462 réponses à ce sujet

[Silfren]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Silfren wrote...
Insults aside, you are definitely being obtuse here.  It IS a lore-based fact that Tranquiling a mage who has passed their Harrowing is illegal.  No amount of "No" on your part will alter this.  

Unless special circumstances happen...like use of Blood Magic or the like.

I'm fairly sure that the punishment for Harrowed mages who use blood magic is death, not Tranquility.  You got proof of this assertion? 

[The massive rock golem]

I agree with you that is totally wrong I think that the Templars should be taught a lesson

[The massive rock golem]

but yes the Templars should only tranquil mages if their blood mages

[The massive rock golem]

any one there

[Lotion Soronarr]

Silfren wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Silfren wrote...
Insults aside, you are definitely being obtuse here.  It IS a lore-based fact that Tranquiling a mage who has passed their Harrowing is illegal.  No amount of "No" on your part will alter this.  

Unless special circumstances happen...like use of Blood Magic or the like.

I'm fairly sure that the punishment for Harrowed mages who use blood magic is death, not Tranquility.  You got proof of this assertion? 

Well, punishments tend to differ.

Templars can even kill a escaped mage if they deem necessary. Your'e telling me death is OK, but tranqulity requires a special permission?
Why was Jowan being brought back then?

[Silfren]

I wouldn't wait around just poking at the forum and waiting for folks to posts, were I you, lol.

I'm not concerned, here, with what the Templars should do. I'm focusing for the moment on what is legal and what is not, and my understanding is that it is totally illegal to make a Harrowed mage Tranquil.

Modifié par Silfren, 11 mars 2013 - 09:03 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Silfren wrote...
You're just going out of your way to misunderstand, at this point.

No, you are going out of your way to equate two similar things as equal. Which they are not.
May be semantics, but it is STILL wrong.

The question was whether Meredith supported Ser Alrik's wish to carry out his Tranquil Solution, and the assertion was that she WAS supporting it, unofficially, because even though she OFFICIALLY rejected his plan, she was by all appearances ignoring the fact that he was illegally making mages Tranquil of his own accord. 

And I say again, I don't care what you can assert, only what you can prove.
There is no way to carry out a tranquil solution - even unofficialy - and get away with it.
What, you think no one would notice?

Personally I suspect that Meredith wanted Alrik to Tranquil mages with abandon, but wanted some kind of tangible evidence, should he be caught, that he was very much not doing it with her permission.  She certainly does seem like the type to happily throw an underling under the bus if it serves her purpose. 

And how pray tell can she do that, if by your own admission it was impossible for her to NOT notice?
No one would by it.
In other words, it wouldn't be possible to throw an underling under the bus.

So what we have are mages who are being made Tranquil in unusually high numbers, under the watchful eyes of an ultra-paranoid Knight Commander.  The only thing left to conclude is that she want to officially refuse to endorse Alrik's Solution, but didn't actually CARE if he Tranquiled mages unlawfully or without any justification, so she turned a blind eye.

OR we can conclude that he was planting false evidence and was thus tranquiling mages without anyone being the wiser.
OR that Orsino agreed. Because we know Orsino had met several times with Elthina.
We also know he should konow about it - if there's no way Meredith didn't notice, then there's no way he didn't either. so why didn't he complain to Elthina?

Another writer oversight? Yeah, the game is full of them.
Which is exactly why we are left with maybes and theories.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 11 mars 2013 - 09:09 .

[Silfren]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Templars can even kill a escaped mage if they deem necessary. Your'e telling me death is OK, but tranqulity requires a special permission?
Why was Jowan being brought back then?

I'm saying that we have lore stating flat-out that it is illegal to Tranquil a Harrowed mage.  The times that this statement is made, no reference is made to possible exceptions to that rule. 

Tranquility requires the consent of BOTH the Knight Commander and the First Enchanter.  Again, we have lore spelling that out, and I'm unaware of lore suggesting possible exceptions to when Templars have sanction to do it anyway.  So obviously it does require a special permission.  I suppose it might be different if a mage for some reason expressly wished to be made Tranquil.

I don't know why Templars are permitted to kill an escaped mage but would have to seek out permission for Tranquility, but that's exactly what Anders says:  He brings up the fact that Templars can't Tranquil a Harrowed mage while the Warden is saying "I'm surprised they didn't just make you Tranquil," in direct reference to his escape attempts.  This pretty much makes it clear that Tranquility is NOT considered an acceptable punishment over execution. 

Personally, I take it to mean that the Chantry actually does consider Tranquility to be a much worse punishment than death, which is quite telling.

[MisterJB]

Tranquility is not a punishment, it's a preventive measure against demonic possession.
The Harrowing is meant to prove that a mage can defend himself against possession. Logically, they can't Tranquilise an Harrowed mage because, theoretically, they are "safe" from possession.
Thus, Harrowed Blood Mages and the such are sent to Aeonar which is an actual prison for mages.

[Silfren]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Silfren wrote...
You're just going out of your way to misunderstand, at this point.

No, you are going out of your way to equate two similar things as equal. Which they are not.
May be semantics, but it is STILL wrong.

The question was whether Meredith supported Ser Alrik's wish to carry out his Tranquil Solution, and the assertion was that she WAS supporting it, unofficially, because even though she OFFICIALLY rejected his plan, she was by all appearances ignoring the fact that he was illegally making mages Tranquil of his own accord. 

And I say again, I don't care what you can assert, only what you can prove.
There is no way to carry out a tranquil solution - even unofficialy - and get away with it.
What, you think no one would notice?

And yet Alrik WAS Tranquiling mages at will, which is mine, and everyone's, goddamned point, Lotion.  He was carrying out his Tranquil Solution anyway, one mage at a time.  He was doing PRECISELY what he wanted to do, which was to render mages Tranquil; he just wasn't in a position to do it as rapidly as he had hoped.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Silfren wrote...
Personally I suspect that Meredith wanted Alrik to Tranquil mages with abandon, but wanted some kind of tangible evidence, should he be caught, that he was very much not doing it with her permission.  She certainly does seem like the type to happily throw an underling under the bus if it serves her purpose. 

And how pray tell can she do that, if by your own admission it was impossible for her to NOT notice?
No one would by it.
In other words, it wouldn't be possible to throw an underling under the bus.

Give me a break.  This kind of sh*t happens all the time, with superior officers giving sanction to something while turning a blind eye, because they THINK they can keep their hands clean through plausible deniability, even though investigations subsequently find that they were aware of a problem after all.  Militaries are replete with these kind of scandals where an officer was letting sh*t go down on his or her watch, even though they tried to claim ignorance after the fact.  IanPolaris already tried to point this out. 

Modifié par Silfren, 11 mars 2013 - 10:52 .

[Hazegurl]

[quote]The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

[quote]Hazegurl wrote...

Yes I can assume more mages are corrupt. If you have one dog with fleas, are you just going to assume the rest don't or check to make sure?[/quote]

Comparing Mages to animals aside, if a dog in a nearby neighborhood has rabies, do you assume your dogs that have never been outside without you around them are rabid as well?[/quote]

That makes no sense when mages like Grace were put into the circle and mages were leaving the Gallows for nighttime meetings, and the Head Enchanter was keeping outside contact with Quentin. So I would say that if they were mingling with rabies infected dogs, even a little, then yes I would make the assumption and take my dog to the vet.

[quote]A Blood Mage like Merrill, however, is not.[/quote]

Her people seem to disagree with that. Although I don't see Merrill as depraved...more misguided and a little foolish than anything.

[quote]As I said before, if a man's mind is broken, does he bear the full weight of blame for "choosing" to engage in blood magic? If he is now insane because of abuses committed against him -- beatings, rape, torture, etc. -- does he have the blame cast on him entirely? Does he still retain the ability to determine right from wrong, to choose what he should do? 

I would say no to both. He bears some of the blame. Not all.[/quote]

This is where we just have to agree to disagree. The way I see it, if you are a mage and cannot prevent yourself from being raped and abused, and can't even save yourself from being locked up in the Gallows then you are just too weak to handle demon summoning and blood magic. Find another means to escape et al. But you don't have a strong will to face down a demon, period.


[quote]I suppose fighting the Darkspawn as a blood mage isn't a legitimate reason for Grey Wardens. I suppose using blood magic to amplify Dalish healing magic and cleansing inanimate objects of the Taint they once bore isn't a good reason to become a blood mage.[/quote]

Actually, it isn't. The mage Warden can go through the entire game without using blood magic. so no, not needed  for a mage warden to fight darkspawn. As for cleansing purposes, perhaps. But still, is blood magic really needed? Or just the easiest way to do it?

[quote]I suppose Malcolm Hawke's becoming a blood mage temporarily to strengthen the seals binding Corypheus isn't a legitimate reason -- also to ensure that his love, Leandra, was safe from harm.[/quote]

Now, this is actually the best point made. Malcolm Hawke seemed like a strong minded man anyway who didn't seem to turn to blood magic due to weakness. I would say it could be the only legit reason you have listed. I also don't have issues with Merrill, she seems to know that is no such thing as a good spirit, advice she gives Anders. But she is still foolish and would have ended up dead if the Keeper didn't step in.


[quote]And funny, I thought there was "no legitimate reason" for someone to become a Blood Mage?[/quote]

That was gameplay (not even my canon Hawke).  Much different than the actual story. Which is what we are discussing. Becoming a blood mage never even changes the story nor how people react to you. Which pretty much makes it nonexistent. Like I said way eariler, I believe in this thread. I had blood mage activated while talking crap about the evils of blood magic. That Hawke was a real hypocrite.

On a side note, it isn't even worth having. At least let me summon some demons or rise the dead like the blood mages in game. The best special skills IMO are force mage and spirit healer. Ones I use often.

[quote]If one is impartial, then they're going to make a decision upon seeing the facts.[/quote]

Not neccessarily the truth. One can remain neutral dispite the facts. when you talk to Elthina about the issues in Kirkwall. She believes that both sides should learn from themselves. That the Chantry should not be a "father with a whip" but an understanding mother. I disagree with her, as sometimes a father with a whip is a good thing. But she believed that the Chantry shouldn't get involved and hopefully they could work it out. She was neutral and was going to remian so. This is why I believe that she would have been in favor of a peaceful resolution. But overall, she forgot what her role as Grand Cleric was supposed to be.

[quote]Except she's not "duty bound" to side with them on every issue. The lore is very clear here. The Grand Clerics are in control of the Templars for a particular region and it is the Templars who are duty bound to support the Grand Cleric.

You see this in the very opening of Act 3, where the Templars follow Elthina's orders regarding escorting Orsino back to the Gallows gently.[/quote]

I'm not saying the she must take orders from the Templars and cannot give them herself. But that she is duty bound to support Templars.

[quote]I'd say four people slaughtering their way through a hundred or so trained Qunari soldiers bolstered by Elven converts all led by the Arishok is pretty damn lucky, especially when the Qunari were the ones that nearly conquered Thedas a few centuries prior. [/quote]

I call it skill. Hawke can defeat the Arishok in one-on-one combat which makes him/her stronger than him. The Elven converts were all poor souls living in the slums of Kirkwall and probably had barely any combat skills besides shooting a bow. Let's see, going up against four heavily armed battle tested combatants who had been fighting throughout Kirkwall for the past four years or so. I laughed when I saw those elves.  They were obviously canon fodder. Also, Hawke had been killing Quanari throughout Act 2.

[quote]I don't think Hawke was really necessary for the journey. Yes, Hawke went farther down in the Deep Roads then anyone believed possible.

That doesn't mean he was actually as vital to the venture as you think.[/quote]

We have agree to disagree. Varric would be dead in the deep roads without Hawke. Actually, they wouldn't have even gotten to the idol without him as he was the one who searched for another path through drakspawn and a dragon. Varric's brother didn't even have a decent map and Varric needed Hawke to get that.

[quote]I still don't see how saving four Mages out of 2000-3000 is particularly something worth celebrating, especially when children are dead because of that RoA.

Children that can't fight back. Were they even given the opportunity to surrender? No, they were not.[/quote]

I perferred protecting the men, women, and children of Kirkwall. And this is also something we have to agree to disagree on. Not going to keep arguing my reasons for siding with the Templars. My reasons stand, period.


[quote]An hour or two passes before the RoA is committed, as Meredith tells Orsino to gather his people while her people are crossing the harbor. Even prior to that, moving from Lowtown to the Docks would take a while as Kirkwall is a large city.
.[/quote]

No it isn't enough time. Orsino runs off to warn the others. this is all directly after the bombing and the RoA is passed and some mages are killed. Then it was all fighting in the streets to the Gallows. Not enough time for all of Kirkwall to assess what happened, know a mage did it, then march to the Galllows. If anything, people would be running to the Chantry to see what happened first.


[quote]No they weren't. Emeric brought his evidence to Meredith to get an official investigation going -- as before that people thought it wasn't really a major conceren -- and Meredith said it was a matter for the City Guard, despite Hawke having told Emeric of fighting shades, seeing someone flee the scene, and retrieving the sack of remains.

If probed, Emeric says he told Meredith all of that and Meredith still didn't authorize an investigation. When the City Guard were tasked with the duty, they refused as well, despite the fact that Aveline may have been there as well.[/quote]

And wasn't Emeric seen as incomptent and reaching baseless conclusions throughout his investigation? Not saying Meredith was right to deny him the right to investigate but the man was clearly over his head the moment Hawke and Co. encountered him.  Something should have been done much earlier, it would have prevented a lot of deaths.

Still don't know how any of this have to do with Orsino not offering an ounce of assistance and helping the killer for years, though.


[quote]See above. For that matter, replay the game. Your memory is obviously very poor.[/quote]

Your post above only talks about how incompetent everyone else is. Not a defense for Orsino's actions. Try staying with that.
 

[quote]When I said "if he had a legitimate say", I meant in the vein of if it would require a First Enchanter's authority to commence with one, since you were saying he was just as bad as Tevinter for keeping information on Quentin hidden.

If he had the legal authority over an RoA's approval, then you'd have a point. Since he doesn't, you don't.[/quote]

I'm not saying he is just as bad as the Tevinter. But he is a growing seed of their problem and if mages like him are in power then it could very well can become one. That has always been my entire point about Orsino.

[quote]TEWR wrote...

Also, not all Mages if left to police themselves would initiate another Imperium.  The Mages' Collective, for instance, polices Mages appropriately if they go astray while also maintaining anonymity from the Templars. But they also have a division of Templars in their pockets, indicating that they could call upon them for aid in dealing with threats if they needed to.

Here I'm specifically referring to the Mage-Templar effort to work together, where the Mage policing is handled by the Mages themselves.[/quote]

And that is what I disagree with. Once again for the...I don't know how many times I have to say it...mages should not be allowed to police themselves. Period.

[quote]Based on the information we gain about Quentin, his MO, Orsino, and so on I'm led to believe Quentin led Orsino to believe he was researching (ethically) how to reverse death after the loss of his wife and it was only when the Harvester ritual was sent to Orsino that he realized how deranged the man was -- something he mentions if Bethany's in the Circle.[/quote]

I call BS on that. What thinking man or woman would cosign necromancy research done for "ethical reasons" by an apostate blood mage, knowing what mages are capable of with the dead already? And you really want to convince me that Orsino is a smart man?? What is Orsino? A smart man capable of making decisions for the good of the circle mages, or a gullible fool easily led astray and totally incompetent as First Enchanter. Cause really, that is all you prove if you want me to believe he had no idea what Quentin was up to. 


[quote]Are you a Templar? No. But Cullen is and he takes issue with the call for the RoA, believing it's unnecessary and that the reasoning for it isn't strong enough to justify it.
.[/quote]

Stop overdramatizing everything I write. When I say it isn't a flimsy reason. I am saying that the act of blowing up the Chantry is not flimsy. 

Also, please save your dramatic "They kill everyone down to the last child."  You must have written that like over forty times in this thread. Your "appeal to emotions" is wearing thin.

And where is your proof that only 5% of Templars do their jobs? And no, five templars is not 5%
Where is your proof that the majority of Templars are evil SOBs?


[quote]So hatred and anger at what an apostate does causes them to condone the murder of men, women, and children unconnected to the crime?
And if their loved ones/family are Mages?
Ah, so selfish desires trump true justice and defending the innocent?[/quote]

You seem to lack the ability to even remotely consider the feelings of the other side.

People may be strong believers of the Chantry and driven by an emotional response to go along with Meredith. It doesn't mean they are right. If given time, they could change their stance but not when the act is fresh on the brain. If they have family and friends who are mages, then it is up to them to try and save them if they want. Like my warrior Hawke who agreed to help Meredith but defended Bethany. If they want to protect their loved ones who are mages, they have a right to do so. It takes more than having selfish desires to not want to starve in the streets for the sake of a bunch of people you don't know.


[quote]Very few Mages would kill the Templars that helped them survive an unjustified act of genocide. Some sure -- Libertarians/Resolutionists -- but not a major amount.[/quote]

There you go stating speculations as facts again. If there is the possibly that news spread of Thrask's death at the hands of mages he was helping then it is safe to assume that there could be some who deem helping them more hazardous than killing them.

[quote]I believe that in the face of injustice, people should make a stand. Elthina refused to make enough of a stand against injustice and the Templars failed to do so during the RoA. [/quote]

That is a nice thought but not always the case. Who decides what is an injustice or not? Perhaps some don't even see it as the injustice you see it to be. And even if it is. What makes mages more deserving of life than anyone else that Templars should just fall on their swords for them?

As for Orsino, since you brought him up....again. The fact that you see what he did as justice and I don't, only proves my point that justice and injustice is simply an opinion. 

Anders loves the idea of selling Fenris back into slavery nowing the torture he suffered yet would talk everyone's ear off about the injustice of mages being locked in the circle.

Also, yes, the circle was corrupt. But I will change my mind and say it was not beyond repair. Those blood mages needed to die though, if there ever could be any repair done on its corruption. However, if blood mages were allowed to stay in the circle then yes, beyond repair is correct.


[quote]
Do you even know the definition of a fallacious argument? You made a claim, thus the burden of proof is on you. I ask you to present said proof, and your response is an improper use of calling something a logical fallacy?

Wow... kudos.[/quote]

Um, no. I asked you, more than once actually. Was Meredith 100% wrong. Yet you continue to dodge that question. Then you turn around and say, "give me proof..."  mind you, you want me to give you proof of your own claim that they were cutting their wrists in desperation or stumbling upon demons in the heat of battle.

I said: Meredith believed he was harboring blood mages. Then I went on to state that considering how many you fight at the end was she 100% wrong?

But just keep on dodging that question, buddy.


[quote]No. Remember the courtyard where you talk to the Tranquil Mage Elsa? Two Pride Demons come through on their own and summon a legion of Shades.

Immediately outside of the room where Orsino and the Mages were gathered Rage Demons appear. That Abominations were summoned is more indicative of Gameplay-Story segregation, per John Epler.
John Epler wrote...

As for abominations appearing out of the ground, unfortunately, story and gameplay occasionally don't intersect as well as they should, and this would be one of those instances. It was noted, however, and the general consensus is (I believe) that abominations need to be handled like, well, abominations. Even the weak ones should be a believable threat. Able to destroy entire towns? Well, you can chalk some of that up to Chantry hyperbole, but they aren't something to be regarded lightly.[/quote]

Yet, none of this proves they were not summoned at all.  We had proof earlier in the game of a mage(Quentin I believe) sending demons and shades to attack and kill Emeric while he was not present. So I will say that while there is a possibility the pride demons came out on their own, there is also the possiblity a mage summoned them.

[quote]In the Glory Age, Mages summoned a Demon that took down its immediate foes -- the Templars -- and then turned to betray the Mages because it wasn't easily controlled.

It's the same thing here. Even if the Mages are summoning the Demons -- which not all of them are -- the Demons are taking out their immediate foes (Hawke and company) before they will even attempt to forcibly possess the Mage. A forcible possession will take some time, depending on the Mage's strength and willpower.

Why kill a Mage? He's far more useful alive to a Demon.[/quote]

At least you actually admit that some of them were summoning demons. Which was my entire point... that you argued with. 

[quote]The skills the enemies use strike me as more basic abilities. Powerful, no doubt, but basic.[/quote]

I don't know if I would call being able to do "Hemorrhage" a basic blood mage skill.

[quote]
But cases like Huon are cases where the Templars do bear blame for what happened.[/quote]

I thought I could agree with you..Until you wrote that above.

[quote]But yes, he really just wanted the Mages to fight for their lives, even if all that awaited them was death. [/quote]

Yeah, he killed the grand cleric. He did not destory everything the chantry represented.

[quote]
 By unofficially supporting Alrik's schemes, she retains her position and still mass Tranquilizes the Mages.[/quote]

Well, if so, then Alrik wasn't doing a very good job of mass tranquilizing mages. Picking only the pretty girls was a flawed way of going about it. I would like to believe that if Meredith approved of a mass Tranquil solution, she would hire someone more competent than him. But that is just my opinion.


[quote]No, I said Orsino is a man known to speak up for his charges and he would've certainly known about it. Do not ignore my points.[/quote]

I didn't ignore your points. I asked you a question. Hence, I asked for clarification on it.

But I do agree that Hawke should have searched the foundry better but after finding the hand and ring it was the better choice to deliever the evidence.

And I don't have to know Samson. Delievering letters was not his job. There is nothing to prove or disprove about that. I won't repeat this again. So just let the letter thing drop.


[quote]Trust me, I'm not anywhere near heated. I know my emotional state and I can assure you I'm nowhere near being far too emotional.[/quote]

Good, to know. You just come across as very snippy.

[quote]I wouldn't have to repeat myself if you'd actually read my points instead of ignoring them. If you replied to the points I say, then I wouldn't have to keep saying them.[/quote]

LOL! You keep bringing up points I had long since replied to which were nothing but your opinions that I have disagreed with. Even in this current post you continue to bring up the same thing over and over again. We just have to agree to disagree. Nothing more and nothing less. Retyping it, won't change things.

Modifié par Hazegurl, 12 mars 2013 - 01:09 .

[TEWR]

And that is what I disagree with. Once again for the...I don't know how many times I have to say it...mages should not be allowed to police themselves. Period.

Heh, I didn't realize I said that. That's what I get for posting my long-ass posts in the middle of the night. Mea culpa, as I too support not leaving it to Mages. My main point however was simply that the Mages' Collective is at least better in how to handle magical regulation since Mages and Templars work together.

It is by far not perfect. I agree that the Mages should not be in control of the policing effort. That's been my position in other threads, mainly because that has a higher chance of leading to Tevinter 2.0 since that's how Tevinter's corruption more or less came back -- with a few other factors thrown in.

But I did feel the need to mention how the Mages' Collective operates. 

Proposal: Both you and I had this discussion devolve into a session where we both were acting as we shouldn't have at some moments -- the "TL;DR" thing, my overall tone even if I had valid points. Shall we start anew?

Which was my entire point... that you argued with.

I argued the idea that all the Demons were summoned by Mages. Undoubtedly, some were. My premise was that to assume all Demons fought in the RoA originated from a Mage no matter what -- regardless of other lore -- was erroneous and not precise.

You just come across as very snippy.

Might have something to do with how I've discussed this topic to death so many times that my patience for it has become seriously strained. 

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 12 mars 2013 - 03:17 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Silfren wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Templars can even kill a escaped mage if they deem necessary. Your'e telling me death is OK, but tranqulity requires a special permission?
Why was Jowan being brought back then?

I'm saying that we have lore stating flat-out that it is illegal to Tranquil a Harrowed mage.  The times that this statement is made, no reference is made to possible exceptions to that rule. 

I don't know why Templars are permitted to kill an escaped mage but would have to seek out permission for Tranquility, but that's exactly what Anders says:  He brings up the fact that Templars can't Tranquil a Harrowed mage while the Warden is saying "I'm surprised they didn't just make you Tranquil," in direct reference to his escape attempts.  This pretty much makes it clear that Tranquility is NOT considered an acceptable punishment over execution. 

Personally, I take it to mean that the Chantry actually does consider Tranquility to be a much worse punishment than death, which is quite telling.

And I'm saying that explicitly saying that there are no exception is not necessary.

Wasn't Jowan going to be tranquiled?
Wasn't there a mage that escaped in DA2, got caught and got tranquiled?

So no, what you are saing doesn't make clear what you think it does.

Tranquility requires the consent of BOTH the Knight Commander and
the First Enchanter.  Again, we have lore spelling that out, and I'm
unaware of lore suggesting possible exceptions to when Templars have
sanction to do it anyway.  So obviously it does require a special
permission.  I suppose it might be different if a mage for some reason expressly wished to be made Tranquil.

Which ins't what I was argouing against, so why bother bringing it up? Unless you wanted to muddy the waters again?

[Lotion Soronarr]

Silfren wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
And I say again, I don't care what you can assert, only what you can prove.
There is no way to carry out a tranquil solution - even unofficialy - and get away with it.
What, you think no one would notice?

And yet Alrik WAS Tranquiling mages at will, which is mine, and everyone's, goddamned point, Lotion.  He was carrying out his Tranquil Solution anyway, one mage at a time.  He was doing PRECISELY what he wanted to do, which was to render mages Tranquil; he just wasn't in a position to do it as rapidly as he had hoped.

your goddamn point is wrong.
You are again equating the TS with tranquiling a few mages. Alarik CAN'T carry out the TS one mage at a time, because it will never be "complete".
It will be noticed sooner or later. The TS requires ALL mages to be tranquil - something he could never achieve.

Give me a break.  This kind of sh*t happens all the time, with superior officers giving sanction to something while turning a blind eye, because they THINK they can keep their hands clean through plausible deniability, even though investigations subsequently find that they were aware of a problem after all.  Militaries are replete with these kind of scandals where an officer was letting sh*t go down on his or her watch, even though they tried to claim ignorance after the fact.  IanPolaris already tried to point this out. 

By your own admission it is not possible to use plausible deniability in this case. Utterly not possible.
Heck, it happens in the military, but the commanders there tend to have a FAR better case because a written command is not necessary. Meredith can't get away with that, even theoreticly.


And it still doesn't explain Orsinos ignorance.. or unwilligness to say anything.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 12 mars 2013 - 12:23 .

[Hazegurl]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Proposal: Both you and I had this discussion devolve into a session where we both were acting as we shouldn't have at some moments -- the "TL;DR" thing, my overall tone even if I had valid points. Shall we start anew?

Sure we can. I never take anything personal.

I argued the idea that all the Demons were summoned by Mages. Undoubtedly, some were. My premise was that to assume all Demons fought in the RoA originated from a Mage no matter what -- regardless of other lore -- was erroneous and not precise.

I see how this got a bit mixed up. I said blood mages were summoning demons. I believed you were arguing that I was saying all mages were summoning demons. However, I did believe blood mages were summoning them all even while not present on the scene.

Might have something to do with how I've discussed this topic to death so many times that my patience for it has become seriously strained. 

The topic of the thread was about why players sided with the Templars.  Not really a Mage vs Templar debate. But I see it had long since passed that. No worries.

Modifié par Hazegurl, 13 mars 2013 - 11:53 .

[Silfren]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Templars can even kill a escaped mage if they deem necessary. Your'e telling me death is OK, but tranqulity requires a special permission?
Why was Jowan being brought back then?

I'm saying that we have lore stating flat-out that it is illegal to Tranquil a Harrowed mage.  The times that this statement is made, no reference is made to possible exceptions to that rule. 

I don't know why Templars are permitted to kill an escaped mage but would have to seek out permission for Tranquility, but that's exactly what Anders says:  He brings up the fact that Templars can't Tranquil a Harrowed mage while the Warden is saying "I'm surprised they didn't just make you Tranquil," in direct reference to his escape attempts.  This pretty much makes it clear that Tranquility is NOT considered an acceptable punishment over execution. 

Personally, I take it to mean that the Chantry actually does consider Tranquility to be a much worse punishment than death, which is quite telling.

And I'm saying that explicitly saying that there are no exception is not necessary.

Wasn't Jowan going to be tranquiled?
Wasn't there a mage that escaped in DA2, got caught and got tranquiled?

Oh, but it IS necessary.  When one states a rule, and offers no exceptions to it, it can be safely and reasonably assumed by listeners that this means there aren't any exceptions. 

Jowan was not a Harrowed mage, so I don't know what the hell you're using him as an example for.  To the best of my knowledge, if he's turned over to the Templars, the lore is totally silent on what is done to him, but I'm fairly sure that execution was the original intention, before he assisted the Warden in arresting the demonic assault in Redcliffe.

Using DA2 as an example is stupid, Lotion.  We already know that a great deal of ILLEGAL activity is permitted by Meredith in that city, so that a captured mage was Tranquiled says nothing whatsoever about the legality of it, which is what I've been discussing, and don't you dare try to claim otherwise.

Lotion Soronnar...

Silfren wrote...
Tranquility requires the consent of BOTH the Knight Commander and
the First Enchanter.  Again, we have lore spelling that out, and I'm
unaware of lore suggesting possible exceptions to when Templars have
sanction to do it anyway.  So obviously it does require a special
permission.  I suppose it might be different if a mage for some reason expressly wished to be made Tranquil.

Which ins't what I was argouing against, so why bother bringing it up? Unless you wanted to muddy the waters again?

You tell me.  You're the one preventing people from having a straightforward discussion because you keep bringing idiotic nonsense into it.  Then again, if you're the sort who claims that Sten's remark about not having food or rest  for three weeks yet still being capable of fighting is not a lore point but pure gamplay and nothing more, than I don't know why I waste my time with you in the first place.  You never have based your arguments on anything substantial, you just get a kick out of employing every logical fallacy you can grab at.

Funny how you accuse others of doing what you do the very instant you enter into a conversation, for the sole purpose of being contrary.  So I don't know what the hell you now CLAIM to be arguing against, and don't give a rat's ass.  I was addressing the words you actually wrote, your own ever-changing interpretation of them be damned.  The one attempting to muddy the waters is you, and you plainly do it because you prefer obfuscation over intelligent discussion.

Now, the last bloody word I'm going to say to you on this subject, since you obviously are choosing to argue for the mere sake of it:  What people are saying is that because Alrik is Tranquiling mages according to his own whim, despite the fact that this is illegal, he is essentially carrying out his Tranquil Solution.  It's not the same sort of thing he had asked for, i.e. rounding all the mages up and Tranquiling them en masse...but he's being allowed to get away with Tranquiling mages anyway, without regard to whether they've committed any offense, or are Harrowed or not, so it's not THE Tranquil Solution, but it's working out to the same thing, which is that he's Tranquiling mages for no other reason than he just f*cking wants to. 

Nobody is saying it is exactly and precisely the same, identical thing.  We're saying that it works out to the same thing in a practical sense, because Alrik has been OFFICIALLY forbidden, but he has NOT been prevented from taking action enacting his "Solution" on any mages he chooses.  Without official sanction, his Solution is much slower and far less efficient, but he IS de facto in the process of carrying it out. 

Modifié par Silfren, 12 mars 2013 - 07:43 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Silfren wrote...
Oh, but it IS necessary.  When one states a rule, and offers no exceptions to it, it can be safely and reasonably assumed by listeners that this means there aren't any exceptions. 

Nope.
That's not how the world works, therefore it is reasonable to assuem that there are exceptions.

Using DA2 as an example is stupid, Lotion.  We already know that a great deal of ILLEGAL activity is permitted by Meredith in that city, so that a captured mage was Tranquiled says nothing whatsoever about the legality of it, which is what I've been discussing, and don't you dare try to claim otherwise.

Just because there was illegal templar activity in Kirkwall doesn't mean that EVERYTHING templars did was illegal.

Lotion Soronnar...
You tell me.  You're the one preventing people from having a straightforward discussion because you keep bringing idiotic nonsense into it. 
Then again, if you're the sort who claims that Sten's remark about not having food or rest  for three weeks yet still being capable of fighting is not a lore point but pure gamplay and nothing more, than I don't know why I waste my time with you in the first place.  You never have based your arguments on anything substantial, you just get a kick out of employing every logical fallacy you can grab at.

PREVENTING you? What, have I come into your house and stolen your keyboard? What a drama queen.

There you go ahead with AdHominems, trying to discredit your opposition by brining in past sins (real or immagined) and attcking the person instead of arguing actual points.

I am wondering why am *I* wasting my time with *YOU*

Funny how you accuse others of doing what you do the very instant you enter into a conversation

The irony is strong in this one. You imploy logical falacies, and other horrible debating techniques at least as much as I do. And you definately imploy AdHominems more than I do.

The one attempting to muddy the waters is you, and you plainly do it because you prefer obfuscation over intelligent discussion.

Inteligent discussion? With you?

Nobody is saying it is exactly and precisely the same, identical thing.  We're saying that it works out to the same thing in a practical sense, because Alrik has been OFFICIALLY forbidden, but he has NOT been prevented from taking action enacting his "Solution" on any mages he chooses.  Without official sanction, his Solution is much slower and far less efficient, but he IS de facto in the process of carrying it out. 

And I say it doesn't work out the same in a parctical sense.
It can never be carried out fully, thus at no point will all mages ever be tranquiled.

Wether he plants false evidence or not we do not know.

I still ask you the question you failed to answer many times - what was Orsino doing all this time? How come he didn't notice?
If you postulate that Meredith must know, then Orsino must know too.

So either Orsino is part of it, is duped into it, doesn't care or is even more incompetent than Meredith.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 13 mars 2013 - 08:25 .

[TEWR]

Considering the DAII Collector's Edition Guide as well as in-game evidence points to him speaking up for his charges, I'd say he was very vocal  in his arguments with Meredith about the issue when he saw more Tranquil popping up, Tranquil that he never once authorized to be made such.

Hazegurl wrote...

And I don't have to know Samson. Delievering letters was not his job. There is nothing to prove or disprove about that. I won't repeat this again. So just let the letter thing drop.

I shall address the entirety of your post when I get home from work this evening -- since it's 4 A.M here now -- but will you at least agree that regardless of your feelings on Samson, Meredith's failure to fire men like Alrik, Karras, and Mettin is a glaring problem and a condemnation on her part that makes her position and why someone should side with her seem undermined?

That promoting them should not have been done, because of their displayed personalities towards Mages and most especially Alrik's Tranquil Solution (which should've been a firing offense and not something she unofficially/tacitly approved of)?

How is one supposed to protect Mages from themselves, if said person will not similarly protect Mages from others?

Lotion_Soronnar wrote...

Wasn't there a mage that escaped in DA2, got caught and got tranquiled?

No, there wasn't. There was however what the Templars did to Grace's group if they were let go in Act 1, where when they were caught the Templars just picked 3 Mages at random and Tranquiled them as a means to inspire fear in the Mages.

Didn't work and was really a douchebag move if it was just to inspire fear. It'd be understandable if the reason given was because the three picked were suspected of blood magic. But if you're just picking at random then it seems to be a callous disregard for life and a near abuse -- as it had to be approved by the FE, though I imagine grudgingly so -- of what the Rite of Tranquility is supposed to entail.

Unless you're talking about Karl, in which case no Karl doesn't apply as he was made Tranquil by Alrik, the man illegally making other Mages Tranquil.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 13 mars 2013 - 09:04 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Considering the DAII Collector's Edition Guide as well as in-game evidence points to him speaking up for his charges, I'd say he was very vocal  in his arguments with Meredith about the issue when he saw more Tranquil popping up, Tranquil that he never once authorized to be made such.

I don't buy it for a second.

If there was illegal tranquilization being done, ther isn't a single shred of evidence in game that he complained to Elthina about it specificly; nor is there any evidence that he didn't know or didn't authorize it.

You might say it's unlikely, but it's equally unlikely that if he did mention that to Elthina, that she did nothing.



The writing and plot holes either make everyone a total, incompetent dofus, or total d***. On both sides.

Hazegurl wrote...
and most especially Alrik's Tranquil Solution (which should've been a firing offense and not something she unofficially/tacitly approved of)?

Nope.

[Silfren]

Hazegurl wrote...


This is where we just have to agree to disagree. The way I see it, if you are a mage and cannot prevent yourself from being raped and abused, and can't even save yourself from being locked up in the Gallows then you are just too weak to handle demon summoning and blood magic. Find another means to escape et al. But you don't have a strong will to face down a demon, period.

......

How dare a mage not fight against the Templars, who outnumber them, are always armed with sharp swords, can nullify every magic BUT the blood magic you just said they're not allowed to use without first proving they can defend themselves against rape, and who are threatening said mage with violence, murder, possibly Tranquilization.  How dare they LET themselves be raped and abused!

Seriously, we're devolved back to victim-blaming now?  In regards to rape? I am so done with the bullsh*t in this thread.  Good luck, TEWR.

Modifié par Silfren, 13 mars 2013 - 01:31 .

[Lazy Jer]

Wow...I'm gone for a couple of days all this happens. Let's keep this in perspective, folks. It IS just a game after all.

EDIT:  It's come to my attention that the above statement has been misinterpreted.  It was in reference to the exchanges above wherein a few parties have using the word "goddamn" in their sentences and accusations of being overly dramatic have be levied.  It was NOT in reference to anything that has been said in regard to this statement:

Hazegurl wrote...

This is where we just have to agree to disagree. The way I see it, if you are a mage and cannot prevent yourself from being raped and abused, and can't even save yourself from being locked up in the Gallows then you are just too weak to handle demon summoning and blood magic. Find another means to escape et al. But you don't have a strong will to face down a demon, period.

This statement is...well...confusing.  If it's implying what I think it's implying (i.e. that demons would do these things to a mage) then that's untrue.  Resisting demonic possession by a mage is a matter of resisting temptation, not brute force. 

Modifié par Lazy Jer, 13 mars 2013 - 11:11 .

[SomniariKess1124]

eh... Meredith makes good points, they both do... but i pick Orsino, since Meredith woke up one day deciding to be an **** to the Champion of Kirkwall. She just... she's got a bad backstory, yes, And Orsino is kind of a coward for going to you for (literally) everything, when theres a lot of things he could do himself. My sugestion: Have them both replaced. For meredith: find someone who is not ape**** crazy. For Orsino: Grow a pair. and a backbone while he's at it. They're both bad leaders, really. In my opinion, go mages, since Meredith decides to talk to you like ****.

[Hazegurl]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Hazegurl wrote...
and most especially Alrik's Tranquil Solution (which should've been a firing offense and not something she unofficially/tacitly approved of)?

Nope.

I didn't write that.

[Hazegurl]

Silfren wrote...

Hazegurl wrote...


This is where we just have to agree to disagree. The way I see it, if you are a mage and cannot prevent yourself from being raped and abused, and can't even save yourself from being locked up in the Gallows then you are just too weak to handle demon summoning and blood magic. Find another means to escape et al. But you don't have a strong will to face down a demon, period.

......

How dare a mage not fight against the Templars, who outnumber them, are always armed with sharp swords, can nullify every magic BUT the blood magic you just said they're not allowed to use without first proving they can defend themselves against rape, and who are threatening said mage with violence, murder, possibly Tranquilization.  How dare they LET themselves be raped and abused!

Seriously, we're devolved back to victim-blaming now?  In regards to rape? I am so done with the bullsh*t in this thread.  Good luck, TEWR.

What a way to get yourself worked up over the wrong thing.  Mages are powerful. A strong mage should be able to defend him/herself against rape and abuse with their own power....if they are powerful enough to do so. You think anyone is going to rape or lock away a mage Hawke? I don't think so. You think anyone is going to do that to Morrigan or Flemeth(who I believe use more than just blood magic), or the warden mage? Nope! Malcom Hawke may have been in the circle but he escaped and never went back. Since a Templar helped him I doubt he resorted to demons and butchering Templars to make his escape.

If you are too weak to handle a Templar you can't handle a demon. Work on your own powers to become strong. Regardless of a Templar's abilities, a strong mage should be able to combat them without running to demons and blood magic. Blood magic is just the easiest weapon to reach for. In most cases, it's just a loaded gun being used by someone who can't shoot worth a damn, and they typically end up hurting themselves and the people around them.

[Lazy Jer]

Hazegurl wrote...

What a way to get yourself worked up over the wrong thing.  Mages are powerful. A strong mage should be able to defend him/herself against rape and abuse with their own power....if they are powerful enough to do so. You think anyone is going to rape or lock away a mage Hawke? I don't think so. You think anyone is going to do that to Morrigan or Flemeth(who I believe use more than just blood magic), or the warden mage? Nope! Malcom Hawke may have been in the circle but he escaped and never went back. Since a Templar helped him I doubt he resorted to demons and butchering Templars to make his escape.

If you are too weak to handle a Templar you can't handle a demon. Work on your own powers to become strong. Regardless of a Templar's abilities, a strong mage should be able to combat them without running to demons and blood magic. Blood magic is just the easiest weapon to reach for. In most cases, it's just a loaded gun being used by someone who can't shoot worth a damn, and they typically end up hurting themselves and the people around them.

I'm still not sure what you're point is.  The people that you mentioned are mostly player characters, first of all, so certain allowances need to be made for their strength, in any case mages that strong are the exception not the rule.  The average mage didn't have Flemeth or Marcus Hawke as teachers.  If they were born in the circle they had circle mages teaching them, if they were born outside the circle who knows who they had teaching them.