615 réponses à ce sujet

[Silfren]

Hazegurl wrote...

Silfren wrote...
Duncan DID tell people they were facing a Blight.  Not taking him at his word was a bloody stupid thing to do.

I do agree that not taking a Grey Warden at his word was stupid. However, what ticked me off about Duncan was the fact that he did not fully explain how he knew, or give any tangible reason to be believed. He doesn't have to explain the full ritual unless he has to but he could have at least said, that the reason why Grey Wardens are needed during Blights is because we sense the presence of the Archdemon we know when one is nearby or not and I can sense the Archdemon is active. Duncan never spells it out clearly like that at all. Even the Warden can ask Alistair "why Duncan just didn't tell everyone that" and naturally Alistair defends Duncan by saying he did say it because he said he feels this is a Blight. Well no, Alistair. That's not enough. Saying you feel it is a Blight is not the same as explaining how you've reached that conclusion. That is only info you would know if you were a Grey Warden. Pretty much Duncan was being cryptic and not explaining things completely so as not to scare away potential recruits.

Well, once again, Alistair didn't say that Duncan felt it was a Blight, he says that Duncan said he felt the archdemon's presence.  Personally I think that should have been enough to give someone pause, whether Duncan explained how it was he could feel the archdemon's presence or not.

Modifié par Silfren, 29 avril 2013 - 03:49 .

[dragonflight288]

My take on that is Duncan gave them as much as he could without being considered nuts. I know if I were a king or a general, and a respected grey warden came to me and "Your majesty, I've just had a dream that the archdemon woke up and a blight is about to start, you need to strengthen your armies." I would look at him weird with a raised eyebrow, shrug then proceed to ignore him. I wouldn't put the fate of my country on the line based on a dream, even if it came from a Grey Warden, as I wouldn't know about the joining or how Warden's are pretty much high-functioning ghouls.

Duncan gave them as much as he could, and even investigated on his own and was able to determine the darkspawn's location. He gave Cailan and Loghain plenty to work on. Cailan doubted it was a blight because he never saw the archdemon, and was kind of obsessed with facing it alongside the grey wardens in battle for the glory. Loghain had his scouts scouring the wilds, and saw no sign of an archdemon, but plenty of darkspawn. He didn't think it was a blight, and the Warden were bringing reinforcements from Orlais. He thought Orlais was doing what they did with Nevarra. Come in to help with a blight, and then never leave, occupying the country and conquering it when it was weakened.

In-game evidence suggests that Loghain was actually right about the Orlesians. He says at the landsmeet that the Wardens were bringing four legions of Chevaliers. However, Riordin said he brought with him six divisions of cavalry and infantry. A single division is much larger than a legion. Orlais lied about the number of troops they were sending. They sent FAR more than Ferelden was expecting.

It's true that they should've taken Duncan's warning more seriously, but it's also true that Orlais was up to something by lying about how many troops they were sending. Given their history, they probably were going to try and conquer Ferelden after helping deal with the darkspawn.

[Hazegurl]

Silfren wrote...

Hazegurl wrote...

Silfren wrote...
Duncan DID tell people they were facing a Blight.  Not taking him at his word was a bloody stupid thing to do.

I do agree that not taking a Grey Warden at his word was stupid. However, what ticked me off about Duncan was the fact that he did not fully explain how he knew, or give any tangible reason to be believed. He doesn't have to explain the full ritual unless he has to but he could have at least said, that the reason why Grey Wardens are needed during Blights is because we sense the presence of the Archdemon we know when one is nearby or not and I can sense the Archdemon is active. Duncan never spells it out clearly like that at all. Even the Warden can ask Alistair "why Duncan just didn't tell everyone that" and naturally Alistair defends Duncan by saying he did say it because he said he feels this is a Blight. Well no, Alistair. That's not enough. Saying you feel it is a Blight is not the same as explaining how you've reached that conclusion. That is only info you would know if you were a Grey Warden. Pretty much Duncan was being cryptic and not explaining things completely so as not to scare away potential recruits.

Well, once again, Alistair didn't say that Duncan felt it was a Blight, he says that Duncan said he felt the archdemon's presence.  Personally I think that should have been enough to give someone pause, whether Duncan explained how it was he could feel the archdemon's presence or not.

www.youtube.com/watch

Around 12:19 Duncan is not doing a very good job of explaining that this is truly a Blight and there is an active archdemon behind this. Calian voices his doubts and Duncan is too busy placating him to just out right drill it into his skull that this is a Blight. Instead he replies with "Disappointed?" despite Alistair's words in Duncan's defense (which is more hero worship than anything), he is wrong. Duncan may have stated that there is an archdemon at work or maybe that he feels its presence but when he backtracks and says he can't just expect them go on his feeling alone then he isn't inspiring any confidence in his word. Seems a little like backtracking to me. Mind you I agree with you that they should have just taken Duncan at his word and treated it seriously until they see further proof but Duncan was getting on my nerves and Alistair needs to shut it about Duncan(and I say this although I love the guy). Duncan was not commanding any type of authority there despite being the Blight expert. It's no wonder no one believed him.

[lil yonce]

Hazegurl wrote...

Youth4Ever wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Hazegurl wrote...
Youth4Ever & Mister JB You both are knocking it out of the park.

All this "you're great...no you're great," is getting kind of silly.  Could we have a discussion without the circle jerk?

Ew. What a gross reference. Could we have a discussion without the put downs? Or is this the alternative?

LOL! Seems like putting people down for not agreeing is all that is left.

Well, we tried. I can never agree with war as a trump card. You should playa cardz right instead and save that for last.

Really, if you want to take up Anders' mantle embrace it but don't pretend you're a moderate or that you care about attempting bloodless reform. SMH.

And it's difficult to debate seriously someone when they call your posts stupid and use such a condescending tone to express themselves. When they put you down for no apparent reason.

Perhaps subsequent debates will fair better.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 29 avril 2013 - 06:32 .

[MisterJB]

LobselVith8 wrote...
How is that an example of the First Enchanter sharing power when the Knight-Commander has all the authority, and overrides the wishes of the First Enchanter and the King of Ferelden when it comes to preventing the Fifth Blight from taking place?

Ok, I'm going to explain to you how a compromise works.
Irvings wants to send all mages. Gregoir wants to send none. They argue and eventually reach a number both can live with, 7. Mages are sent o earn some sympathy points from Ferelden but the small number means Gregoir can choose more loyal mages such as Wynne over more rebellious ones such as Anders and, if they escape or become Abominations, they can be stopped more easily.
That is a compromise, that is working together and sharing power. That is the Circle System working.
What you want is for the mages to have ALL the power and for the templars to be unable to do anything to stop them. And that is Tevinter.

Modifié par MisterJB, 29 avril 2013 - 01:41 .

[MisterJB]

Silfren wrote...
No, it hasn't actually been tried.  Tevinter, as I already pointed out, is not an example of what I'm talking about.  I don't know of any example where society has tried to accomodate mage freedom WHILE having safeguards in place to protect against magic abuses.

Chantry, pre-Circle. It didn't work.
Just because you think the rules were unresonable, that doesn't mean it wasn't a system where mages were free and there were rules in place to prevent magical abuse. And it still didn't work.
Besides, I do not believe that if mages were free, any rules to prevent magical abuse would stick for more than a couple of generations.
I doubt when Tevinter was first created, the non-mages started as slaves. The mages simply took more ground and more and more until we have the barbaric institution that exists in the Dragon Age.

Forbidding mages to use magic at all--except when the Chantry wants you to, is not reasonable. You CAN enact restrictions on mages using magic to hurt and dominate others WITHOUT saying "you can only ever use magic when I want you to, ever."  Why you think that demanding that no mage, ever, use magic for any reason, unless and until authorized to do so, is an acceptable thing that all mages should agree to is beyond me.  Even the codex you refer to, written by a Chantry sister, makes that point, that demanding that mages ONLY ever use magic as servants of the Chantry, and thinking the mages wouldn't chafe at being treated this way, was stupid.

For someone who seems to believe so much in equality between mages and non-mages, you sure seem opposed to banning the one thing that makes that equality impossible.
Magic exists to give supremacy of ones over others. Equality would be destroying magic or, at least, forbidding its use.

You always bring up the Dalish having mage rulers as if this is an inherently bad thing.  Since I don't see the much-fear inequality or brutality among Dalish peoples, I'm not sure what the hell your point is supposed to be.  Simply BEING a mage with leadership power is not automatically a sign of impending descent into madness and evil.

The Dalish are an autocratic system where power is granted only to mages. Not because they've proven to be the best suited for the position but simply because they are mages.
It's true that the Dalish are a very united people but that doesn't change the fact that mages have supremacy over non-mages amonsgt their society. there is no equality. My concerns do not lie solely upon the potential for abuses of a mage ruler.
Therefore, what I am opposed to is not mages holding political power, but political power being reserved for mages with basis on nothing beyond the fact they are mages, regardless of how benevolent those mages are.

Modifié par MisterJB, 29 avril 2013 - 02:03 .

[Hazegurl]

Youth4Ever wrote...
Well, we tried. I can never agree with war as a trump card. You should playa cardz right instead and save that for last.

Really, if you want to take up Anders' mantle embrace it but don't pretend you're a moderate or that you care about attempting bloodless reform. SMH.

And it's difficult to debate seriously someone when they call your posts stupid and use such a condescending tone to express themselves. When they put you down for no apparent reason.

Perhaps subsequent debates will fair better.

Right, just go ahead and say that mages should be free at the expense of everyone else's lives and be done with it. I also will never agree that war is the first thing you should run to when you want something done. Saying that no compromise can be reached with Templars when we have seen Templars and Mages work together since origins is ridculous and just making excuses for the actions of terrorist mages. As a matter of fact in DA2 there are Templars willing to side with mages and help them only to pay the price by being killed by those same mages they're trying to help.

MisterJB wrote...
Ok, I'm going to explain to you how a compromise works.
Irvings wants to send all mages. Gregoir wants to send none. They argue and eventually reach a number both can live with, 7.
That is a compromise, that is working together and sharing power. That is the Circle System working.
What
you want is for the mages to have ALL the power and for the templars to
be unable to do anything to stop them. And that is Tevinter.

That's pretty much what a compromise consists of but I don't think some mage supporters would agree with you as they feel Gregoir should have just allowed Irving to make the choice alone. I believe that therein lies the root of the issue surrounding these debates. Some mage supporters believe mages should never have to compromise as it has reached a point where anyone telling a mage they can't do something is somehow considered oppressing them.

[TEWR]

For someone who seems to believe so much in equality between mages and non-mages, you sure seem opposed to banning the one thing that makes that equality impossible.
Magic exists to give supremacy of ones over others. Equality would be destroying magic or, at least, forbidding its use.

Thing is, pre-Circle post Chantry Mages weren't even allowed to study magic and its associated dangers. That's negligence on the part of the Chantry. If they're not allowed to study magic and are only allowed to use it for menial tasks, they're at a bigger risk for possession.

Which, funnily enough, pro-Templars say that Mages must be trained (you among them JB) and that's something I agree with, but now you're saying Mages must be forbidden from using magic ever.

Not jiving there.

Now, you'd have a point maybe if Mages were allowed to study magic pre-Circle/post Chantry but were forbidden from actually using said magic. But that's not the case. DG said that the only time Mages were capable of practicing their magic was in isolated communities away from the Chantry and its Templars.

[MisterJB]

Agreed, that is negligence. Mages should learn enough magic so there is no risk of them sneezing and setting something on fire or believing in the nice lady with the claws who wants to wear their skin as a suit.
But it seems to me that people who demand equality should be willing to give up their demigod powers. Otherwise, it's not equality.

If we're lucky, maybe one in ten will stay away from magic. Bah.

Modifié par MisterJB, 29 avril 2013 - 03:10 .

[Lazy Jer]

MisterJB wrote...

Agreed, that is negligence. Mages should learn enough magic so there is no risk of them sneezing and setting something on fire or believing in the nice lady with the claws who wants to wear their skin as a suit.
But it seems to me that people who demand equality should be willing to give up their demigod powers. Otherwise, it's not equality.

If we're lucky, maybe one in ten will stay away from magic. Bah.

I'm sure there are a lot of mages who would give up their powers.  Bethany being a prime example of one.  Thing is...well first of all "Demigod" is an exaggeration, and second of all, short of the Rite of Tranquility, you really can't give up magical powers.

[TEWR]

Silfren wrote...

BlueMagitek wrote...

It wasn't a Blight to the world at that point, especially as Duncan wouldn't admit that the Wardens could actually feel the Archdemon. ~_^

On the contrary, Alistair says that Duncan told people he could sense the archdemon's presence. 

Regarding Duncan, the Blight, and whatnot, it's a bit of equal blame. Duncan didn't say enough for people to believe it was a Blight, but he has done enough for people to at least have cause to question him further on the matter.

Saying "I can feel the Archdemon's presence" isn't immediately enough, such that even Duncan says in a private moment with the Warden that he can't ask Cailan to act solely on his feelings.

OTOH, Duncan has traveled to Orzammar and the Deep Roads looking for evidence of the Archdemon to bring to the troops so that he can be believed. So they should've pressed the matter.

Personally, were I Duncan, I would've taken Cailan and Loghain off for a private meeting and told them about the intricacies of the Joining and why Wardens are necessary. The Warden mantra is that they'll do anything to defeat the Blight. Or at the very least lie to the two of them and say "I saw the Archdemon in the Deep Roads, dudes and dudettes."

They do not live up to that mantra of doing anything in the name of defeating the Blight.

MisterJB wrote...

The Circle has only existed for a few centuries. mages have existed for
thousands of years. Even the Chantry is older than the Circle.

The Circle has existed for a millenia, not a few centuries. The Chantry is only older by a decade, at most.

MisterJB wrote...

It has been tried, there are places in Thedas where mages are free. Not
only does it not work, it's not something that can be easily rectified
once we realize our mistake.

Haven, for all of its moral bankruptcy concerning outsiders, made it work. A non-Mage was the leader of the community, Mages have lived there for centuries without destroying the village/taking over, and so on.

BlueMagitek wrote...

Well, Flemeth does steal and eat children.

She actually doesn't. Those are unfounded rumors about her.

BlueMagitek wrote...

Free Mages do put out bounties for the knowledge of the most heinous and wretched of blood magics available.

No.

Blue Magitek wrote...

Free Blood Mages in Denerim go about murdering and mind warping people.

Which, funnily enough, if you read the journal entry or item description of the journal (can't remember which) it says that the Templar that did investigate brought the matter to his superiors who didn't even bother to investigate.

Dear lord Denerim has the same problem as Kirkwall. Templars aren't doing their jobs when someone comes up to them with concrete evidence on suspicious magical activity within the city.

Well, aside from the fact that all the Keepers we meet descend into madness and evil, you might have a point.

Except for Redemption's Dalish Keeper, who wasn't a bad guy at all. Or the fact that Mahariel's father wanted to integrate human and Elven activity more and more (without sacrificing Elven culture in the process). Or Keeper Ilshae, who didn't advocate revenge against the humans.

Marethari's a unique example and Zathrian's susceptible to human issues, as are we all.

Yes, all the ones we meet may have done some bad things, but it'd be erroneous to use that as wholesale evidence of the Dalish Keepers as a whole considering we hear of the mindsets of more and even see one of those.

[Lazy Jer]

Youth4Ever wrote...

^^@LazyJer; Do you know about the Palace at Cumberland? Its not a Circle itself. It's Capitol Hill for the Magi. Do you know how they waste every opportunity to negotiate and install proper change at their gatherings. How they accomplish absolutely nothing-- not even more mundane issues are resolved there? Do you think the petty bickering amongst them will disappear when they're starving in the wilderness?

Do they think everyone in Thedas has the opportunity, the right by Chantry law, to advocate and lobby as one voice? They take for granted the position and power they do wield. They have stupid leaders. Where's a Lucrosian when you need one? They have the right idea when it comes to instituting Circle reform and establishing a real and stable independence.

And precautions, as strict as they appear, are necessary. A mage could instantly become a danger to everyone around them should they be so weak as to allow a demon to possess them. Irving had restricted tomes in his office and was he accused of being a blood mage? No. Who has been accused of being a blood mage from reading a tome that wasn't on blood magic? In Jowan's case, he did read tomes on blood magic. In any case, you don't go behind your mentor's or watcher's back to learn powerful magic in secret and expect them not to do anything about it. The Templars have a ruthless, thankless responsibility, but it is one that must be carried out.

None of which takes away from the fact that a mages life isn't the "beer and skittles" life some pro-Templar folks make it out to be.  Irving may have not been accused of being a blood mage for having forbidden tomes in his office, but that's because Greigor is one of the more reasonable Knight-Commanders.  If Meredith *ahem* I mean certain other overzealous Knight Commanders had seen that they'd have put Irving's head on a pike first and called for the Rite of Annulment later.  And it's also not like all mages are given the chance to pass the Harrowing.  The Harrowing is a rite of passage meant only for those deemed strong enough.  If you're not, you get The Brand, like it or not.

My point is that yeah they get an education and they get nicer digs, on average, then most folks.  But most folks have a better chance at living to be 30 years old without being turned into an emotionless husk of a being, so there's an evening out there.

[Hazegurl]

Lazy Jer wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

Agreed, that is negligence. Mages should learn enough magic so there is no risk of them sneezing and setting something on fire or believing in the nice lady with the claws who wants to wear their skin as a suit.
But it seems to me that people who demand equality should be willing to give up their demigod powers. Otherwise, it's not equality.

If we're lucky, maybe one in ten will stay away from magic. Bah.

I'm sure there are a lot of mages who would give up their powers.  Bethany being a prime example of one.  Thing is...well first of all "Demigod" is an exaggeration, and second of all, short of the Rite of Tranquility, you really can't give up magical powers.

I agree, there are some mages who would give up their powers but I think asking them to do so would be extreme imo. I think Magic is very useful and even beautiful in the sense that one can harnest nature et al (I love the elemental magic the most). I don't think mages should give up using their power, I do believe they should be restricted so as not to cause veil tears, I believe they should strive to not become so reliant on magic to the point where it causes stagnation in technology etc. Blood magic and demon summoning shouldn't be used simply because you've hit a road block in life. But get rid of magic completely? No, that would be too much. I also wouldn't call them demigods.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Personally, were I
Duncan, I would've taken Cailan and Loghain off for a private meeting
and told them about the intricacies of the Joining and why Wardens are
necessary. The Warden mantra is that they'll do anything to
defeat the Blight. Or at the very least lie to the two of them and say
"I saw the Archdemon in the Deep Roads, dudes and dudettes."

They do not live up to that mantra of doing anything in the name of defeating the Blight.

I agree. Duncan sadly didn't do everything he could and he had such a good chance to do it. Like Calin was going to call him a liar if he told them he saw it in the deep roads. Heck he should have demanded that Loghain go through the joining.  Even if Loghain had some of his soldiers go through the joining instead they could confirm the archdemon for him after a nightmare.

[MisterJB]

Lazy Jer wrote...
I'm sure there are a lot of mages who would give up their powers.  Bethany being a prime example of one.  Thing is...well first of all "Demigod" is an exaggeration, and second of all, short of the Rite of Tranquility, you really can't give
up magical powers.

I expect Bethany to be a rare case. Most mages probrably wish to be Tevinters.
The point is that before the Circle, mages were not locked up, the Chantry's demand was that magic not be used which, to me, seems like a fair deal.
Equality goes both ways. If the mages wish to have the same rights as any man, then they should have the same capabilities as any man and not more.
But the mages refused. They wanted magic which indicates that what they wish is supremacy, not equality.

[Silfren]

MisterJB wrote...

Just because you think the rules were unresonable, that doesn't mean it wasn't a system where mages were free and there were rules in place to prevent magical abuse. And it still didn't work.

We don't know exactly how that system worked.  We know only that the Chantry forbade mages from using magic ever, except when the Chantry needed magic for its own purposes.  It was determined that mages should exist as servants to the Chantry and little more.  Of course it didn't work...it is not justifiable to tell someone that they can ONLY use magic when YOU want them to.

For someone who seems to believe so much in equality between mages and non-mages, you sure seem opposed to banning the one thing that makes that equality impossible.
Magic exists to give supremacy of ones over others. Equality would be destroying magic or, at least, forbidding its use.

I have repeatedly asserted that mages should have some oversight so that magical abuses should be punished.  I have also repeatedly said that yes, there should be restrictions on mages using magic to injure or dominate others.  I have no issues with that at all.  But of course I would be opposed to an outright ban on it, as you are suggesting. YOU are the one taking an uncompromising stance, suggesting that magic should be outright banned so that mages never, EVER use it for any reason. 

You can't see why this is unreasonable?  Magic is an inborn ability.  You can't turn it on and off with a switch--you can't ban it any more than you can ban someone from having a genius-level intellect.  And you are totally ignoring that magic has plenty of beneficial uses.  Why should a mage have to have seek out Chantry authorization to use magic to heal a sick or injured person?  Why should they have to have permission to use their abilities to, say, keep a village from being drowned during a serious flood?  Why couln't it be enough to make it illegal for mages to use their powers for ill, instead of instituting a total ban on it?

Never minding the fact that even if you did instate a total ban--assuming mages were living freely, which is the only situation in which a ban would serve any purpose at all--it would be impossible to enforce.  Mages WOULD want to use their powers to benefit themselves and their loved ones, and to serve their communities....and people would quickly learn to resent a mage whose response to "please heal my leg before I develop gangrene," was "nope, sorry, Chantry banned me from using magic at all."

Modifié par Silfren, 29 avril 2013 - 04:46 .

[MisterJB]

It's exactly because I believe that a ban on magic would be impossible to enforce that I think segregating mages is the answer to the problem.

It's not unresonable at all to demand that mages just stop using their powers if they want to be equals. The biological differences that exist between non-mages are small. Some are stronger, others are smarter but that's the extent of it. It's not the same as the abiltiy to conjure firestorms from thin air and...not. It's an abysmal difference.
"We want equality but we also want to keep our demigod powers so we can benefit ourselves." That is not equality.

[Silfren]

MisterJB wrote...

Lazy Jer wrote...
I'm sure there are a lot of mages who would give up their powers.  Bethany being a prime example of one.  Thing is...well first of all "Demigod" is an exaggeration, and second of all, short of the Rite of Tranquility, you really can't give
up magical powers.

I expect Bethany to be a rare case. Most mages probrably wish to be Tevinters.

Most people generally want nothing more than the freedom to live their own lives.  Mages also being people, are mostly going to want no more than that. 

I wonder sometimes how you can get through the day without giving in to utter despair, given your ultra-negative perspective of people.

The point is that before the Circle, mages were not locked up, the Chantry's demand was that magic not be used which, to me, seems like a fair deal.
Equality goes both ways. If the mages wish to have the same rights as any man, then they should have the same capabilities as any man and not more.
But the mages refused. They wanted magic which indicates that what they wish is supremacy, not equality.

Do you expect people with talents that put them above others in some way to squelch those talents in the name of equality?  Is it not enough to simply require that they do not use those talents to bring injury?

A person with natural inborn talents is naturally going to want to use those talents (assuming they aren't terrified of them).  Wanting to use it does NOT automatically mean they want to be supreme over others.  This is ridiculous.  You're starting to come across as a person who is jealous of other people's abilities and demands that they not use them lest you feel inferior.

[MisterJB]

Silfren wrote...
Most people generally want nothing more than the freedom to live their own lives.  Mages also being people, are mostly going to want no more than that.

Most people want to be rich, famous and powerful. And when they get something, then they automatically want something else.
Someone who has a sports car will want a dozen next. Someone who has freedom, will want power next.

Do you expect people with talents that put them above others in some way to squelch those talents in the name of equality?

No, which is why I support locking the mages for life without chance of parole.

Is it not enough to simply require that they do not use those talents to bring injury?

A person with natural inborn talents is naturally going to want to use those talents (assuming they aren't terrified of them).  Wanting to use it does NOT automatically mean they want to be supreme over others.  This is ridiculous.  You're starting to come across as a person who is jealous of other people's abilities and demands that they not use them lest you feel inferior.

Has it taken you this long to realize there is a measure of jealousy in the issue? My rants about mages forcing non-mages into secondary roles in society given their natural advantage didn't tip you off sooner?
Equality works both ways. Which means mages get to experience all of the joys free life in Thedas has to offer but they must also deal with the potential suffering.
Equality does not mean mages get to have the same rigths and simply avoid the unpleasantness with a snap of their fingers. There is no justice there for non-mages just like there isn't in the Circle system  for mages.
No one said life is just.

Modifié par MisterJB, 29 avril 2013 - 05:32 .

[LobselVith8]

Youth4Ever wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

Because unless every non-mage accepts mages with open arms, war is the only acceptable solution? Because, Maker knows, magical world war is clearly the best way for them to endear themselves to the general population.
Of course the war was avoidable. The mages don't rebel. There, the war has been avoided.
Meanwhile, actually reasonable people such as Wynne and Justinia work on compromises while the extremists shut the hell up and the whole continent is not set on fire.

Win, win, win. 

I know, right? 

I know how disingenious the two of you are being, that's for certain.

Have the Circles of Magi declared war on mundanes? No.

Have the templars defected from the Chantry to hunt down men, women, and children for refusing to live in servitude to the Chantry anymore? Yes.

Are the two of you blaming thousands men, women, and children because they want to be free of an oppressive regime that has spread fear and intolerance against them, to the point of committing genocide against an entire population of innocent people (see: Circle of Kirkwall and Circle of Rivain)? Yes.

The leadership made a democratic vote to seperate themselves from the Chantry and the templars. Instead of living in subjugation to an anti-mage religious order where mages can be tranquil without contesting the charges against them, where the Chantry and the templars have dominion over mages in the name of the Maker, the mages finally freed themselves from tyranny and oppression.

The mages emancipated themselves from the Chantry of Andraste and the Order of Templars. They didn't declare war on anyone. Nor does anything that MiserJB said demand that mages bend knee to the Chantry or the Templar Order for another millennia.

Pointing out that Andrastians have negative and hostile views towards mages is the result of the preachings of the Chantry, which is precisely why mages are so reviled and hated among the people living in the Andrastian kingdoms - in comparison to many non-Andrastian societies where mages aren't controlled by templars, where mages and magic aren't reviled.

The fact that you and MiserJB are so disingeious as to ignore the fact that it's the templars who are trying to kill thousands of men, women, and children for refusing to live in servitude to the Chantry or the Templar Order is precisely what I know.

[Silfren]

MisterJB wrote...

Silfren wrote...
Most people generally want nothing more than the freedom to live their own lives.  Mages also being people, are mostly going to want no more than that.

Most people want to be rich, famous and powerful. And when they get something, then they automatically want something else.
Someone who has a sports car will want a dozen next. Someone who has freedom, will want power next.

Nearly all of the people I know refute this.  They want enough to be free of struggle.  They don't want fame, and don't necessarily want any more money or power than gives them control over their own life. 

I'm aware that a lot of people in the world want more than they have and covet anything and everything, and look upon those people who DO have money, fame, and power with jealousy.  I do not believe, however, that this is most people.  That hasn't been my experience in the least.

Has it taken you this long to realize there is a measure of jealousy in the issue? My rants about mages forcing non-mages into secondary roles in society given their natural advantage didn't tip you off sooner?

......I made a general comment with actual people and actual, real-world abilities in mind.  I didn't expect you to admit you were jealous of fictional mages.

[MisterJB]

Silfren wrote...
Nearly all of the people I know refute this.  They want enough to be free of struggle.  They don't want fame, and don't necessarily want any more money or power than gives them control over their own life.

People lie. It doesn't look good admitting your deepest desires. 

......I made a general comment with actual people and actual, real-world abilities in mind.  I didn't expect you to admit you were jealous of fictional mages.

And I made a comment with the context of Thedas in mind.
Obviously, I am not jealous of fictional mages. But I understand that jealousy does place a role in the entire issue.

[LobselVith8]

Hazegurl wrote...

Youth4Ever & Mister JB You both are knocking it out of the park.  

Because Youth4Ever is acting like this is the first response made by the mages, when they have had to endure the Chantry controlled Circles for nearly a millennia?

Because MisterJB has argued that Cullen's comments about templars having dominion over mages by divine right should be ignored because he insinuated that Cullen is an extremist because of his history at the Circle of Ferelden, despite the fact that the developers have gone on record as stating that Cullen is supposed to be an example of a moderate templar?

Because both of them are condemning men, women, and children for refusing to live their lives in servitude?

Hazegurl wrote...

War is certainly avoidable, the mages just don't want to avoid it.

The mages didn't declare war; the templars left the Chantry of Andraste to hunt down men, women, and children, so they are the ones who have declared war on the mages for refusing to live their lives on their knees. What you and the rest of the pro-templars in this thread continue to do is ignore the facts: the mages have endured the subjugation of the Chantry controlled Circles for nearly a millennia, and they finally decided that enough was enough, so they broke free. That's it. No declaration of war; they simply refuse to live their lives in service to the Chantry or the templars anymore.

Hazegurl wrote...

They give no thought to how life would be for them and their families post war and zero means to even support themselves as free mages cause I don't see anyone trusting a mage enough to have them around after this. I hope they have fun getting crushed in their zero resource having war and starving afterwards if the Chantry doesn't bother to show them enough mercy to let them back into the circle.  

The fact that you and the rest of the pro-templars in this thread are acting like the mages weren't trying hard enough with their oppressors, or making factually inaccurate statements about the mages declaring war simply because the mages won't accept Chantry domination anymore, is what makes your line of thought so fallacious.

[Silfren]

MisterJB wrote...

Silfren wrote...
Nearly all of the people I know refute this.  They want enough to be free of struggle.  They don't want fame, and don't necessarily want any more money or power than gives them control over their own life.

People lie. It doesn't look good admitting your deepest desires.

And maybe you're just wrong.  You certainly don't have any business insinuating you know my friends, family, and associates better than I do.

[MisterJB]

Silfren wrote...
And maybe you're just wrong.  You certainly don't have any business insinuating you know my friends, family, and associates better than I do.

Fair enough. I meant no offence.

[LobselVith8]

MisterJB wrote...

Yes, it has been tried. Several times, in fact. Mages were not contained before the Chantry existed and they created the Tevinter Imperium.

Elven mages weren't controlled, and they created the kingdom of Arlathan. There were elven mages and non-mages who established the nation of the Dales.

MisterJB wrote...

Even after the Chantry was created, mages were not confined to the Circles, they were just forbidden from using magic. It did not work because the mages refused to abide by these rules. They demand equality but refuse to abstain from what makes equality impossible.

You mean the peaceful protest lead by the mages over their lack of rights, that Divine Ambrosia II wanted to response to with an Exalted March on her own cathedral? Is that the example you're honestly using here?

MisterJB wrote...

And then there are societies like the Dalish where the mages are free and they are the ruling class.

I'm not sure how much of a larger scale you want. Tevinter encompassed all of the continent and it's not going to be a few rules that are going to make the difference. The Chantry had rules before the Circle and Templars to enforce them and it didn't work.

Except we have societies where mages aren't controlled, and they don't emulate Tevinter, so this line of thought is contradicted by the history of Thedas.

MisterJB wrote...

Equality between mages and non-mages is simply impossible.

Except we know there are societies where mages aren't controlled, but they aren't in a position of leadership over everyone, either.