587 réponses à ce sujet

[dragonflight288]

Bleachrude wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Bleachrude wrote...

I wouldn't use the Dalish as a good example of "mages can work with non-mages"

I'm not sure why more people aren't troubled with the fact that to become the leader of a dalish tribe, you have to be a mage.

Not sure why THIS the dalish get a pass on this....

Because the Elves have historically had Mages ruling over them with no ill effects. Arlathan's Elves were supposedly all Mages and the Dales was ruled by a council of Mages. Neither one suffered from Mages ruling over them in terms of internal affairs. External affairs eventually saw the two nations fall, which has nothing to do with how Mages acted within the nations.

It's more custom and how they view magic -- as a gift that should truly serve the best interests of the Elves. Tevinter claims to view magic the same way, saying it should serve the best interests of the people and they feel politics best serves that end.

And while that interpretation isn't necessarily wrong, Tevinter corrupted it and used it to justify the return of the Imperium's old ways.

And if you believe that a non-mage should be the leader of a community...What then?

Arlathan is a bad example since as you point out, everyone was a mage, thus you can discount it as an example of mages and non-mages working together.

So basically, what you're saying, "just because someone's a mage, they deserve to be leader?"

How is this any different from how Chantry sees mages?

Etheral wasn't saying that because someone is a mage, they deserve to be the leader. He was saying that it's the Dalish custom to have their mages be their guides as keeper, and we know that clans have more than two mages. A Keeper, a First, and a few others. We know this from Origins where Lanaya said she had to compete with other mages in the clan to be Zathrian's first. And there are more than two mages if you side with the werewolves.

Those other mages likely aren't in leadership positions at all. Chances are, considering the tribal nature of the Dalish, that non-mages guide these other mages who aren't Keeper and First just as much as the Keeper guides the clan.

And the Dalish aren't the only ones as a society with free mages. We have the Rivaini seers, who act as advisors, but not leaders (based on what I remember from the codex) who willingly allow themselves to be possessed by spirits...doesn't mean demons, and that the common man who wasn't a mage believed so strongly in their customs that they violently resisted the Chantry when they tried taking away their seers. The Chasind have Shamans, but I don't know enough about them to talk about their command structure and who guides their tribes, so I'll just leave that point as a way to say that there are multiple societies that have free mages and don't have abomination problems.

[TEWR]

Those other mages likely aren't in leadership positions at all

Some are. The halla caretaker, for instance, is a Mage. Sarel and Varathorn aren't Mages, though.

The Chasind have Shamans, but I don't know enough about them to talk about their command structure and who guides their tribes, so I'll just leave that point as a way to say that there are multiple societies that have free mages and don't have abomination problems.

True, not much is known about the Chasind. We know that they celebrate the tale of Flemeth and that she inspires fear and awe and respect amongst them. We also know that Prosper's guard Cahir knew how to make mages go insane, though whether that's indicative of something all Chasind know or just something he picked up is unknown.

It should also be known that the Chasind in general can sense the Blight, much like Zathrian could sense the Blight's northward march. If you'll recall the Chasind man yelling in Lothering, he talks of how the Warden "bears their evil stench" but he was not a Ghoul himself.

We know a bit about the Avvars as well.

[Bleachrude]

dragonflight288 wrote...



Those other mages likely aren't in leadership positions at all. Chances are, considering the tribal nature of the Dalish, that non-mages guide these other mages who aren't Keeper and First just as much as the Keeper guides the clan.

That is a non-sensical statement...how exactly can you guide someone if you're not the leader?

Furthermore, you still avoided my question...WHY can't a non-mage elf lead the tribe..how is this not a case of mage supremacy...the only difference is that the non-magical elves seem fine with it

[Plaintiff]

Bleachrude wrote...

That is a non-sensical statement...how exactly can you guide someone if you're not the leader?

"How can you give people advice and not be the boss of them?"

Seems pretty easy to me. Just saying.

[dragonflight288]

Bleachrude wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...



Those other mages likely aren't in leadership positions at all. Chances are, considering the tribal nature of the Dalish, that non-mages guide these other mages who aren't Keeper and First just as much as the Keeper guides the clan.

That is a non-sensical statement...how exactly can you guide someone if you're not the leader?

Furthermore, you still avoided my question...WHY can't a non-mage elf lead the tribe..how is this not a case of mage supremacy...the only difference is that the non-magical elves seem fine with it

I was referring to the mages who aren't Keepers or firsts.

EDIT: I said in my original post, supporting Etheral, that it's Dalish Custom. I don't have answers, but they are a working society that isn't completely overrun with blood mages and abominations where mages and non-mages work together.

And it's possible to guide someone without leading them. You offer advice and guidance, but you don't lead them into the charge, don't give orders. And if people respect you, your advice has influence and most people will follow it, if most people in the tribe like and respect you.

Modifié par dragonflight288, 08 mars 2013 - 06:43 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

dragonflight288 wrote...

And the Dalish aren't the only ones as a society with free mages. We have the Rivaini seers, who act as advisors, but not leaders (based on what I remember from the codex) who willingly allow themselves to be possessed by spirits...doesn't mean demons, and that the common man who wasn't a mage believed so strongly in their customs that they violently resisted the Chantry when they tried taking away their seers. The Chasind have Shamans, but I don't know enough about them to talk about their command structure and who guides their tribes, so I'll just leave that point as a way to say that there are multiple societies that have free mages and don't have abomination problems.

You mean who you THINK have no abomination problems.

Also, most mages in Rivaini are also locked ina Circle. The Seers are hedge-mages like Morrigan.

[erilben]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Also, most mages in Rivaini are also locked ina Circle. The Seers are hedge-mages like Morrigan.

The World of Thedas book says the Rivaini Circle was a facade to appease the Chantry. The mages were free to see their families and female mages were trainted to be seers. In 9:40, the Chantry denounced these mages as apostates and Annulled their Circle.

Modifié par erilben, 10 mars 2013 - 06:25 .

[TEWR]

erilben wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Also, most mages in Rivaini are also locked ina Circle. The Seers are hedge-mages like Morrigan.

The World of Thedas book says the Rivaini Circle was a facade to appease the Chantry. The mages were free to see their families and female mages were trainted to be seers. In 9:40, the Chantry denounced these mages as apostates and Annulled their Circle.

Well that's pleasant...

[IanPolaris]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

erilben wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Also, most mages in Rivaini are also locked ina Circle. The Seers are hedge-mages like Morrigan.

The World of Thedas book says the Rivaini Circle was a facade to appease the Chantry. The mages were free to see their families and female mages were trainted to be seers. In 9:40, the Chantry denounced these mages as apostates and Annulled their Circle.

Well that's pleasant...

Indeed, bad enough that the Chantry put Meredith in charge of a circle and let Elthina be a Grand Cleric as long as she was.  Now the Chantry is out and out slaughtering entire circles just because they don't agree with the way that circle does things (essentially religious politics) (which is NOT what a RoA is suposed to entail).

-Polaris

[Plaintiff]

IanPolaris wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

erilben wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Also, most mages in Rivaini are also locked ina Circle. The Seers are hedge-mages like Morrigan.

The World of Thedas book says the Rivaini Circle was a facade to appease the Chantry. The mages were free to see their families and female mages were trainted to be seers. In 9:40, the Chantry denounced these mages as apostates and Annulled their Circle.

Well that's pleasant...

Indeed, bad enough that the Chantry put Meredith in charge of a circle and let Elthina be a Grand Cleric as long as she was.  Now the Chantry is out and out slaughtering entire circles just because they don't agree with the way that circle does things (essentially religious politics) (which is NOT what a RoA is suposed to entail).

-Polaris

Well, who knows what a Rite of Annulment is supposed to entail? The only information we have is that a circle can be annulled if it's ruled "iredeemable" by the presiding Grand Cleric.

As far as we know, there's no criteria by which the "iredeemability" of a Circle is defined. At this stage it looks like a Grand Cleric can choose to annul a circle for literally any reason at all.

Tripped over the hem of your own robe? A mage probably did it! Annul the Circle!

Modifié par Plaintiff, 11 mars 2013 - 06:13 .

[IanPolaris]

Plaintiff wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

erilben wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Also, most mages in Rivaini are also locked ina Circle. The Seers are hedge-mages like Morrigan.

The World of Thedas book says the Rivaini Circle was a facade to appease the Chantry. The mages were free to see their families and female mages were trainted to be seers. In 9:40, the Chantry denounced these mages as apostates and Annulled their Circle.

Well that's pleasant...

Indeed, bad enough that the Chantry put Meredith in charge of a circle and let Elthina be a Grand Cleric as long as she was.  Now the Chantry is out and out slaughtering entire circles just because they don't agree with the way that circle does things (essentially religious politics) (which is NOT what a RoA is suposed to entail).

-Polaris

Well, who knows what a Rite of Annulment is supposed to entail? The only information we have is that a circle can be annulled if it's ruled "iredeemable" by the presiding Grand Cleric.

As far as we know, there's no criteria by which the "iredeemability" of a Circle is defined. At this stage it looks like a Grand Cleric can choose to annul a circle for literally any reason at all.

Tripped over the hem of your own robe? A mage probably did it! Annul the Circle!

That's exactly the point.  The Chantry justifies the circles as a matter of public protection, and the RoA as a regrettable "all else fails" necessity, yet we now learn that the Chantry will annul a circle basically for a political/religious disagreement.

Nice.

How does anyone support the Chantry given this?

-Polaris

[Plaintiff]

IanPolaris wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

erilben wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Also, most mages in Rivaini are also locked ina Circle. The Seers are hedge-mages like Morrigan.

The World of Thedas book says the Rivaini Circle was a facade to appease the Chantry. The mages were free to see their families and female mages were trainted to be seers. In 9:40, the Chantry denounced these mages as apostates and Annulled their Circle.

Well that's pleasant...

Indeed, bad enough that the Chantry put Meredith in charge of a circle and let Elthina be a Grand Cleric as long as she was.  Now the Chantry is out and out slaughtering entire circles just because they don't agree with the way that circle does things (essentially religious politics) (which is NOT what a RoA is suposed to entail).

-Polaris

Well, who knows what a Rite of Annulment is supposed to entail? The only information we have is that a circle can be annulled if it's ruled "iredeemable" by the presiding Grand Cleric.

As far as we know, there's no criteria by which the "iredeemability" of a Circle is defined. At this stage it looks like a Grand Cleric can choose to annul a circle for literally any reason at all.

Tripped over the hem of your own robe? A mage probably did it! Annul the Circle!

That's exactly the point.  The Chantry justifies the circles as a matter of public protection, and the RoA as a regrettable "all else fails" necessity, yet we now learn that the Chantry will annul a circle basically for a political/religious disagreement.

Nice.

How does anyone support the Chantry given this?

-Polaris

Because for some people, even a minor increase in personal safety is worth any amount of tyranny and bigotry.

[TEWR]

Plaintiff wrote...

Tripped over the hem of your own robe? A mage probably did it! Annul the Circle!

You should check out this thread. 

Hell, we should give that thread a rebirth somehow. Make a new one, I say!

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 11 mars 2013 - 07:16 .

[erilben]

This is the page that with journal entry about the Annulment at Dairsmuid.

When we heard of the injustices against our fellow mages at the White Spire, the Circle of Magi in Val Royeux, I feared what was to come. Our Circle at Dairsmuid is small and isolated. It exists largely as a facade to appease the Chantry.

When the other Circles rose up, the Chantry sent Seekers across the bay from Ayesleigh to investigate. They found us mixing freely with our families, training female mages for the traditions of the seers, and denouced us as aposates. Perhaps they thought we were spinless robes who could be intimidated with a little bloodshed. Before I was First Enchanter, I was daughter of Captain Revaud, of the Felicisima Armada. I know how to plan a battle.

They brought with them a small army of templars. We fought. And we might have won. But they invoked the Right of Annulment with all the unrelanting brutality that allowed. It is their right to put screaming apprentices to the sword, burn our "tainted" libraries, crush irreplacable artifacts under their heels, tear down the very walls of our home. No mages has the right to disagree.

We of the Darismuid Circle wait now behind barricades. I have sent word to our brothers and sisters on this outrage. When they break through we will not die alone.

Final journal entry of First Enchanter Rivella
slain in Dairsmiud 9:40 Dragon

I  didn't know there was another preview page that tells a little more about the Rivain Circles:

…odd relationship with the Chantry and the Circle of Magi. The Circles of Rivain function much like those elsewhere and are supported by the Andrastian nobility. However, they tolerate and work with the seers, allowing the wise women to keep apprentices and remain free so long as they aid the nation’s templars when required.

Nowhere in Rivain is the Chantry influence stronger than in Dairsmuid, the capital. Rivaini royalty are Chantry faithful, but also progressive in their beliefs. If only out of necessity. The nation, with its patchwork of cultures, remains one entity through consensus and compromise.

Modifié par erilben, 11 mars 2013 - 09:16 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

IanPolaris wrote...
Indeed, bad enough that the Chantry put Meredith in charge of a circle and let Elthina be a Grand Cleric as long as she was.  Now the Chantry is out and out slaughtering entire circles just because they don't agree with the way that circle does things (essentially religious politics) (which is NOT what a RoA is suposed to entail).

Dude...not following the rules and practices AND deliberately allowing possesions? If that isnt' enough grounds for Annulment, I don't know what is.
That's not religious politics. That's common sense.

[Lotion Soronarr]

IanPolaris wrote...
How does anyone support the Chantry given this?

-Polaris

Maybe because they actually have more than two brain cells to rub together?

Plaintiff wrote...
Because for some people, even a minor increase in personal safety is worth any amount of tyranny and bigotry.

And for some people living in a dream world and risking everyone and everything for their own feel-good moral purity is perfectly fine and dandy.

[IanPolaris]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...
Indeed, bad enough that the Chantry put Meredith in charge of a circle and let Elthina be a Grand Cleric as long as she was.  Now the Chantry is out and out slaughtering entire circles just because they don't agree with the way that circle does things (essentially religious politics) (which is NOT what a RoA is suposed to entail).

Dude...not following the rules and practices AND deliberately allowing possesions? If that isnt' enough grounds for Annulment, I don't know what is.
That's not religious politics. That's common sense.

Only in your warped universe.  There is no evidence that the Rivanni seers are a threat to anyone.  Certainly the Rivanni don't seem to think so, and given that Rivvain isn't a smoking ruin, they might have a point.  That shoots the Chantry position full of holes.

The Right of Annulment is supposed to be reserved for GENUINE emergencies, not because the Chantry has a bad hair day.

-Polaris

[TEWR]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Dude...not following the rules and practices AND deliberately allowing possesions? If that isnt' enough grounds for Annulment, I don't know what is.
That's not religious politics. That's common sense.

Not so. As the above poster showed us and assuming I read it right, the Rivaini Chantry who draws its faithful from the Andrastian nobility actually allowed these possessions to occur so long as the Seers helped the Templars.

If the Chantry in Rivain was content to allow these things to occur, then who are the Seekers and Templars to come in and label such people "apostates" -- when they're still a part of the Circle, just allowed more freedoms -- or declare an RoA?

It wasn't grounds for an RoA. The Chantry of Rivain allowed such things to occur, meaning they had a different interpretation of how the magic and mages should be allowed to act. Or the nobility if they aren't a part of the Chantry, who help maintain the Circle.

I agree with IanPolaris. It's religious politics. Rivain itself had remained intact prior to the Seekers' intervention because of its works on consensus and compromise.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 11 mars 2013 - 11:51 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

They were by definition possesed.
Even Merril acknowledges there is no real difference between Spirits and Demons.

Wether Bob from Rivian thinks such practice is dangerous or not doesn't change anything.

And the idiotic notion that "it remained in tact" somehow proves anything...
It couldn't be because all the mages were still locked in the Cirlce?
Or because the abominations were slow and methodical (as they can sometimes be...there is a lore example of an Abomintion living inside a city for years, slowly coorrupting and twisting it)

There is no way to tell a benevolent spirit from a malicous one.
So the Chantry policy has been a total taboo on any kind of posesion - and with good reason.

And OF COURSE you agree with Polaris. What else is new.

B.t.w. - why od you keep signing your posts Polaris? What, you think you're some kind of schoolar and everytihng you say hasoot be immortalized wiht your name so no one would ever forget?

[dragonflight288]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

And the Dalish aren't the only ones as a society with free mages. We have the Rivaini seers, who act as advisors, but not leaders (based on what I remember from the codex) who willingly allow themselves to be possessed by spirits...doesn't mean demons, and that the common man who wasn't a mage believed so strongly in their customs that they violently resisted the Chantry when they tried taking away their seers. The Chasind have Shamans, but I don't know enough about them to talk about their command structure and who guides their tribes, so I'll just leave that point as a way to say that there are multiple societies that have free mages and don't have abomination problems.

You mean who you THINK have no abomination problems.

Also, most mages in Rivaini are also locked ina Circle. The Seers are hedge-mages like Morrigan.

I KNOW that there's no evidence to suggest there's an abomination problem at all. You won't be able to point out a single codex entry or a single character in any game that suggests the Rivaini or the Chasind are overrun with abominations. Not one. There's an absence of evidence, and we know the mundanes of the Riviani violently resisted the Chantry when they were trying to round up the seers, so they felt like they weren't in any danger.

Due to the lack of evidence from in-game characters, and a codex entry on how highly regarded the Rivaini seers are, I think it's a very safe belief that societies can have free mages living among them and not have abominations running around, blood mages controlling everyone, or so forth.

And I'd trust Morrigan not to get possessed more than I trust the Circle mages. Morrigan has a greater understanding and control of her magic than most people, so there's nothing wrong with hedge-mages who know what they're doing...of course Morrigan was taught by Flemeth so she might be something of an exception. We need to see more Hedge-mages to get a clearer picture on that.

[Lotion Soronarr]

dragonflight288 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
You mean who you THINK have no abomination problems.

Also, most mages in Rivaini are also locked ina Circle. The Seers are hedge-mages like Morrigan.

I KNOW that there's no evidence to suggest there's an abomination problem at all. You won't be able to point out a single codex entry or a single character in any game that suggests the Rivaini or the Chasind are overrun with abominations. Not one. There's an absence of evidence, and we know the mundanes of the Riviani violently resisted the Chantry when they were trying to round up the seers, so they felt like they weren't in any danger.

I never said overrun. You are again strawmaning. The Cirlce or the coutnry don't have to be overrun to warrant annulment. After all, take a look at Broken Circle. Were abominations roaming the lands? No.
Did the mages there present a danger to the entire land? Hell yes.


There were Riviani that resisted - that much we know - but so what. Brainwashed masses can do stupid things. Masses influenced by blood mages or abominatiosn can do even stupid things.
Resistance is irrelevant.

Due to the lack of evidence from in-game characters, and a codex entry on how highly regarded the Rivaini seers are, I think it's a very safe belief that societies can have free mages living among them and not have abominations running around, blood mages controlling everyone, or so forth.

You bet all you want.
Mages are a doorway to apocalypse waiting to happen.
Deliberately allowing entities form the Fade to posses you is the height of stupidity. Even Merril knows better.

And I'd trust Morrigan not to get possessed more than I trust the Circle mages. Morrigan has a greater understanding and control of her magic than most people,

Because control over magic is a defense agaisnt possesion?
I wouldn't trust Morrigan farhter than I could throw her. She is self-serving, power-hungry and full of herself.

so there's nothing wrong with hedge-mages who know what they're doing...

Do they know? Mages ALWAYS think they know what they are doing...untill they end up a snack for some demon.

[erilben]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

They were by definition possesed.
Even Merril acknowledges there is no real difference between Spirits and Demons.

Demons and spirits are the same creatures, but they don't behave the same. Spirits meld with their host, only demons possess.

Wether Bob from Rivian thinks such practice is dangerous or not doesn't change anything.

And the idiotic notion that "it remained in tact" somehow proves anything...
It couldn't be because all the mages were still locked in the Cirlce?
Or because the abominations were slow and methodical (as they can sometimes be...there is a lore example of an Abomintion living inside a city for years, slowly coorrupting and twisting it)

Well the seers are definitely not locked up in the Circle. Other than it flat out saying they are "free", on the side of page 82, there's something about the seers from all around come to Dairsmuid to for the Allsmet.

Apparently the village leaders- hedge mages they dub "seers"- travel to Dairsmuid twice a year to meet in council, forge trade agreements, and publicy pledge loyality to Rivain's queen. Deals at Allsmet are seen as especailly auspicious.

[Lotion Soronarr]

erilben wrote...
Demons and spirits are the same creatures, but they don't behave the same. Spirits meld with their host, only demons possess.

One it's in, you gave it free reign of the house so it's pointless. A mage can only know which is which AFTER that (if even then).
"Hey, I'm a spirit and defiantely not a demon trickign you. Let me in and I'll give you great power!"

[MisterJB]

Plaintiff wrote...
Tripped over the hem of your own robe? A mage probably did it! Annul the Circle!

The mages are extremely valuable natural resources. The Chantry has a vented interest in keeping them alive, not killing them for meaningless reasons.

Plaintiff wrote...
Because for some people, even a minor increase in personal safety is worth any amount of tyranny and bigotry.

What bigotry is there in not wanting people who have more than one voice in their heads to walk around wearing explosive belts?
These women are allowing themselves to be possessed. Am I the only one seeing the issue here?
They don't need to be possessed, they are not born possessed, there is absolutely no reason they should be possessed!
Is it really so much of an infringment of personal freedom to ask mages to NOT be possessed?
Seriously! What kind of regulations should we have in place if we can't even ask mages to not be possessed without someone complaining?

[MisterJB]

erilben wrote...
Demons and spirits are the same creatures, but they don't behave the same. Spirits meld with their host, only demons possess.

Nice going there, "Justice".

I can't believe I'm going to say this but...Merril is right. All spirits are dangerous.