271 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

grimkillah wrote...
The Templars is right next to the mage, you didn't read my original post at all have you? one sign of corruption and he cuts you down.

So mages are only free if their templar chaperone is there next to them? How is that less prone to abuse (or less prone to a clever mage mind-controlling this person)?

As for mage wanting to lead the community, if the community elect him/her, then why not.

"If they'd only vote for me, I'd make it all better," says the mage, who "convinces" people who vote for her.

[Sir JK]

hhh89: Indeed, a crucial part of how the world works is that every single situation changes with time as people make alterations. Nothing remains as it was through time. Even the best intentions become twisted as the original reasons are forgotten. Even the worst ideas in time become milder as people work them to becoming tolerable.

My point was that requiring mages to police themselves will actually only work for a very short time span, and only with the mages that actually agree that it is neccessary (which will be far from a majority). In all likelyhood mages will, as a collective, resent conscription for law enforcement as much as they will resent forced isolation.

grimkillah:
Isn't the omnipresence and damocles' sword acting templars precisely what the mages primarily object to? Isn't having them standing next to the mage no change at all from the current system.

As for mages being elected, what if the mage really wants to lead but finds that the group he wishes to lead is not all that keen on the idea? What if he's opposed by someone that uses dirty tactics to get elected? What if this someone will, in the eyes of the mage, bring absolute ruin to the society? What if the only way to prevent disaster is to get elected by a crowd that will never elect the mage?

[grimkillah]

In Exile wrote...
So mages are only free if their templar chaperone is there next to them? How is that less prone to abuse (or less prone to a clever mage mind-controlling this person)?

Because they are living within the community, with mage's parents and loved ones.

In Exile wrote...
"If they'd only vote for me, I'd make it all better," says the mage, who "convinces" people who vote for her.

No more dangerous than a politician then.

[Auintus]

grimkillah wrote...

They still go to mage school to train if that is what you meant, but after school they are just like any other person. I believe it is not their power that makes them abominations, but rather their desire of power makes them attract the creature of Fade. Better mage training and real life training is the only long term way to ensure each mage can resist the temptation when opportunity raises. As for the Templars, I doubt they are overtaxed like the Grey Wardens, surely there are thousands of them if not millions, and from DA2 it appears there are just as many Templars as there are mages.

Okay. I guess I misunderstood something from your original post. That sounds about right, although I doubt there are that many templars.

[grimkillah]

Sir JK wrote...

grimkillah:
Isn't the omnipresence and damocles' sword acting templars precisely what the mages primarily object to? Isn't having them standing next to the mage no change at all from the current system.

As for mages being elected, what if the mage really wants to lead but finds that the group he wishes to lead is not all that keen on the idea? What if he's opposed by someone that uses dirty tactics to get elected? What if this someone will, in the eyes of the mage, bring absolute ruin to the society? What if the only way to prevent disaster is to get elected by a crowd that will never elect the mage?

The real problem of the current system is isolation, mages lack/denied real human contact and interaction, not the Templar overwatch.

As for your political example, you lie to get what you want, it is true in any world. Maybe the other person is into necrophilia, or underage sex, a slave owner, or elf lover; any slander you can think of, it is politics for god sake, truth isn't as important.

[upsettingshorts]

grimkillah wrote...

In Exile wrote...
"If they'd only vote for me, I'd make it all better," says the mage, who "convinces" people who vote for her.

No more dangerous than a politician then.

Nonsense.  People have free will and are capable of researching issues and arriving at their own conclusions.

Politicians are capable of misleading voters because the voters are complicit in perpetuating their ignorance.

grimkillah wrote...

The real problem of the current system is isolation, mages lack/denied real human contact and interaction, not the Templar overwatch.

No, the real problem is that mages are in fact different from mundanes in a significant and permanent way.  

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 02 décembre 2012 - 06:27 .

[Auintus]

MisterJB wrote...

That's not comparable at all. A Dreamer in Tevinter can control the minds of bandits in Kirkwall.

Dead's dead. Doesn't matter how you go. The range bit is an important difference, but dreamers are rare.

Walking Bom. Watch Morrigan use it in the "Sacred Ashes" trailer just by touching an Hurlock on the head.

Heheh forgot about that. Okay, point taken.

Connor did it and he is a small child.

With great potential and a demon behind it.

Ah. Well, that's your own agenda, isn't it?

It's not an agenda, it's the truth. Both in Thedas and in our real world, powerless minorities have had crimes against them ignored by polices that belonged to the majority. There is good reason to fear that mages would ignore the crimes of other mages much like humans ignore crimes commited by other humans against elves.

Your placement of faith is your own agenda. It's the way you choose to interpret the world. I could go off n a philisophical rant, but I'd rather not take up the space.
How many mages do you see condoning maleficar? Mages have just as much hate of maleficar as the average individual, if only because it makes all of them look bad.

Of course they are. Magic allows for things no criminal mundane could accomplish, both in hiding a crime and avoiding capture. They even have the last resort of becoming an Abomination.

But unlike mundane criminals, they have templars and mages hunting them. The whole system escalates and amounts to much the same.

If a mundane is at risk of losing a family member, he cries, he goes to doctors, he might steal to afford medicine but that's the extent of it.
If a mage is at risk, he can play Make-a-Wish foundation with a demon like Connor did or he can create  Frankestein Monster like Quentin did.
The point is that there are a numberless situations in life that mages can use to justify the use of their powers.

Few mages would condone becoming an abomination for the sake of a single life. Connor was a naive child and Quentin was insane. Children can be trained and the criminally insane will exist regardless.

I speak for the great majority of the human race.

Enough. You aren't changing my mind. Not every one is that self-serving.

See above.
Mages can't be trusted to hunt other mages, mundanes need to rely on themselves. And most mages don't use blood magic because, inside the Circle, there is a good chance it will be found.

Can't trust mages? But we can trust normals?

Nothing to give in to? Other than the entire world?
People don't need a strong reason to abuse their powers. They need a strong reason not to. For mages, that is the constant scrutiny inside the Circle.
Remove them from there and what you accomplish is exposing mages to more temptations, giving them a great leeway to abuse their powers and reduce the quickness of Templar response when they do.

No one would be treating them as monsters by their very existance. There would be no preconceptions of mages to give in to.
Enough. This topic is getting off of the structure of the Circle system. You believe people to be inherently self-serving, I believe there is good and bad in any group. These beliefs structure our idea of a Circle and clearly, neither of us is changing the other's mind.

Modifié par Auintus, 02 décembre 2012 - 06:56 .

[ShadowSplicer]

Auintus wrote...

@Fuggyt
Untrained mages are a threat by their mere existence. Mages absolutely have to be trained, and the weak must still be weeded out. I will admit, the only significant change mine proposes is allowing mages free after their Harrowing(which is the name of the ritual, I didn't choose it.)
Tracking chips, yes. My sister is an idiotic(rant over family issues) who can't even(more ranting) so yes, she definitely needs a tracking chip. More to the point, anyone would only have a reason to use these phalacteries should the mage turn criminal, so I see little reason for concern.
If their child will come back, if they would be allowed to see them, then why would any parent deny their child training that could save their life? I would submit, I would encourage my child to do so. The great change I propose is that it is only temporary, the only thing I take offense to in the current Circle. It is an improvement.
If I missed anything, remind me. It's hard to find specific complaints in your post.

My view exactly.

[Rixatrix]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
mind control

In Exile wrote...
"convinces"

MisterJB wrote...
control minds

I keep seeing this thrown around by several posters.  To the issue of its stealth, are we forgetting that spells have animations?  For example, Blood Slave?

"Mind control," in the Dragon Age universe, is no stealthy, undetectable magic as it seems to be illustrated by some.  Each spell, including those "controlling" others, have very visible casting effects.

Modifié par BlueMoonSeraphim, 02 décembre 2012 - 08:06 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Auintus wrote...

Of course they are. Magic allows for things no criminal mundane could accomplish, both in hiding a crime and avoiding capture. They even have the last resort of becoming an Abomination.

But unlike mundane criminals, they have templars and mages hunting them. The whole system escalates and amounts to much the same.

Nope.
It doens't amount to same.
You assume mages have some super-secreat way of detecting and tracking mages.

A blood mage can hide easily, a regular mage can't track him easily.
And it's still too big a cost to pay to move to a reactive system.

Few mages would condone becoming an abomination for the sake of a single life. Connor was a naive child and Quentin was insane. Children can be trained and the criminally insane will exist regardless.

People do stupid things all the time. didn't we go trough this many times before?
People are NOT perfect logic machines. People do NOT have perfect self-control.

You don't have to be either a child or ignorant or crazy to frak everyone up if you are a mage.

Can't trust mages? But we can trust normals?

Up to a point. But at least normals are more easily handled and are less dangerous.

No one would be treating them as monsters by their very existance. There would be no preconceptions of mages to give in to.

What?

Enough. This topic is getting off of the structure of the Circle system. You believe people to be inherently self-serving, I believe there is good and bad in any group. These beliefs structure our idea of a Circle and clearly, neither of us is changing the other's mind.

Your belief is naive. Not the good and bad part, but the idea tha good and bad and somehow constant.
There are MOSTLY good and MOSTLY bad people...more or less.
But even good people can do bad things nad even bad people can do good things.

The tempations a mage faces are MUCH greater than that a mundane faces.
Hell, if you had the power to convince me you are right an win this debate, dont' tell me you wouldn't be tempted as hell to use it on me each time I post. And maybe you would resist temptation the first few times. but nothing is eternal or forever. Just like the passage of time, the sand carried by the wind or the rain erodes even the strongest rock, so does willpower erode the more it is tempted.

[MisterJB]

BlueMoonSeraphim wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
mind control

In Exile wrote...
"convinces"

MisterJB wrote...
control minds

I keep seeing this thrown around by several posters.  To the issue of its stealth, are we forgetting that spells have animations?  For example, Blood Slave?

"Mind control," in the Dragon Age universe, is no stealthy, undetectable magic as it seems to be illustrated by some.  Each spell, including those "controlling" others, have very visible casting effects.

Since one of those animations involves a mage puncturing his chest with a staff, I'm going to go ahead and say that the animations are mostly for show.
Besides, the spell can be performed in privacy.

[Vandicus]

BlueMoonSeraphim wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
mind control

In Exile wrote...
"convinces"

MisterJB wrote...
control minds

I keep seeing this thrown around by several posters.  To the issue of its stealth, are we forgetting that spells have animations?  For example, Blood Slave?

"Mind control," in the Dragon Age universe, is no stealthy, undetectable magic as it seems to be illustrated by some.  Each spell, including those "controlling" others, have very visible casting effects.

Idunna doesn't have a noticeable action. The companions themselves don't even realize anything is going wrong. If we weren't the PC(with plot armor) we would've been dead.

[Rixatrix]

So then, the game's depiction of the skills is wrong, and instead opinions are the facts?

Modifié par BlueMoonSeraphim, 02 décembre 2012 - 09:19 .

[Vandicus]

BlueMoonSeraphim wrote...

So then, the game's depiction of the world is wrong, and instead opinions are the facts?

Idunna. We can look at combat mechanics, or we can look at how its treated in the story and cutscenes.

[Lotion Soronarr]

BlueMoonSeraphim wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
mind control

In Exile wrote...
"convinces"

MisterJB wrote...
control minds

I keep seeing this thrown around by several posters.  To the issue of its stealth, are we forgetting that spells have animations?  For example, Blood Slave?

"Mind control," in the Dragon Age universe, is no stealthy, undetectable magic as it seems to be illustrated by some.  Each spell, including those "controlling" others, have very visible casting effects.

It seems someone is incapable of separating the gameplay from the universe....

[MisterJB]

Vandicus wrote...

BlueMoonSeraphim wrote...

So then, the game's depiction of the world is wrong, and instead opinions are the facts?

Idunna. We can look at combat mechanics, or we can look at how its treated in the story and cutscenes.

Good point.

BlueMoonSeraphim wrote...

So then, the game's depiction of the world is wrong, and instead opinions are the facts?

Fine, explain to me how this makes sense outside of gameplay mechanics then.

[Rixatrix]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
It seems someone is incapable of separating the gameplay from the universe....

Or maybe, someone is incapable of separating the Dragon Age universe from their imagination? 

There is a difference between a source and its interpretations.  I went by the literal interpretation - what you see is what you get with magic - while some have chosen to see the animations figuratively.  It's just that, while the literal interpretation is clearly a case of res ipsa loquitur, it is much harder to prove that that animations of spells are intended to be figurative.

It's not my universe.  I accepted the skills as presented in the game.  And the Idunna example, are we really going to go by the one lone outlier, or how spells are cast 99.9% of the time in-game?

I am just surprised that so many people argue based on how they believe magic is, rather than how it is actually portrayed in the games.

Modifié par BlueMoonSeraphim, 02 décembre 2012 - 09:26 .

[Vandicus]

BlueMoonSeraphim wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
It seems someone is incapable of separating the gameplay from the universe....

Or maybe, someone is incapable of separating the Dragon Age universe from their imagination? 

There is a difference between a source and its interpretations.  I went by the literal interpretation - what you see is what you get with magic - while some have chosen to see the animations figuratively.  It's just that, while the literal interpretation is clearly a case of res ipsa loquitur, it is much harder to prove that that animations of spells are intended to be figurative.

It's not my universe.  I accepted the universe as presented in the game.  And the Idunna example, are we really going to go by the one lone outlier, or how spells are cast 99.9% of the time in-game?

I am just surprised that so many people argue based on how they believe magic is, rather than how it is actually portrayed in the games.

Segregation of story and gameplay dictates that how the story treats it trumps the gameplay mechanics. Although I don't really want to have to explain how hp bars aren't real and that our characters story wise are not stabbing the same guy through the chest dozens of times before he goes down, or that casual mode and nightmare mode are the same in-universe story. 

[Rixatrix]

MisterJB wrote...
Fine, explain to me how this makes sense outside of gameplay mechanics then.

Isn't it obvious?  You got owned by the Arishok.  The game allows you to heal yourself and revive - unless you believe those spells and potions "don't really happen" in the game either.  Then perhaps you can explain to me why spells like "Regroup" exist in Dragon Age.

Modifié par BlueMoonSeraphim, 02 décembre 2012 - 08:46 .

[Vandicus]

BlueMoonSeraphim wrote...

MisterJB wrote...
Fine, explain to me how this makes sense outside of gameplay mechanics then.

Isn't it obvious?  You got owned by the Arishok.  The game allows you to heal yourself and revive - unless you believe those spells and potions "don't really happen" in the game either.  Then perhaps you can explain to me why spells like "Regroup" exist in Dragon Age.

So, just to make sure your position is clear, you're saying that all those mages in DA2 violated the laws of magic by teleporting?

[Rixatrix]

Vandicus wrote...
Segregation of story and gameplay dictates that how the story treats it trumps the gameplay mechanics. Although I don't really want to have to explain how hp bars aren't real and that our characters story wise are not stabbing the same guy through the chest dozens of times before he goes down, or that casual mode and nightmare mode are the same in-universe story. 

Clearly the UI is for the players' benefit, but your hyperbole is at least entertaining. 

Why is a spell animation a "mechanic"?  We are not talking about the actual targetting circles or anything, but the visual of the spell.  Are all the skills not as shown in game?  (In which case, by all means, tell me how they really go in the DA universe!)

Modifié par BlueMoonSeraphim, 02 décembre 2012 - 09:27 .

[Rixatrix]

Vandicus wrote...
So, just to make sure your position is clear, you're saying that all those mages in DA2 violated the laws of magic by teleporting?

My opinion is as stated, nothing more, that animations for skills in Dragon Age actually show in the universe.

It seems, though, that you are convinced to ski down the slippery slope fallacy, so by all means, have fun.

Modifié par BlueMoonSeraphim, 02 décembre 2012 - 08:53 .

[Vandicus]

BlueMoonSeraphim wrote...

Vandicus wrote...
Segregation of story and gameplay dictates that how the story treats it trumps the gameplay mechanics. Although I don't really want to have to explain how hp bars aren't real and that our characters story wise are not stabbing the same guy through the chest dozens of times before he goes down, or that casual mode and nightmare mode are the same in-universe story. 

Clearly the UI is for the players' benefit, but your hyperbole is at least entertaining. 

It seems to me that posters pick and choose what is part of the universe and what isn't when it suits them.  Who gets to decide what is actually part of the game's universe and what isn't?  Why is a spell animation a "mechanic"?  We are not talking about the actual targetting circles or anything, but the visual of the spell.  Are all the skills not as shown in game?  (In which case, by all means, tell me how they really go in the DA universe!)

Your stance, gameplay mechanics represents how magic really works.

Mages teleport.

http://dragonage.wik..._Rules_of_Magic

Cardinal rules of magic tells us this is impossible.

But since gameplay is the true representation, all those mages in DA2 were legitimately teleporting.

If you're sincerely taking that position(rejecting story and lore in favor of game mechanics for what is canon), there's no point to thise conversation.

[MisterJB]

BlueMoonSeraphim wrote...

MisterJB wrote...
Fine, explain to me how this makes sense outside of gameplay mechanics then.

Isn't it obvious?  You got owned by the Arishok.  The game allows you to heal yourself and revive - unless you believe those spells and potions "don't really happen" in the game either.  Then perhaps you can explain to me why spells like "Regroup" exist in Dragon Age.

And since when do potions give your armor magical renegerative powers? And yes, I question how one can find the most rare resource in Thedas, lyrium, on mabaris or being sold by elves in the alienage. And what about Ser Cauthrien who you can decapitate at Howe's estate and still appear just fine in the Landsmeet?
This is not a complex question. Gameplay mechanics have no bearing in lore.

Regroup is a spell where your wounds are healed. My Hawke is a Warrior who was stabbed through the chest by the Arishok multiple times, did not take a single potion and seemed to be just fine.

Modifié par MisterJB, 02 décembre 2012 - 09:00 .