731 réponses à ce sujet

[Silfren]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Wasn't the spell that created darkspawn said to use both tons of slaves and tons of lyrium? So then spells can use both power sources.

There is nothing that says a spell can't be powered by both. But if a spell can be powered by both, then it isn't truly blood magic, since blood needs to exclusively power the spell. So for a spell to belong to the blood magic school of spells, then only blood can power it. 

The fault of your logic being that going with it, Merrill wasn't using blood magic to cleanse the shard.  She clearly states that had she had access to lyrium she could have used it instead of blood.  But nobody would rightly argue that she wasn't using blood magic.  She was, and by her own acknowledgement. 

Something may not be specifically classified as a blood magic spell if it can be powered by either lyrium or blood, but it's pure fallacy to use this to claim that ONLY spells which can only be powered by blood qualify as blood magic.  Powering a spell with blood makes it blood magic, whether or not lyrium could have been used.  If you're going to argue with this, Emp, then you'll have to bend your personal brand of 'logic into some very interesting pretzel forms to explain Merrill.

Modifié par Silfren, 07 mai 2013 - 12:55 .

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Silfren wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Don't argue that tranquility is mind-rape then.

It's not a term I've used--I call it psychic castration.  But I can see why it's called mind-rape, and I also see a clear difference between using mind control in a single, temporary instance to prevent an individual from causing harm to someone, and permanently stripping someone of their emotional capacity because they are considered too weak-willed.  The two situations are in no way morally equivalent at all.

Minor Correction: the procedure might be more accurately described as a lobotomy than a castration.

As for whether or not it's justified, the idea is that it makes mages less tempting to demons. I'd argue that breaking one person is a better idea than risking the lives of dozens of templars and mages. And it would be even more so were mages were allowed to live outside the Circles. Connor basically wiped out Redcliffe on his own, because there were no templars or Senior Enchanters to put him down.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 07 mai 2013 - 12:58 .

[The Elder King]

LobselVith8 wrote...

As I said earlier, blood magic can be used for good, and I pointed out an example of how even mind control can be used for an altruistic purpose by stopping Vaughan or the darkspawn.

Mages have other magical ways to stop Vaughan beside blood magic mind control, and without killing him. Unless mind control is proven to be oviously better (a non-mage with a strong will could resist it, as it was shown in DA2), I don't think why in this case it should be necessarly for a mage to use blood magic.
It could be useful in other situations, but I don't see the need in this case, for a mage.

[Silfren]

[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

[quote]Silfren wrote...

[quote]Dave of Canada wrote...

Don't argue that tranquility is mind-rape then.[/quote]

It's not a term I've used--I call it psychic castration.  But I can see why it's called mind-rape, and I also see a clear difference between using mind control in a single, temporary instance to prevent an individual from causing harm to someone, and permanently stripping someone of their emotional capacity because they are considered too weak-willed.  The two situations are in no way morally equivalent at all.

[/quote]

Minor Correction: the procedure might be more accurately described as a lobotomy than a castration.[/quote]

Nope.  With the attendant label of 'psychic' before it, castration fits just fine.
[/quote]

[LobselVith8]

hhh89 wrote...

While I don't think they're equal, a mage could stop Vaughan in a lot of other non-lethal ways without using blood magic, but simply magic.

Vaughan also had a large number of guards with him, and Andrastians despise mages. It's a covert way to stop Vaughan without inviting the wrath of pretty much everyone around you for being a mage.

hhh89 wrote...

The only advantage of mind control would be if Vaughan couldn't remember what happened, so that he could stay hidden  and not expose himself to the noble's rage, but from what I understand, people know that they are controlled. With blood magic mind control a mage would simply have another way to stop Vaughan. He could've stopped him with other magics. 

Vaughan abducted a large number of elven women in broad daylight. Nobody cared. As Duncan points out, some people see elves as less than people.

[azarhal]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Solmanian wrote...

If a spell contains Lyrium, than it can't be blood magic. Lyrium is used for "conventional" spells, because it tapping into the fade. Observe the spell jowan/irving use to confront the demon that possessed connor: you can either drain a person dry, or use a ton of lyrium. Lyrium is the power source, not the blood; the blood is used to for it's connection to the darkspawn and archdemons. An unintiated, which is probably any non-mage, would probably have no way of diferentiating between a blood spell and a spell that merely uses blood.

Wasn't the spell that created darkspawn said to use both tons of slaves and tons of lyrium? So then spells can use both power sources.

There is nothing that says a spell can't be powered by both. But if a spell can be powered by both, then it isn't truly blood magic, since blood needs to exclusively power the spell. So for a spell to belong to the blood magic school of spells, then only blood can power it. THe ritual the Tevinters used, obviously wasn't pure blood magic, however, since blood is a resource in more abbundance than Lyrium, I can see why they would use both. Or it could have beena  myriad of different spells, a mixture of blood magic and normal magic, all culminating in the Veil Being torn and the portal to the Black City opened.

Blood magic isn't a school of magic, it's the practice of converting blood into mana to cast or strengthen spells. It's an extremely efficient conversion in term of quantity vs power achieved compared to lyrium, so cheaper to use and easier to find.

[Silfren]

hhh89 wrote...

The only advantage of mind control would be if Vaughan couldn't remember what happened, so that he could stay hidden  and not expose himself to the noble's rage, but from what I understand, people know that they are controlled. With blood magic mind control a mage would simply have another way to stop Vaughan. He could've stopped him with other magics. 

Blood magic CAN be used to make a person forget. 

[Silfren]

azarhal wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Solmanian wrote...

If a spell contains Lyrium, than it can't be blood magic. Lyrium is used for "conventional" spells, because it tapping into the fade. Observe the spell jowan/irving use to confront the demon that possessed connor: you can either drain a person dry, or use a ton of lyrium. Lyrium is the power source, not the blood; the blood is used to for it's connection to the darkspawn and archdemons. An unintiated, which is probably any non-mage, would probably have no way of diferentiating between a blood spell and a spell that merely uses blood.

Wasn't the spell that created darkspawn said to use both tons of slaves and tons of lyrium? So then spells can use both power sources.

There is nothing that says a spell can't be powered by both. But if a spell can be powered by both, then it isn't truly blood magic, since blood needs to exclusively power the spell. So for a spell to belong to the blood magic school of spells, then only blood can power it. THe ritual the Tevinters used, obviously wasn't pure blood magic, however, since blood is a resource in more abbundance than Lyrium, I can see why they would use both. Or it could have beena  myriad of different spells, a mixture of blood magic and normal magic, all culminating in the Veil Being torn and the portal to the Black City opened.

Blood magic isn't a school of magic, it's the practice of converting blood into mana to cast or strengthen spells. It's an extremely efficient conversion in term of quantity vs power achieved compared to lyrium, so cheaper to use and easier to find.

Actually it is a school of magic, there are spells which can only be cast with blood.  The problem is that it can refer to both this school, and simply the act of using blood as the power source for any spell.  (I don't think there's any conversion of blood to mana, though. Blood remains blood).

http://dragonage.wik...orbidden_School

[azarhal]

Silfren wrote...

azarhal wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Solmanian wrote...

If a spell contains Lyrium, than it can't be blood magic. Lyrium is used for "conventional" spells, because it tapping into the fade. Observe the spell jowan/irving use to confront the demon that possessed connor: you can either drain a person dry, or use a ton of lyrium. Lyrium is the power source, not the blood; the blood is used to for it's connection to the darkspawn and archdemons. An unintiated, which is probably any non-mage, would probably have no way of diferentiating between a blood spell and a spell that merely uses blood.

Wasn't the spell that created darkspawn said to use both tons of slaves and tons of lyrium? So then spells can use both power sources.

There is nothing that says a spell can't be powered by both. But if a spell can be powered by both, then it isn't truly blood magic, since blood needs to exclusively power the spell. So for a spell to belong to the blood magic school of spells, then only blood can power it. THe ritual the Tevinters used, obviously wasn't pure blood magic, however, since blood is a resource in more abbundance than Lyrium, I can see why they would use both. Or it could have beena  myriad of different spells, a mixture of blood magic and normal magic, all culminating in the Veil Being torn and the portal to the Black City opened.

Blood magic isn't a school of magic, it's the practice of converting blood into mana to cast or strengthen spells. It's an extremely efficient conversion in term of quantity vs power achieved compared to lyrium, so cheaper to use and easier to find.

Actually it is a school of magic, there are spells which can only be cast with blood.  The problem is that it can refer to both this school, and simply the act of using blood as the power source for any spell.  (I don't think there's any conversion of blood to mana, though. Blood remains blood).

http://dragonage.wik...orbidden_School

From World of Thedas: "As breath is to breathing, mana is to magic. Mana is a measurement of one's ability to draw power from the Fade, and it is this power that is expended in magic."

I took the definition to mean that mana is a quantitative representation of magical potential. When performing blood magic, blood become mana (the magical potential of the mage to cast a spell).

[In Exile]

azarhal wrote...
I took the definition to mean that mana is a quantitative representation of magical potential. When performing blood magic, blood become mana (the magical potential of the mage to cast a spell).

Blood has unique properties and powers. It can substitute for lyrium, but lyrium is toxic and blood isn't, so they're not the same, even as a catalyst (of sorts). Blood mages can also perform acts that regular mages can't - mind control being the big one. That certainly makes it a unique class of spellcasting. 

[LPPrince]

The capability of boiling someone's blood while still in their bodies is pretty hard to justify, methinks.

[In Exile]

LPPrince wrote...

The capability of boiling someone's blood while still in their bodies is pretty hard to justify, methinks.

Hostage crisis? 

[LPPrince]

Couldn't there just be some other spell that prevents all physical movement and speech from an enemy without having to go to those extremes?

[Silfren]

LPPrince wrote...

Couldn't there just be some other spell that prevents all physical movement and speech from an enemy without having to go to those extremes?

The only instance I know of where boiling someone's blood is mentioned, it's in regard to a Magister taking defensive action against invading Qunari.  That's not a situation in which someone would be of a mind to just render them immobile or speechless--in war, you destroy your enemies, you don't leave them alive to fight another day.  I agree that boiling blood is, well, kinda horrific.  But the objective in war is NOT to find humane ways to stop them from attacking.

Modifié par Silfren, 07 mai 2013 - 03:33 .

[LPPrince]

Ooh, while I'm here I should state where I sit on the mage-templar thing.

Personally(not speaking for my characters) I feel like mages do need to be kept in check, but in a way that keeps all sides safe and happy without hurting anyone. Used in the right way, templars+circle could pull it off.

Problem- There's some serious corruption going on in some parts of that system.

Now, my Warden? (Prince Cousland, what up) He sided with the mages in the Circle Tower. He felt the Templars were coming on a little strong if they were going to punish all the mages for the actions of one. He also was cool with Jowan, because at least Jowan was aware that he screwed up and needed to repent for his previous actions.

My Hawke? (Alexandria Hawke why are you so inept? At least you were hilarious at times) Well, she saw way too much corruption on the sides of both templars and mages, but ended up siding with the templars most of the time. She couldn't let go all of the atrocities that a lot of mages were committing nor all the potential damage they were doing(Anders/Justice=Vengeance almost killing a girl). She had to deal with her mom being killed by a blood mage, on top of it all. And it turns out even Orsino couldn't be trusted as he sent things back and forth with the killer(O Quentin). Templars were the best solution, but even they could go overboard(one attempting to tranquil every mage, having tranquil sex slaves to rape). She felt Templars she could have a better chance of controlling.

So where my Inquisitor will stand? Dunno. We'll get there.

[Silfren]

Faerunner wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

The capability of boiling someone's blood while still in their bodies is pretty hard to justify, methinks.

It's an excellent area of effect spell that only hurts hostile targets. It paralyses them while damaging them so they can't hurt you in the process, and unlike most legal offensive magic (primal and entropy) it has no friendly fire. Can make an excellent crowd control tactic in battle, and save countless guards or soldiers from being killed in melee. I've saved many companions and ally fighters (in Redcliffe and Denerim) from being killed that way.

At least, it was like that in DA:O. Don't know if they changed it for DA2.

I'm not sure the gameplay effect can be translated into the lore in this instance.  If you were mass-targeting a group, how would you be able to identify hostile targets and exempt your own?  Seems like that would require a LOT of psychic focus, with potential for unintended targets regardless.  If you're just targeting an area so that anyone within it gets their blood boiled, you're GOING to hit non-hostile targets in the area.  Seems like the spell would be most useful for taking out a mass of enemy soldiers before they've engaged your own. 

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Silfren wrote...
If you're just targeting an area so that anyone within it gets their blood boiled, you're GOING to hit non-hostile targets in the area.  Seems like the spell would be most useful for taking out a mass of enemy soldiers before they've engaged your own.  

Well, it might be possible to make a spell more discriminative than that, if there's large enough internal differences between the targets. It might be possible to design a blood-effecting spell to only harm kossith, since they're apparently different enough internally that the Qunari are able to come up with a poison that harms everything except kossith. (I know the Qunari themselves don't use that term, and the devs don't like it; on the other hand it rolls off the tongue better than "horned qunari," and I doubt that it's the Qun that protects the Qunari from that poison.)

(And of course, if there's human or elven qunari in the battle, this becomes sort of a half-measure.)

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 07 mai 2013 - 04:11 .

[Silfren]

LPPrince wrote...

Ooh, while I'm here I should state where I sit on the mage-templar thing.

Personally(not speaking for my characters) I feel like mages do need to be kept in check, but in a way that keeps all sides safe and happy without hurting anyone. Used in the right way, templars+circle could pull it off.

Problem- There's some serious corruption going on in some parts of that system.

Now, my Warden? (Prince Cousland, what up) He sided with the mages in the Circle Tower. He felt the Templars were coming on a little strong if they were going to punish all the mages for the actions of one. He also was cool with Jowan, because at least Jowan was aware that he screwed up and needed to repent for his previous actions.

My Hawke? (Alexandria Hawke why are you so inept? At least you were hilarious at times) Well, she saw way too much corruption on the sides of both templars and mages, but ended up siding with the templars most of the time. She couldn't let go all of the atrocities that a lot of mages were committing nor all the potential damage they were doing(Anders/Justice=Vengeance almost killing a girl). She had to deal with her mom being killed by a blood mage, on top of it all. And it turns out even Orsino couldn't be trusted as he sent things back and forth with the killer(O Quentin). Templars were the best solution, but even they could go overboard(one attempting to tranquil every mage, having tranquil sex slaves to rape). She felt Templars she could have a better chance of controlling.

So where my Inquisitor will stand? Dunno. We'll get there.

I find your comment about the Ferelden Circle interesting, because in this case it was NOT about punishing innocent mages.  Greagoir's reasoning there was that there were SO many demons and abominations running loose that there was no choice but to annul the Circle.  A good portion of his own forces had been wiped out, so he had to retreat and seal the doors.  He faced a situation where there were so many abominations and demons about that the likelihood of surviving mages was slim anyway, innocent or no.  It didn't have a thing in the world to do with punishing innocent people for Uldred's crime; it was simply about containing a truly disastrous situation.  There's no room for question here:  Greagoir is notably different from Meredith in that he faced a true crisis in which a brutal, kill-all response is not unreasonable, because his motivation is NOT to slaughter innocents, and he faces a concrete threat. 

[In Exile]

Silfren wrote...
 Greagoir is notably different from Meredith in that he faced a true crisis in which a brutal, kill-all response is not unreasonable, because his motivation is NOT to slaughter innocents, and he faces a concrete threat.  

More importantly, if left to his own devices with Irving alive, Gregoire tells Cullen off and sees the Circle as saved. He doesn't condemn the mages to Aeonar. 

[LPPrince]

Silfren wrote...

I find your comment about the Ferelden Circle interesting, because in this case it was NOT about punishing innocent mages.  Greagoir's reasoning there was that there were SO many demons and abominations running loose that there was no choice but to annul the Circle.  A good portion of his own forces had been wiped out, so he had to retreat and seal the doors.  He faced a situation where there were so many abominations and demons about that the likelihood of surviving mages was slim anyway, innocent or no.  It didn't have a thing in the world to do with punishing innocent people for Uldred's crime; it was simply about containing a truly disastrous situation.  There's no room for question here:  Greagoir is notably different from Meredith in that he faced a true crisis in which a brutal, kill-all response is not unreasonable, because his motivation is NOT to slaughter innocents, and he faces a concrete threat. 

Aye, its been years since I've played Origins, I'm likely remembering it wrong. Gracias.

Regardless, my Warden didn't feel that the Circle needed to be annulled. He was a goody goody who tried to save as many as he couldy couldy.

[Solmanian]

LobselVith8 wrote...

I think some people would prefer to vilify blood magic rather than acknowledge that it's not inherently evil. They act like the abuses of this specific school performed by the Magisters should condemn all blood magic. There are Grey Wardens and apostates (like Merrill) who haven't used it for malicious purposes.

The only cannonical grey warden practicing blood magic is the guy that summonedan army of demons to overthrow the rightfull king of fereldan, and got pretty much every warden but him killed in the process. And oh yeh, he also turtured and killed a ****load of wardens in the hopes of creating a taint-based magic (similar to what darkspawn are using).

Merril is a showcase of an impossibly naive approach to blood magic. It's possible that the writers were simply trolling all pro-blood magic players.The fact that she doesn't become an abomination is a miracle by itself.

Blood magic has an inherent escalation to evil. By researching blood magic you quickly reach the inevitable conclusion: if you want to cast more powerfull spells, you need more blood. Using your own blood is incredibly innefficient; as anyone who donated blood can tell you, you'll need between hours to days to recover from casting a spell - much worse than using standard casting, where you usually recover your strength in minutes. using someone else's blood is much more efficient; you get more "juice" (pun intended), and don't need a long recovery time. It's only a matter of time before you sacrifice hundreds of slaves so you could invade the maker golden city. It's always the end result, people just walk it in a different pace, and most encounter "speed bumps" in the way like templars or simply the fact that sacrificing hundreds of people is extremely expansive, and incredibly complicated ordeal. And pretty much everyone will be trying to stop you; wehter it's for the altruistic reason of stopping the slaughter, or merely the competition wanting to deny you that power.

It's like the argument of "guns don't kill people. people kill people". Sure, the reasoning may true; doesn't mean you should be handing out machine guns in the street.

[Silfren]

In Exile wrote...

Silfren wrote...
 Greagoir is notably different from Meredith in that he faced a true crisis in which a brutal, kill-all response is not unreasonable, because his motivation is NOT to slaughter innocents, and he faces a concrete threat.  

More importantly, if left to his own devices with Irving alive, Gregoire tells Cullen off and sees the Circle as saved. He doesn't condemn the mages to Aeonar. 

No, he just inflicts his horribly traumatized extremist-turned templar on an entirely different group of mages. 

Ah, Cullen.  How I hope to see you as a companion in DA:I with a much more comprehensible personality and backstory.

Modifié par Silfren, 07 mai 2013 - 04:31 .

[Silfren]

Solmanian wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I think some people would prefer to vilify blood magic rather than acknowledge that it's not inherently evil. They act like the abuses of this specific school performed by the Magisters should condemn all blood magic. There are Grey Wardens and apostates (like Merrill) who haven't used it for malicious purposes.

The only cannonical grey warden practicing blood magic is the guy that summonedan army of demons to overthrow the rightfull king of fereldan, and got pretty much every warden but him killed in the process. And oh yeh, he also turtured and killed a ****load of wardens in the hopes of creating a taint-based magic (similar to what darkspawn are using).

Merril is a showcase of an impossibly naive approach to blood magic. It's possible that the writers were simply trolling all pro-blood magic players.The fact that she doesn't become an abomination is a miracle by itself.

Blood magic has an inherent escalation to evil. By researching blood magic you quickly reach the inevitable conclusion: if you want to cast more powerfull spells, you need more blood. Using your own blood is incredibly innefficient; as anyone who donated blood can tell you, you'll need between hours to days to recover from casting a spell - much worse than using standard casting, where you usually recover your strength in minutes. using someone else's blood is much more efficient; you get more "juice" (pun intended), and don't need a long recovery time. It's only a matter of time before you sacrifice hundreds of slaves so you could invade the maker golden city. It's always the end result, people just walk it in a different pace, and most encounter "speed bumps" in the way like templars or simply the fact that sacrificing hundreds of people is extremely expansive, and incredibly complicated ordeal. And pretty much everyone will be trying to stop you; wehter it's for the altruistic reason of stopping the slaughter, or merely the competition wanting to deny you that power.

It's like the argument of "guns don't kill people. people kill people". Sure, the reasoning may true; doesn't mean you should be handing out machine guns in the street.

I disagree that researching (and using) blood magic means that any mage doing so will inevitably decide to use more and more blood to cast more and more spells.  This entire argument assumes that the only reason a mage would ever use blood magic would be for power's sake alone, and also implies an addictive quality.  I don't see this as the inevitable conclusion.  Not all mages lust for power, and not everyone who uses magic automatically seeks out more and more powerful spells. 

Believing this requires a belief that all people, no matter their personality or belief system, ultimately want power and upon having a taste of it will always seek more and more of it.

I'm not saying that blood magic isn't dangerous or that there isn't potential for abuse; nor am I saying that no mages would ever be tempted or outright corrupted by the potential for more and greater power.  But I don't see this as the inevitable conclusion of each individual mage exposed to it--not all mages want to cast powerful spells for no greater purpose than casting powerful spells: for mages who prefer to use their magic for beneficial reasons and not just for power's sake, see Wynne, or Irving, or Bethany.  And rest assured that there are more than just three total mages in the entirety of Thedas who feel this way.

It would have to be exercised with caution and wisdom, but, say you're a mage in the midst of battle and you've run outof lyrium.   Are you obligated to let your life be forfeit rather than slice into your own palm to save yourself?  Or to save someone else?  

Modifié par Silfren, 07 mai 2013 - 04:45 .

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Silfren wrote...

In Exile wrote...

Silfren wrote...
 Greagoir is notably different from Meredith in that he faced a true crisis in which a brutal, kill-all response is not unreasonable, because his motivation is NOT to slaughter innocents, and he faces a concrete threat.  

More importantly, if left to his own devices with Irving alive, Gregoire tells Cullen off and sees the Circle as saved. He doesn't condemn the mages to Aeonar. 

No, he just inflicts his horribly traumatized extremist-turned templar on an entirely different group of mages. 

Ah, Cullen.  How I hope to see you as a companion in DA:I with a much more comprehensible personality and backstory.

The sad part is, Gregoir actually did the Kirkwall mages a favor; at least Cullen's saner than Meredith.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 07 mai 2013 - 04:51 .