587 réponses à ce sujet

[Siharaa]

"The RoA is such a big deal that it was used only 17 times in 900 years, most certainly not because a KC simply carried a grudge."

That's not the point. The point is that they could if they wanted - a supposition that makes as much sense as saying all mages are evil because they *could* choose blood magic.

The main reason Kirkwall exploded into civil war was that a deranged KC (meredith) went nuts and started oppressing the mages. Her deputy, a zealous Templar who watched his colleagues murdered by abominations in Ferelden, said she was going too far. Detached or reasonable? No. Yet she went unchecked by the person who should have controlled her (the Grand Cleric).

Push people enough, they push back.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Kirkwall was full of blood mages...So Meredith going too far is very debatable up the the very end... and even then.

[dragonflight288]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Siharaa wrote...

"WoG has it that mages can marry, it's just that most choose not to"

That's the Grey Wardens. Mages are actively discouraged from marriage and if they have a child it is forcibly adopted and raised by the Chantry.

No, that's mages.

Mages need special permission from the Chantry to marry. That's word of Gaider. Most Wardens can marry, but choose not to.

[TEWR]

no one thought more mages were really needed

Except Duncan, Warden-Commander of Ferelden. The man who wanted a Mage in every contingent because they could heal their allies and smite their Darkspawn foes. Especially since the Darkspawn have hundreds upon hundreds of their own Mages.

Or Cailan, the king of Ferelden, who says that the more Mages they have the better.

Even searching a mages quarters is aparently a big deal.

In Ferelden's Circle? I don't recall that.

And what do you do when canon contradicts canon?

Bang my head against the wall.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 09 janvier 2013 - 04:49 .

[dragonflight288]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

And what do you do when canon contradicts canon?

Bang my head against the wall.

[Lotion Soronarr]

dragonflight288 wrote...
Mages need special permission from the Chantry to marry. That's word of Gaider. Most Wardens can marry, but choose not to.

And? I did say they can marry.
You just confirmed that they can marry.

Gaider never said it was a big deal.

[Lotion Soronarr]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
Except Duncan, Warden-Commander of Ferelden. The man who wanted a Mage in every contingent because they could heal their allies and smite their Darkspawn foes. Especially since the Darkspawn have hundreds upon hundreds of their own Mages.

Or Cailan, the king of Ferelden, who says that the more Mages they have the better.

It's ALWAYS better to have more firepower.

And yet armies rarely deploy more forces than necessary.

Even searching a mages quarters is aparently a big deal.

In Ferelden's Circle? I don't recall that.

No, in Kirkwall...which is said to be far stricter and worse.
So if even in Kirkwall searching the quaters of a mage is a big no-no, then all those "no privacy and no rights" complaints are bogus.

[Siharaa]

 "Kirkwall was full of blood mages...So Meredith going too far is very debatable up the the very end... and even then."
Kirkwall became full of blood mages after Meredith cracked down on them too hard - for her own personal reasons, as her sister had become an abomination. Both she and her deputy, Cullen, had personal, not rational reasons, to distrust mages.

In our society they would have been asked to resign due to conflict of interest.

If your choices are submission to slavery, being made Tranquil, or blood magic - well I know what I'd choose.

Not sure where it came from originally but I really like this quote:
"And he saw plots and spies everywhere throughout his waking hours, and had men root them out, and the thing about rooting out plots and spies everywhere is that, even if there are no real plots to begin with, there are plots and spies galore very soon."

[Lotion Soronarr]

No, Kirkwall always had problems with mages.

Meredith was perfectly sane for years and was an examplary templar before the idol.

[Siharaa]

"No, Kirkwall always had problems with mages."

Citations?

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Siharaa wrote...

"No, Kirkwall always had problems with mages."

Citations?

INSANE, BLOOD MAGES, EVERYWHERE!
No citation is necessary!

[Siharaa]

Legatus - when? Blood mages only appear on the streets in Act 3.
You might as well argue that there are Dwarven Carta thugs everywhere, so all dwarves should be slaughtered.

"Meredith was perfectly sane for years and was an examplary templar before the idol."

That's like saying that that serial killer was perfectly sane before she began stitching herself a coat out of human skin. Doesn't change the fact that she spent 3 years harvesting flesh *after* she went insane.

Meredith's mad behaviour meant the excesses of her templars were tolerated and the mages - already being 'tranquilised' for the slightest infraction - started turning to blood magic out of desperation.

Orsino would never have utilised blood magic if Meredith hadn't invoked the Right of Anullment and condemned him and (more importantly) his people to death.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Kirkwall always had problem with mages. It's in the codex and the city history.

And yes, it matters.
Saying mages are only a problem because of Meredith is bogus. They were a problem before Meredith, they were a problem during Meredith, they were a problem when she became insane and they will be a problem after her.

I have no idea what Orisno would or wouldn't have done and I don't care.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 09 janvier 2013 - 05:37 .

[LobselVith8]

Considering that templars can nullify the abilities of a mage - with the sole exception of mages who use blood magic - it makes sense that mages who are trying to escape from the Gallows, or protect themselves against the templars, would use blood magic. As the lore on illegal mages in Kirkwall reads, "Known as 'maleficarum', blood mages are feared not only for the incredible power of their spells, but also their ability to control minds. Templars hunt blood mages relentlessly, yet despite their efforts, Kirkwall sees more instances of blood magic with each passing year. Some whisper that the Order's relentless hunt has driven good intentioned apostates to blood magic in their desperation to survive and keep their freedom." It's a matter of survival.

As the lore on blood mages reads, it isn't simply used by villains: "The effects can be vile, but this specialization isn't limited to madmen and monsters. Many see it as the only form of magic that is truly free, because it's tied to the physical, not favors to spirits or demons." Whether you agree or disagree is a matter for debate.

[dragonflight288]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...
Mages need special permission from the Chantry to marry. That's word of Gaider. Most Wardens can marry, but choose not to.

And? I did say they can marry.
You just confirmed that they can marry.

Gaider never said it was a big deal.

I never said they couldn't marry, only they needed special permission to marry. And even then, they're never allowed to keep their kids. Any children they have are considered the Chantry's 'property.' And whey would anyone need special permission to marry in the first place?

[MisterJB]

dragonflight288 wrote...
And whey would anyone need special permission to marry in the first place?

The Circles do not have an unlimited quantity of resources and space.
I'd be accepting of mages keeping their children but only one per couple.

[dragonflight288]

MisterJB wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...
And whey would anyone need special permission to marry in the first place?

The Circles do not have an unlimited quantity of resources and space.
I'd be accepting of mages keeping their children but only one per couple.

Even that's better than what the Chantry gives them now.

[Lotion Soronarr]

dragonflight288 wrote...
I never said they couldn't marry, only they needed special permission to marry. And even then, they're never allowed to keep their kids. Any children they have are considered the Chantry's 'property.' And whey would anyone need special permission to marry in the first place?

So?

Society takes away children from parents not deemed fit. We do it all the time. The children are taken under Chantry care, they are not "property".

Special permision? In so much that marriage is performed by Chantry priests, yes, Chantrys approval is required, jsut like you need the OK from the church for a church marriage. So what?

[dragonflight288]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...
I never said they couldn't marry, only they needed special permission to marry. And even then, they're never allowed to keep their kids. Any children they have are considered the Chantry's 'property.' And whey would anyone need special permission to marry in the first place?

So?

Society takes away children from parents not deemed fit. We do it all the time. The children are taken under Chantry care, they are not "property".

Special permision? In so much that marriage is performed by Chantry priests, yes, Chantrys approval is required, jsut like you need the OK from the church for a church marriage. So what?

Mages are not allowed to marry normally is the point. They're normally not given permission.

As for taking away their children, actually, yes they are considered property of the Chantry. I can't remember which codex it was, but I'm sure I read it in a codex or something that said that. And real-life society takes children from their parents if the parent has proven they are incapable of raising their child or are abusive. Mages aren't even given the option to show they may be good parents or not. Their child is taken right out of their arms immediately after birth. That is traumatizing to not only the parents, but the children who grow up without parents.

You seem completely dismissive that the Chantry makes a habit of traumatizing mages and destroying their self-esteem, thus making them more dangerous than they already are, and then when your attitude is pointed out, you call it irrelevent and dismiss any arguments you disagree with.

Face it, mages may not be perfect, but most often seen in the game are mages who grow desperate because of the way the chantry treats them, and desperate people do desperate things. And nothing is more dangerous than a person who has nothing to lose. Especially a mage who has nothing to lose.

[tooducks58]

I like going with the templars at the end. With the mages it feels like your making a last stand. With the templars it feels like your just going with the flow, you can even stop Meridith and the templars from killing a couple of the mages (one of them being your sister) making the moment when she turns on you a bit more interesting. BETRAYAL!!

Good playthrough. Mages. Funny-Bad-guy playthrough, Templars.

[Lotion Soronarr]

dragonflight288 wrote...
Mages are not allowed to marry normally is the point. They're normally not given permission.

wrong.

As for taking away their children, actually, yes they are considered property of the Chantry. I can't remember which codex it was, but I'm sure I read it in a codex or something that said that. And real-life society takes children from their parents if the parent has proven they are incapable of raising their child or are abusive. Mages aren't even given the option to show they may be good parents or not. Their child is taken right out of their arms immediately after birth. That is traumatizing to not only the parents, but the children who grow up without parents.

Bwing mages they present and inherent risk to the child.
WoG has it that children are taken away for a good reason. Obviously there are practical and safety benefits for doing so.

And no, children taken away after birth doesn't traumatise them. If they never knew their mother/father there is no trauma.

You seem completely dismissive that the Chantry makes a habit of traumatizing mages and destroying their self-esteem, thus making them more dangerous than they already are, and then when your attitude is pointed out, you call it irrelevent and dismiss any arguments you disagree with.

Cry me a river.
Traumatizing mages?

Yeah, I will dismiss arguments I deem crap. Just like you. Don't come all high and mighty here.

Face it, mages may not be perfect, but most often seen in the game are mages who grow desperate because of the way the chantry treats them, and desperate people do desperate things. And nothing is more dangerous than a person who has nothing to lose. Especially a mage who has nothing to lose.

Which is again mostly irrelevant, sicne when tehy do go blonkers or "desperate" they do it in a controlled enviroment (the Circle)...which is far better teh ngoing blonkers or desperate outside - and it's not a quation of will it happen, but only "when" and "where".

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 10 janvier 2013 - 10:15 .

[TEWR]

@MisterJB: I'll address your post tomorrow sometime.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

It's ALWAYS better to have more firepower.

And yet armies rarely deploy more forces than necessary.

When the Darkspawn have hundreds of their own Mages in their own ranks, I'd say it's necessary to deploy as many Mages as possible to try and balance the playing field. 7-8 Mages scattered about where they can't do much good isn't militarily sound, especially when dozens upon dozens upon dozens of Darkspawn Mages are lobbing powerful spells around the battlefield themselves.

Whether they viewed it as a Blight or an unusually large raid doesn't change the fact that Emissaries were fielded in the Darkspawn's ranks in large numbers, and Duncan knew this -- and made it known.

And as a new book that will be coming out states, Drakon himself made use of all the Mages to push back the Second Blight -- and it's definite Word of God, as DG had a hand in it. 

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

wrong

Meh, you're both right.

David Gaider wrote...

Mages within the Circle are permitted to marry, but it's impractical with outsiders and they also must get permission from the Chantry (so it might be considered a reward for good behavior). Even so, the culture within the typical Circle of Magi tends to make mages unwilling to marry. The policy on fraternization will depend on the individual Circle-- some forbid it, while others do not, though in either case it still occurs. Considering mages live outside normal culture, they also consider themselves free of cultural conventions (especially those who were raised in a Circle from a young age) and thus tend to be quite liberal in their views.

The Chantry will reward it for good behavior -- so I'd say it's not a normal occurrence that's granted often -- but some Mages don't really want to marry other Mages in their Circle because of the nature of the place they live in.

That doesn't mean they'd be opposed to marriage to people outside the Circle, however.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 10 janvier 2013 - 10:30 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Whether they viewed it as a Blight or an unusually large raid doesn't change the fact that Emissaries were fielded in the Darkspawn's ranks in large numbers, and Duncan knew this -- and made it known.

And no one really believed him....

And as a new book that will be coming out states, Drakon himself made use of all the Mages to push back the Second Blight -- and it's definite Word of God, as DG had a hand in it.

So? I don't see the significance of that.

[TEWR]

And no one really believed him....

On it being an Archdemon-led Blight.

Not on there being a ****load of Darkspawn that has enough intelligence to pose somewhat of a threat. Your average ragtag Darkspawn band can cause a lot of trouble on its own. A horde can do much worse, Archdemon or no.

And everyone believed there was a ****load of Darkspawn. There being an Archdemon behind it -- thus making it a Blight -- was what some people doubted. Others took it being a Blight at face value.

So? I don't see the significance of that.

It goes to show that in Blights past, rulers of nations and the Chantry made use of the Mages to their full potential. The Second Blight happened after the Chantry was formed.

So there's a historical precedent. Mages have made a big difference in Blights, such that Drakon enlisted their assistance.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 10 janvier 2013 - 10:54 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
And everyone believed there was a ****load of Darkspawn. There being an Archdemon behind it -- thus making it a Blight -- was what some people doubted. Others took it being a Blight at face value.

And everyone also belived they would mop the floor with the darkspawn as it is.

It wasn't a "Only 7 mages? OH NO!!" but rather a "Only 7 mages? Meh, we're good anyway." reaction

So? I don't see the significance of that.

It goes to show that in Blights past, rulers of nations and the Chantry made use of the Mages to their full potential. The Second Blight happened after the Chantry was formed.

So there's a historical precedent. Mages have made a big difference in Blights, such that Drakon enlisted their assistance.

During Blights. Which no one though it was.

I don't really get it why you are so hung up on the "issue". So they only allowed several mages out because they didn't think more was necessary. SO WHAT?