Let the monarchs know that their lands would be magically devastated if they tried to force the issue, and the sentinels would be on the mages' side this time.

[Dean_the_Young]

The only international body of standing and perceived legitimacy across Thedas is the Chantry*.

What you've effectively asked for is a UN army with a nuclear first-strike enforcement privilege in a world that doesn't even have a UN.


Edit: As a clarification, I don't consider the Wardens an international body for this task because the Wardens have a very narrow mandate within a specific problem, ie Darkspawn and Blights.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 01 décembre 2012 - 04:39 .

[Xilizhra]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

The only international body of standing and perceived legitimacy across Thedas is the Chantry.

What you've effectively asked for is a UN army with a nuclear first-strike enforcement privilege in a world that doesn't even have a UN.

It might not be easy for the Circle union to keep its position at first, but if it works well for long enough, people will get used to it. It'll need to benefit the various nations, true, but since none of them will want the others to have mage armies...

[Sir JK]

Thing is though, the Chantry got popular support. You cannot wage war against the chantry without your own people taking offense. But waging war against the mage oversight commitee? That's going to be the first thing every ambitious warlord will do to prove how powerful he is and there's nothing stopping him. Noone except mages are going to feel personally attacked. So making it a massive international mage movement makes them a target, not a shield. Whatever it is protecting the mages need to be supported on a popular level on virtually all levels of society. The Chantry does that. A bank could do that too. But solely mages could never do that.

[Dean_the_Young]

Xilizhra wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

The only international body of standing and perceived legitimacy across Thedas is the Chantry.

What you've effectively asked for is a UN army with a nuclear first-strike enforcement privilege in a world that doesn't even have a UN.

It might not be easy for the Circle union to keep its position at first, but if it works well for long enough, people will get used to it. It'll need to benefit the various nations, true, but since none of them will want the others to have mage armies...

...they'd be more interested in secretly building their own mage army first, to protect them from the influences applied on the mage army that's been given right to raze them to the ground.

[Xilizhra]

Thing is though, the Chantry got popular support. You cannot wage war against the chantry without your own people taking offense. But waging war against the mage oversight commitee? That's going to be the first thing every ambitious warlord will do to prove how powerful he is and there's nothing stopping him. Noone except mages are going to feel personally attacked. So making it a massive international mage movement makes them a target, not a shield. Whatever it is protecting the mages need to be supported on a popular level on virtually all levels of society. The Chantry does that. A bank could do that too. But solely mages could never do that.

Noted, but if they can win this war and defeat the templars, that may provide discouragement to many would-be ambitious warlords; if even an army trained to defeat the mages can't actually defeat the mages, how would one warlord's army do so? Beyond that, if there's an imminent qunari invasion, it could well use that as a point of influence.

...they'd be more interested in secretly building their own mage army first, to protect them from the influences applied on the mage army that's been given right to raze them to the ground.

This is why the sentinels will continue to track down mage births throughout the lands of various nations.

[Auintus]

brushyourteeth wrote...

I think... it would be quite some time before normal people could handle seeing a mage use his/her powers combatively without having a complete freakout. In fact, were I a Chantry official in charge of the Circle, I'd put some sort of emphasis in the healing school of magic into effect. Because healers are useful and much less scary than people who can shoot fire out of their fingers. And in a combat situation, we all know that mages are every bit as useful as healers as dps machines (which is something non-mages can cover, even if not quite as effectively, especially if they can stay alive a lot longer to fight with whole squads of healers to help them do it).

there's a simple psychology to it: healing = good
watching you freeze a guy until he shatters in a bloody mess (even if he's "the bad guy") = wet-pants scary

Thedas might just need to see the softer side of magic.  
(I'm not, of course, talking about what they should do if they want to overthrow the Chantry. I'm talking simply about what's possibly the best way to win the hearts and trust of the people.)

I think a bodyguard role would emphasize that mages could protect people, not just kill them.
You do have an excellent point though. Teaching Thedas to trust mages and magic will be a long, slow process. Small steps.

[Auintus]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...


You dont' care. Others do. Because others are clearly smarter.

You talk in absolutes, yet absolutes are garbage.
You apply a principle that works in our world, in a world where it wouldn't work the same.

I know it goes against your nature, but try to avoid insulting people. We are discussing possibilities of a new Circle system, one that will not be so volatile. If you have a recommendation, post it. If you're just going to insult everyone who suggests a system that you don't approve of, please leave. I think this is an interesting topic and would not like this thread locked because you are incapable of controlling yourself.

No one expects mages to be criminals, becuase you don't have to be a criminal to frak up massively. A mage doesn't have to do anything criminal and he can still end up destroying a whole village.

Hence the training. In the Circle, you can see an apprentice training. His mentor warns him of the danger of losing control, which, ironically, causes him to lose control. Learning control is part of the standard cirriculum of the Circle.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Xilizhra wrote..

...they'd be more interested in secretly building their own mage army first, to protect them from the influences applied on the mage army that's been given right to raze them to the ground.

This is why the sentinels will continue to track down mage births throughout the lands of various nations.

Aaand then the king of a country kicks your sentinels out and tells you you cannot have the mages there. What then?

[Lotion Soronarr]

Auintus wrote...

I know it goes against your nature, but try to avoid insulting people.

I call em as I see them.
If people dont' want their ideas called stupid, then they should think them trough better before they post.

No one expects mages to be criminals, becuase you don't have to be a criminal to frak up massively. A mage doesn't have to do anything criminal and he can still end up destroying a whole village.

Hence the training. In the Circle, you can see an apprentice training. His mentor warns him of the danger of losing control, which, ironically, causes him to lose control. Learning control is part of the standard cirriculum of the Circle.

And - as we said a bajjilion times before - the training is not NEARLY enough.

[TCBC_Freak]

There is also the problem of resentment. One of the reasons most people in Thedas don't like mages is because mages "have it easy" from the average person's point of view. Let me explain.

The average person is probably a farmer. He works for months doing hard labor in the hopes that after paying his bann a portion of his crop he has enough left to feed his family for the rest of the year. Rats in his granary or a bad harvest could kill his family. He is out in the open exposed to the elements, a bad winter frost would be his doom, and things like raiders and darkspawn are a constant treat to him. Not only those threat but in some nations his family is subject to the lords whims. He has a lovely daughter, well he prays that a knight doesn't happen by and take a liking to her or she'll be used and cast aside and if he does anything to stand up for her, he dies and his land will be seized. He hopes that his family can advance one day but for now he and his children can't read or write, they are blessed if they even have access to a priest or the like who can do those things and is willing to help them with keeping their books and setting up a will and such. He has to hope that if he is killed his family is taken in by another family member or they'll starve to death.

A mage, meanwhile, (from his point of view) gets to live in a big tower, with warm food and soft beds. Which his tax in no small part provides for. They get to learn to read and write and are protected from the elements and the bad people that are a treat to his family. And all they do is sit in their tower and read and play games and "study magic." Then he has to hear about these golden children revolting because their life is so hard. He sees them with power in their magic, power his family will never have and yet he hears them complain because one mage was beaten or abused. Things his family faces every day from the nobility that is supposed to protect him the same as the Templar that are supposed to protect mages. He sees people who have the best things in life given to them for no reason other than the fact that they were born with a power he can never have and then they have the gal to "revolt" against it and unleash demons that could come and kill his family? To give it all up because life is hard in the Circle? His life is hard, he'll probably be dead before his hair has a chance to turn grey, his children are lucky to survivor the winter, but the mages in their posh tower have it hard?

Now, I'm not saying he's right. Nor am I saying he has the right information, clearly his view is limited. But is it any wonder the mages are having trouble finding support in the majority of people?

Modifié par TCBC_Freak, 01 décembre 2012 - 05:56 .

[Auintus]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

I call em as I see them.
If people dont' want their ideas called stupid, then they should think them trough better before they post.

And if I disagree? Your judgement of an idea is not right by default. It's called an opinion, and you should keep it to yourself if it isn't going to be productive.

Hence the training. In the Circle, you can see an apprentice training. His mentor warns him of the danger of losing control, which, ironically, causes him to lose control. Learning control is part of the standard cirriculum of the Circle.

And - as we said a bajjilion times before - the training is not NEARLY enough.

As you said a bajjilion times, it's not enough. Again, I disagree. And again, your opinion should be productive or silent.

[Auintus]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Aaand then the king of a country kicks your sentinels out and tells you you cannot have the mages there. What then?

What happened after King Alistair freed the Circle of Magi in Fereldan?
The Chantry really didn't give a pile of nug droppings.
I imagine you'd just let them deal with their mage-related trouble themselves.

Y'see, now that is a productive criticism. I knew you could do it.

Modifié par Auintus, 01 décembre 2012 - 06:09 .

[Herr Uhl]

Auintus wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Aaand then the king of a country kicks your sentinels out and tells you you cannot have the mages there. What then?

What happened after King Alistair freed the Circle of Magi in Fereldan?
The Chantry really didn't give a pile of nug droppings.
I imagine you'd just let them deal with their mage-related trouble themselves.

So imagine that King Alistair freed the circle by conscripting them into an army that he uses to attack Orlais. If anything, your example is only pointing out the innate problem with sentinels.

[Xilizhra]

Now, I'm not saying he's right. Nor am I saying he has the right information, clearly his view is limited. But is it any wonder the mages are having trouble finding support in the majority of people?

I really don't think they are having that much trouble. Certainly, if the populace as a whole was arrayed against them, they'd lose. Because they haven't yet, I suspect the templars either made themselves look bad or the mages got to look good. And for people who won't change their minds? Well, if they become combatants, they'll be defeated; otherwise, they're irrelevant.

[Auintus]

Herr Uhl wrote...

So imagine that King Alistair freed the circle by conscripting them into an army that he uses to attack Orlais. If anything, your example is only pointing out the innate problem with sentinels.

What?
Soronnar suggested that the new mage-policing/educating faction is kicked out of the country. They do not control mages, merely ensure that they are educated beyond being an unacceptable threat. So I suppose the sentinel's situation would be more akin to the Wardens being ejected from Fereldan. The country rejects a group created and trained for dealing with this problem for, what, spite? Leave them to their own devices. If mages want training, they'll have to flee the country. More trouble for the country and its mages than for the sentinels.

...Why would any intelligent individual conscript untrained mages?

[Herr Uhl]

Auintus wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...

So imagine that King Alistair freed the circle by conscripting them into an army that he uses to attack Orlais. If anything, your example is only pointing out the innate problem with sentinels.

What?
Soronnar suggested that the new mage-policing/educating faction is kicked out of the country. They do not control mages, merely ensure that they are educated beyond being an unacceptable threat. So I suppose the sentinel's situation would be more akin to the Wardens being ejected from Fereldan. The country rejects a group created and trained for dealing with this problem for, what, spite? Leave them to their own devices. If mages want training, they'll have to flee the country. More trouble for the country and its mages than for the sentinels.

...Why would any intelligent individual conscript untrained mages?

The country trains their mages in the army. For killing people. Similar to how they train regular soldiers. The potential benefits does in this case outweigh the negatives of not having sentinels.

The sentinels would get trouble keeping the same grip on mages as the chantry now enjoys because they'd not be backed up by dogma.

[Iakus]

 To find an alternative to the Circles, I'd say we'd have to look at how other societies del with mages.  Unfortunately at this point the only ones we know much about are Tevinter, the qunari, and the dalish.

The Tevinter Imperium is and was esentially the dark opposite of the Circles.  Not a viable option

The qunari treat their mages worse than the most fanatical templar.  They consider mages to be things

Magic is dyng out among the dalish, their problems with magic are generally different than that of the humans

So at this pont we may have to look further back, to pre Chantry, pre Tevinter societies and examine how mages interacted with their people.  Were there ever human societies were mages were just people, neither dominators nor dominated?  Perhaps we should study the elven homeland of Arlethan as well.

I'm also reminded of the tv series Heroes:  Although it ended up corrupted, the Company was designed to monitor "specials" and to step in if they abused their powers.  They functioned in teams, one mundane human and one with a power: "One of us, one of them" as they put it.  Perhaps trusting mages to help police other mages, with templar/mundane backup would be a step in getting people to trust mages in general.

In addition, I think finding a way to strengthen the Veil will be required as well.  To lessen/eliminate the risk of demonic possession.  One abomination could easily undo years of rbinging people together, after all. 

[MisterJB]

TCBC_Freak wrote...

There is also the problem of resentment. One of the reasons most people in Thedas don't like mages is because mages "have it easy" from the average person's point of view. Let me explain.

The average person is probably a farmer. He works for months doing hard labor in the hopes that after paying his bann a portion of his crop he has enough left to feed his family for the rest of the year. Rats in his granary or a bad harvest could kill his family. He is out in the open exposed to the elements, a bad winter frost would be his doom, and things like raiders and darkspawn are a constant treat to him. Not only those threat but in some nations his family is subject to the lords whims. He has a lovely daughter, well he prays that a knight doesn't happen by and take a liking to her or she'll be used and cast aside and if he does anything to stand up for her, he dies and his land will be seized. He hopes that his family can advance one day but for now he and his children can't read or write, they are blessed if they even have access to a priest or the like who can do those things and is willing to help them with keeping their books and setting up a will and such. He has to hope that if he is killed his family is taken in by another family member or they'll starve to death.

A mage, meanwhile, (from his point of view) gets to live in a big tower, with warm food and soft beds. Which his tax in no small part provides for. They get to learn to read and write and are protected from the elements and the bad people that are a treat to his family. And all they do is sit in their tower and read and play games and "study magic." Then he has to hear about these golden children revolting because their life is so hard. He sees them with power in their magic, power his family will never have and yet he hears them complain because one mage was beaten or abused. Things his family faces every day from the nobility that is supposed to protect him the same as the Templar that are supposed to protect mages. He sees people who have the best things in life given to them for no reason other than the fact that they were born with a power he can never have and then they have the gal to "revolt" against it and unleash demons that could come and kill his family? To give it all up because life is hard in the Circle? His life is hard, he'll probably be dead before his hair has a chance to turn grey, his children are lucky to survivor the winter, but the mages in their posh tower have it hard?

Now, I'm not saying he's right. Nor am I saying he has the right information, clearly his view is limited. But is it any wonder the mages are having trouble finding support in the majority of people?

You know, I like you.

[Rixatrix]

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

You dont' care. Others do. Because others are clearly smarter.

You talk in absolutes, yet absolutes are garbage.
You apply a principle that works in our world, in a world where it wouldn't work the same.[/quote]

Ad hominem. Please stop being rude.  Here is a heart, put it in your chest: <3

[quote]
It's not tyrany is REASONABLE SEGREGATION.
No one excpets mages to be criminals, becuase you don't have to be a criminal to frak up massively. A mage doesn't have to do anything criminal and he can still end up destroying a whole village.[/quote]

You really want to argue for segregation?  Before you cry, "it's different," are you not suggesting setting people apart by their natural qualities?

[quote]Rojahar wrote...

Dave's point is that very few people have rights in Thedas. It's not like Dragon Age is a setting where every peasant can just go to an attorney when they've been wronged, or have healthcare, or live in a tower where they get an education and food, or even have ANY education or food to survive at all. Even most non-mage humans seem to lack basic "rights" and "freedom". The average person in Ferelden probably slaves away on a farm owned by some taeryn, hoping to do enough just to survive. Pretty human commoner woman in Orlais? Some Chivalier can do whatever he wants to you. The majority in Kirkwall seemed to be in the slums starving to death. Unfortunately, those muggles don't have the ability to blow things up or control minds. If they're lucky, they might have food most of the time and maybe if they're really lucky the ability to read/write or strength/training for combat.
[/quote]

I agree with this, the state of things now.  Was this not a discussion of possible "alternatives" and "should be's"?  I would like to see the general state of society improve in Thedas.

[quote]MisterJB wrote...

[quote]BlueMoonSeraphim wrote...
You are missing my point.

The concept that only actions, not natural qualities, should be punished is universal.  I don't care if the human being has magic, laser eyes, firecracker hands, or anything else - unless that individual has committed an offense for which the law demands a punishment, I refuse to consider taking away their rights as human beings.  That is what we are dealing with when talking about mages.  Human beings.

When any governing body starts expecting a group of individuals to be criminals and restricting their rights as a consequence, it should come as no surprise that that group rebels against such tyranny.  My opinion on that stands whether we are dealing with police in poor neighborhoods or templars in the Circle of Magi.[/quote]

My rights are restricted. I can't buy a firearm in my country or drive on the opposite side of the road whenever I please. The rulers who forbid me from doing this did not take into account my morality not did they expect me to be a criminal. They considered the possibility of me being a criminal or simply the possibility of me not knowing how to drive and restricted my freedoms in order to ensure that I am less of a threat to others. Then they estricted the freedoms of all other civillians in the same way because they too are capable of pulling a trigger or crashing into someone.[/quote]

Rights vary from country to country, but are you really trying to suggest that you have a right to drive on the wrong side of the street?  I believe others' right to life trumps that, if you do.  Also, trying to compare magic to a gun is a flawed analogy.  It is a part of you, not like a gun.  It would be more like being a master of martial arts.  Do they round up the black belts in your country and lock them up in a tower?  Even if they did, it wouldn't prove that such an action was ethically sound.

[quote]The same logic applies to the DA world. We do not expect mages to be criminals. We consider the possibility that they might be and restrict their freedoms in order to ensure they're less of a threat to others. Their freedoms are more restricted simply because they have the advantage of magic that other people don't.[/quote]

So you consider the mere possibility that mages might become criminals and restrict their freedoms as a consequence?  That's even worse.  They're not even expected to commit crimes but are punished nonetheless.

[quote]True, in practice, there's little real equality in our world. But, even if the practice fails, the theory makes sense in our world. The difference between people of our world are, mostly, superficial.
Neither the theory nor the practice apply in Thedas.
I am of the opinion things that are equal must be treated equally. Things that are not, such as mages and mundanes, it would be irresponsible to pretend they are equal and expose mundanes to the threat of magic.[/quote]

[emphasis added]

Unless you are advocating socialism... Sorry, but I disagree.

The latter part of your post, "things that are equal must be treated equally" would destroy the concept of equality in our world if applied.  "Equal" among beings with distinct characteristics is very subjective.  That is why, when I see a human with magical abilities and one who does not, they are still both people to me, but with different natural qualities, and why to you, one is no longer equal to the other in the eyes of the government.

[quote]Dave of Canada wrote...
Whether you want to believe it or not, no-one has rights. The only rights outside of Circles is the right to be abused like everyone else as the concept of "rights" hasn't been developed yet. This isn't an emotional response, it's straight fact.

Mages cannot bear emotional turmoil and Thedas is full of it, at least the Templar answer to a higher authority and mages never suffer the commoner's fate while being given an education, being provided with food, having warm beds and healing magic at their disposal.[/quote]

To your first point, I do not dispute the current state of affairs in Thedas.  Here, we are discussing alternatives and should be's.

To your second point, the whole should not be treated the same based on a few individuals.  It is ideas like that which lead to genocide.  And you make being a mage sound like a vacation.   I like your version, I'd go there, but the sad fact from the actual canon is that mages are mistreated - raped and abused by templars, threatened constantly with tranquility (and even without cause), unable to have and raise children, falsely imprisoned for the rest of their lives, etc.  That is not a life I would want to live.

[quote]
[quote]The entire assumption that mages need to do wrong to be chased is silly, they'd get away by then--you can't "fingerprint" a dangerous apostate / blood mage.[/quote][/quote]
My first point was that taking phylacteries only from mages discriminates against them unfairly, when they have committed no wrong.  Saying it is "silly" to need a reason for the templars to pursue someone does not make it so.  Please explain why mages should be chased down for no reason?

[quote]
[quote]An investigative unit examines a body and an alleged scene of a crime and draws conclusions, which may or may not be proven in court.  Both sides engage in a battle of experts who give their expert opinions.[/quote]

Would work if there was possibly a way to identify if the mage was responsible, though there's not. A man is murdered in cold blood and his wife was blamed, she claims blood magic--how do you prove her innocence? You don't, nobility and guardsmen don't care and they'd simply imprison/execute the woman. Perhaps abuse her while she's in prison too because why the hell not.

Hell, they wouldn't even be able to prove her innocence even if they bothered to.[/quote]

An anecdote does not a prove a point.  However, the investigative unit would look for evidence that supports or refutes her claims - does the scene suggest blood magic?  Can she describe the mage who performed blood magic on her?  Can s/he be found?  Are there witnesses?  There should be a judicial system in place to hear her try to prove her version of the events beyond a reasonable doubt (or whatever standard would apply).  It may not be perfect, but it is better than the current situation (which, by the way, regardless of whether the Circle changes, this could still happen, except with "apostates").

[quote]
[quote]No.  The Circle is governed by and monitored by the Chantry.  Thus, the Chantry is in control of the Circle.[/quote]

The Circle was created by the mages alongside the Chantry, they were and always had the right to leave the Chantry and held two public gatherings to discuss whether or not they wanted to leave. Votes in the original meeting fell in favor with the Chantry and the second one fell in favor of war by one vote.

They're monitored but by no means governed.[/quote]

The Circle leaving the Chantry?  In your words, "that'd go over well." 

I cited a source for my argument - where is your source showing that the Circle is "by no means governed" by the Chantry?

[quote]
[quote]Knowing that it is horrific for the person being made Tranquil, how can this rape of a human's emotions be considered acceptable?[/quote]

We've only seen two people be cured of tranquility and both were done against their will, we've yet to see the thoughts of those who desired to be tranquil and even then--you'd claim executing someone on a claim which most tranquil don't even experience is more humane? They only realize the horror when cured.[/quote]

Let me see if I am understanding correctly: "It's okay to commit atrocities such as lobotomizing individuals for crimes, or sometimes no reason at all, since they won't know how horrible it is once it is done; although, if by some miracle, they could be whole once more, they'd tell you it was horrific.  Still okay."

If you believe this, we are at an impasse.

[quote]
[quote]I never said it wouldn't cause problems.  However, should rights be taken from a minority because they may "cause problems"?[/quote]

Yes, most nations do so in real life too--I can't purchase a handgun because they'd rather be safe than sorry.

The difference being in Thedas, "human rights" don't exist and a commoner can never be on par with a mage. The fact that they didn't slaughter every mage yet is a surprise.[/quote]

Because most nations in real life do does not mean it is ethically sound.  My country had periods of restricting minorities' rights, which they are still attempting to correct, for example.  The idea that certain minorities shouldn't have equal rights because it would be problematic was the fuel behind slavery and keeping women in the home.  For the white man, those situations would have been fine and dandy - unless he had a conscience.

[quote]
[quote]In my opinion, blood magic, as long as it does not cause injury or deprive others of their rights, should not be punishable until it does.[/quote]

The sheer fact that blood magic requires blood to power it should indicate that there's no way to use it without injury.

... and it's practically impossible to track down who's abusing blood magic or not until demons come out of the woodworks. Wouldn't it be nice to not know when someone is themselves and someone is mind controlled by a blood mage?[/quote]

Is self-injury punishable in Thedas?  Or giving blood willingly?  No?  Then there are cases in which blood magic does not cause legal injury.

And, blood magic still has spell animations.  Unless you are saying that the game does not accurately depict the world of Thedas?

[quote]

[quote]This presuppposes that the Tranquil are the only organ of the Circle capable of earning an income.[/quote]

They're complete income straight into the Circle's coffers, they require little maintenance and don't have much desire to purchase goods which they don't require to survive.  The current system has all of this (except the dwarves but I don't understand why you cling to that point, they'd most likely rather work on their own), mages just keep their profits as Tranquil sustain them. Cutting Tranquil would harm the mage's income and surely would never be enough to compensate for the complete lack of Tranquil.[/quote]

Slaves were complete income into plantation owners' coffers.  Just sayin.  Not so pretty when you illustrate that concept in our world.

[quote]Hell, Asunder goes on to say Tranquil are more useless to demons than inanimate objects. Tranquility does work as it takes a desirable target and makes them useless to demons.[/quote]

Exact quote?  They can still be possessed.  In a world with magic, where is the research to prevent demonic possession without the rite of tranquility?  Ah yes, when the Tranquil are such money makers, "why fix something that ain't broke"?

[quote]
[quote]What makes him dangerous?  Actions make him dangerous.  If a person has committed a crime, then yes, he may need to be imprisoned.  However, a person being who s/he is from birth should never be a "crime."  There is a difference between punishing actions and qualities.[/quote]

A plague victim has no rights, they're locked away in plague houses or into plague quarters and left to fend for themselves--infected or not. Same thing with any prison camps for a group of people which the ruling body fears might cause harm--they'd rather imprison anyone dangerous than leave the innocent to frolic.

The fact was, we as a society had deemed the risk was too high over any concept of "innocence".

Although a flawed comparison, mages are similar. They're all afflicted by magic and whether they want to or not, they may become dangerous to everyone around them (by virtue of possession) and when mages go bad, it only gets worse all around (Kirkwall, Ferelden Circle, Redcliffe, Denerim mage cult, etc).[/quote]

You said it yourself, these are flawed comparisons.  Natural inborn qualities, such as magic, do not compare to contracting a disease or committing a crime.  Magic itself is not a disease, but susceptibility - demonic possession is the disease.  Although you quarantine individuals with disease, you do not quarantine everyone susceptible to it.

[quote]
[quote]Yes, Thedas is a fantasy world, but that does not mean we cannot apply concepts from reality in analysis of 
its events.[/quote]

You can all you want but far too many people apply modern ethics and code to try as reasoning to rebuilding the Circle and intend to do so by using modern ideas. An impossible and silly task as no-one on Thedas thinks like our society does.[quote]

You know that, do you?  Men and women fight side by side on the battlefield and no one bats an eye at bisexuality and homosexuality, but "no one on Thedas thinks like our society does"?  You need to set aside the misdirecting concept of "modernity," which has no bearing on validity, and start evaluating concepts on their merits.

[quote]
[quote]Moreover, need I remind you that the world of Thedas is a creation by people from our world, who may hold to a modern code of ethics?[/quote]

But their creations do not, that's the point. A writer must abandon their ethics and beliefs if they desire to create a dilemma as they must understand the alternate point of view. [/quote]

[emphasis added]

I vehemently disagree with this.  I believe many authors use their work to champion their ideas.  Perhaps you should ask David Gaider if none of his ethics and beliefs are present in his work in any capacity.

[quote]
[quote]Perhaps you would care to explain why you believe punishing individuals for their natural qualities is ethically sound?
[/quote]

The needs of the many over the needs of the few.
[/quote]

Ah yes, Spock.  The meter stick of ethics.

This profound concept, the needs of the many outweighing the needs of the few, was exemplified by people like Nicolae Ceausescu.  Didn't that work out well?

Greater minds, like John Adams, John Stuart Mill, Alexis de Tocqueville, and others have spoken out against the tyranny of the majority.

I think we will have to agree to disagree.

Modifié par BlueMoonSeraphim, 01 décembre 2012 - 08:55 .

[Rixatrix]

brushyourteeth wrote...

This thread is quickly derailing from "The Circle is imperfect. What would be a better idea?" back into the much argued-over, sightly off-topic and frankly, less interesting argument between a very few forumites about whether mages or templars are more wrong.

I think... for the purpose of this discussion, it's more helpful to accept the notion that the templar order has been wrong, and how can fixing it essentially fix mages?

Just my two cents. I'd hate to see this genuinely intelligent discussion slowly get dragged back into the same old arguments. :/

I agree.  It seemed so to me... A thread entitled "Alternative Circle Systems" asks that you accept, for the sake of argument, that there need be alternatives.

Xilizhra wrote...
Let the Circles possess an international body of their own strong enough to resist conscription. Let the monarchs know that their lands would be magically devastated if they tried to force the issue, and the sentinels would be on the mages' side this time.

I like this idea, making the Circle of Magi its own international organization, like the Chantry.  Although I feel like they should establish themselves by treaty peacefully, via carrots, rather than by sticks.

And, maybe, they could create their own policing organ to capture mages committing crimes.  Haha, sort of like the aurors in Harry Potter! 

Auintus wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
snip

I know it goes against your nature, but try to avoid insulting people. We are discussing possibilities of a new Circle system, one that will not be so volatile. If you have a recommendation, post it. If you're just going to insult everyone who suggests a system that you don't approve of, please leave. I think this is an interesting topic and would not like this thread locked because you are incapable of controlling yourself.

Thank you.  I think if everyone in the thread treated others as they would like to be treated and argued concepts rather than each other, it'd go a lot more smoothly.

Modifié par BlueMoonSeraphim, 01 décembre 2012 - 09:05 .

[Herr Uhl]

BlueMoonSeraphim wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
Let the Circles possess an international body of their own strong enough to resist conscription. Let the monarchs know that their lands would be magically devastated if they tried to force the issue, and the sentinels would be on the mages' side this time.

I like this idea, making the Circle of Magi its own international organization, like the Chantry.  Although I feel like they should establish themselves by treaty peacefully, via carrots, rather than by sticks.

Why would a monarch accept an unaffiliated organization to take charge of their subjects without any sticks? That is the perk of being a religious organization, you get popular support.

[Rixatrix]

Herr Uhl wrote...

BlueMoonSeraphim wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
Let the Circles possess an international body of their own strong enough to resist conscription. Let the monarchs know that their lands would be magically devastated if they tried to force the issue, and the sentinels would be on the mages' side this time.

I like this idea, making the Circle of Magi its own international organization, like the Chantry.  Although I feel like they should establish themselves by treaty peacefully, via carrots, rather than by sticks.

Why would a monarch accept an unaffiliated organization to take charge of their subjects without any sticks? That is the perk of being a religious organization, you get popular support.

Perhaps if they had humanitarian goals, took care of some of the country's problems, and maybe paid a little rent for their keep. 

[MisterJB]

BlueMoonSeraphim wrote...
Rights vary from country to country, but are you really trying to suggest that you have a right to drive on the wrong side of the street?  I believe others' right to life trumps that, if you do.  Also, trying to compare magic to a gun is a flawed analogy.  It is a part of you, not like a gun.  It would be more like being a master of martial arts.  Do they round up the black belts in your country and lock them up in a tower?  Even if they did, it wouldn't prove that such an action was ethically sound.

The destruction a black belt is capable of is much smaller to what a mage can do. Not to mention less insidious.
The right to life of mundanes trumps the right of freedom of mages. The fact that magic is born with them is irrelevant. It makes what needs to be done more tragic but no less necessary.
Mages are living nuclear bombs and you can imagine the state any government would be if they suddenly lost one. And you're suggesting we let nuclear bombs walk around freely. At least our nuclear bombs are not at risk of exploding if they get depressed.

So you consider the mere possibility that mages might become criminals and restrict their freedoms as a consequence?  That's even worse.  They're not even expected to commit crimes but are punished nonetheless.

it's not punishment, it's restricting their freedoms just like my freedoms are restricted. My right of freedom dictates i can go wherever I please inside my country. However, I also am not allowed to drive on the wrong side of the road because that endagers others.
"I'm an extremely good driver, I won't hit anyone trust me." Would you allow me to drive on the opposite side of the road after I said this? Somehow, I doubt it.
Then why do you expect me to accept that we should trust mages will never abuse their powers or cause a magical accident?