1082 réponses à ce sujet

[IanPolaris]

BlueMagitek wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

BlueMagitek wrote...

^ But River, it appears that, from DA:O, Senior Enchanters more or less fit that definition anyway. Wynne just needed permission from Irving to go, Gregoire didn't get a say at all. She didn't even need a Templar escort, nor did her herbologist rival in DA:A.

And Amaranthine isn't in ruins. So they can be allowed that much liberty.

That is the point, Senior Enchanters already seem to have that much liberty. 

Not really.  You have a whole sample size of two Senior Enchanters both of which have impeccable records.  That's not enough to draw any kind of universal conclusions about Senior Enchanters as a whole.

IanPolaris wrote...

BlueMagitek wrote...

You're definitely right. Mages should have the right to be legally raped by a Chevalier just like any other person.

Orlesion
culture is all messed up in ways that don't involve magic.  Some
Orlesian laws and customs are simply immoral by any standard.  That does
not diminish my overall point.

-Polaris

You're asking for Mages to be treated like everyone else, but no one in Thedas is treated as you describe.

Holy Generalizations Batman!  In fact even Fereldan Peasents are treated the way I describe.  A Fereldan is entitled to a hearing by a magister and due process.  To some degree this also applies in Nevarra and even the Free Marches (certainly we see it in Kirkwall).  Orlais is a human rights cesspool, but we've known that for a long time.

-Polaris

[BlueMagitek]

IanPolaris wrote...

It's a better idea to send the Chevalier to the hell that he deserves and change the laws that permit it.

-Polaris

You only seem to care about it for when it happens to mages though. :/

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

IanPolaris wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...


The fact remains that it's a really good idea to keep mages away from situations like this. Especially the ones who have not proven themselves minimal risks to go abomination. (Do not mistake that as me being concerned for the chevalier.)

It's a better idea to send the Chevalier to the hell that he deserves and change the laws that permit it.

-Polaris

If we have the option to change the laws that allow it, I'll do so. (Well, assuming I'm not in the midst of my villain playthrough. Because you know I'm going to do one.) That doesn't change the fact that not everybody follows the law; rape is illegal in most of the modern world, and it still happens. People who have been allowed to rape whoever they want for as long as anyone can recall? They're unlikely to stop even if I get the authority to make a law saying they have to. So keeping mages away from that situation is easier if they're in a controlled environment. (Unless, you know, that environment is controlled by Meredith. And Templars having no legal way to get any consensually probably doesn't help much. Someone should look into that.)

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 01 juin 2013 - 06:39 .

[Hazegurl]

Well let's look on the bright side. If the mages were out of the Circles they would have no education which means they won't even be able to read any spell books nor write any.

[BlueMagitek]

IanPolaris wrote...

Holy Generalizations Batman!  In fact even Fereldan Peasents are treated the way I describe.  A Fereldan is entitled to a hearing by a magister and due process.  To some degree this also applies in Nevarra and even the Free Marches (certainly we see it in Kirkwall).  Orlais is a human rights cesspool, but we've known that for a long time.

-Polaris

Tell that to the Alienage Elves in Ferelden.  Tell that to the bandits that are put down on the spot.  Tell that to Jowan, who is immediately executed.  Tell that to the people of Redcliffe, who never see any justice for the horde of undead swept down upon them.  Tell that to the Casteless.  Tell that to everyone harmed by nobility.  The nobles can literally get away with murder in Ferelden, as they can in most any other place.

[Bleachrude]

Again....I'm not sure why people forget that as others have stated, NOBLES are different as this is a medeival land.

Other than Kirkwall, we see that in both Orlais and Ferelden, parents have contact with their children if they want to.

NOBLES and rich merchants are the ones that can make best use of this since again, in medieval lands, the common populace can't take time to visit people out of their own towns. Vacations is a modern 1st world feature....

(I REALLY don't think people understand just how much it sucked to be a serf in medieval Europe).

[Lotion Soronarr]

IanPolaris wrote...
Taking away children from a group and putting them into other groups is specifically laid out by the UN as a form of genocide.  Look it up.

-Polaris

You heard it from Polaris first folks!

Child services are GENOCIDE!!!!

Down with foster homes! Down with adoptions! Burn the orphanages!

And while we're at it, free all the people from the quarantene wing! Freedom (to die) to everyone!

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Dave of Canada wrote...

BlueMagitek wrote...

You're definitely right. Mages should have the right to be legally raped by a Chevalier just like any other person.

Legally raped, abused, murdered, stolen from, taxed, left to starve and freeze in the cold just like everyone else! None of that would make them want to abuse their powers. Let's not forget how monarchies would crack down on them to make them into an asset they could abuse!

Actually, if I was a monarch I'd probably be above-and-beyond generous to the mages in my domain. Though I would of course want them all to serve me exclusively, and ideally by helping me enlarge my domain. An Orlesian lord or emperor thinking along these lines is arguably scarier than the Chantry system.

[In Exile]

IanPolaris wrote...
If this were right after DAA or even DA2, I'd agree.  In fact if you'll recall my posts from a couple of years ago, I never advocating removing the circle system all at once.  Instead I advocated phasing it out while increasing magical regulation and security and phasing that responsibility to the various states.

How would that in any way reduce abuse? Ignoring that the idea that this could actually be a solution is far-fetched (because you'd be asking the mages to exchange one militant set of jailers for another), why would giving jurisdiction over the mages to each nation improve anything?

[In Exile]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
Actually, if I was a monarch I'd probably be above-and-beyond generous to the mages in my domain. Though I would of course want them all to serve me exclusively, and ideally by helping me enlarge my domain. An Orlesian lord or emperor thinking along these lines is arguably scarier than the Chantry system.

The problem, of course, is when you've got your non-magical mobility removed from power. What would you do? Give them land and titles? Raise them over your other nobles because they can zap people with their minds? Not only would you be essentially creating an entire new class of nobility, you'd also be effectively stripping power away from establishes knight and noble families. 

I can't see this ending in anything but civil war. 

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

In Exile wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
Actually, if I was a monarch I'd probably be above-and-beyond generous to the mages in my domain. Though I would of course want them all to serve me exclusively, and ideally by helping me enlarge my domain. An Orlesian lord or emperor thinking along these lines is arguably scarier than the Chantry system.

The problem, of course, is when you've got your non-magical mobility removed from power. What would you do? Give them land and titles? Raise them over your other nobles because they can zap people with their minds? Not only would you be essentially creating an entire new class of nobility, you'd also be effectively stripping power away from establishes knight and noble families. 

I can't see this ending in anything but civil war. 

I didn't mention ennobling them, I just said I'd treat them damn well. "Knight" does sound about right for the ones who are in the army, but not all of them would be that either. Some of them would be doctors. Some would be scholars, magic instructors, or bodyguards for circuit judges. Some of the ones I really trust might be circuit judges. And the ones who really distinguish themselves might be ennobled, ideally by receiveing lands they took for me.

Edit: Though of course my original point was that we don't want kings doing this, since a king who did would probably be able to gain a whole lot of power, and this could be really unfortunate if that king is a tyrant. So your point helps the argument that this is a bad thing. I'm just saying you misunderstood what I was originally envisioning.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 01 juin 2013 - 11:01 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

In Exile wrote...
How would that in any way reduce abuse? Ignoring that the idea that this could actually be a solution is far-fetched (because you'd be asking the mages to exchange one militant set of jailers for another), why would giving jurisdiction over the mages to each nation improve anything?

If anything it would make things much worse.
The Chantry is relatively neutral territory so it keeps mages out of politics. So each nation would try to use mages to gain an advantage.

[In Exile]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

I didn't mention ennobling them, I just said I'd treat them damn well.

But that's what treating them well would amount to. You'd be giving them wealth, political power, land, inheritance laws... you'd put them on a pedestal. If one in one generation, then certainly in few, as the mages would be hungry for advancement. 

"Knight" does sound about right for the ones who are in the army, but not all of them would be that either. Some of them would be doctors. Some would be scholars, magic instructors, or bodyguards for circuit judges. Some of the ones I really trust might be circuit judges. And the ones who really distinguish themselves might be ennobled, ideally by receiveing lands they took for me.

That sounds like a mage burgeoise. We've seen how that went in Europe, politics wise. 

Anyway, now I get what you're saying re: it being problematic anyway, so no need for me to drone on.

[LobselVith8]

BlueMagitek wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

It's a better idea to send the Chevalier to the hell that he deserves and change the laws that permit it.

-Polaris

You only seem to care about it for when it happens to mages though. :/ 

If Ian is addressing that the laws should be changed to protect people from these abuses and that the chevaliers shouldn't have the right to abuse the non-nobles of the empire (as well as face punishment for their actions when they commit such crimes), how is he focusing only on the plight of mages?

Modifié par LobselVith8, 02 juin 2013 - 12:55 .

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

LobselVith8 wrote...

BlueMagitek wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

It's a better idea to send the Chevalier to the hell that he deserves and change the laws that permit it.

-Polaris

You only seem to care about it for when it happens to mages though. :/ 

If Ian is addressing that the laws should be changed to protect people from these abuses and that the chevaliers shouldn't have the right to abuse the non-nobles of the empire (as well as face punishment for their actions when they commit such crimes), how is he focusing only on the plight of mages?

The accusation, as I understand it, is that Ian only comments on mage v. templar threads because he doesn't really care about any of the characters except the mages, and that he's only agreeing this law should be changed because when the Circles are gone this will effect mages. Having not read any posts of Ian's about non-mages (if there are any), I can't really judge the validity of this accusation.

[LobselVith8]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

The accusation, as I understand it, is that Ian only comments on mage v. templar threads because he doesn't really care about any of the characters except the mages, and that he's only agreeing this law should be changed because when the Circles are gone this will effect mages. Having not read any posts of Ian's about non-mages (if there are any), I can't really judge the validity of this accusation.

I've read comments from Ian in threads that had nothing to do with mages, so I don't see how that accusation has any merit.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

The accusation, as I understand it, is that Ian only comments on mage v. templar threads because he doesn't really care about any of the characters except the mages, and that he's only agreeing this law should be changed because when the Circles are gone this will effect mages. Having not read any posts of Ian's about non-mages (if there are any), I can't really judge the validity of this accusation.

I've read comments from Ian in threads that had nothing to do with mages, so I don't see how that accusation has any merit.

I doubted it myself, I was just trying to make sense of it.

[BlueMagitek]

If you all say so. The point remains that the downtrodden of Thedas (read: everyone not a mage, wealthy merchant or noble) do not have pleasant lives, and there seems to be a bit of dissonance between what, shall we call, complete freedom from Circles and how Thedas actually is.

The only time I see any ideas about improved lives for other peoples are the Dalish. At the very least, there does not appear to be even a tenth of discussion about the normal, common people of Thedas and how their rights are oft squashed.

[KiwiQuiche]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...
Taking away children from a group and putting them into other groups is specifically laid out by the UN as a form of genocide.  Look it up.

-Polaris

You heard it from Polaris first folks!

Child services are GENOCIDE!!!!

Down with foster homes! Down with adoptions! Burn the orphanages!

And while we're at it, free all the people from the quarantene wing! Freedom (to die) to everyone!

I think you are just acting stupid since you obviously missed the point of Polaris's post.

I'm fairly sure Polaris is referencing to the mage treatment with genocide; the mages are forcibly taken from families with the templars completely ignoring if the child is well loved and looked after, which child services doesn't do, they don't steal children from loving, caring homes. The mages are not permitted to ever contact their families and friends, they are completely cut off from their life and basically wiped from that record (such as never being able to hold titles and treated as if they are diseased). That is also something child services does not do.

Mages aren't able to be adopted. They are locked up in a tower and never allowed to leave their entire life barring a few. Their children are taken from them the instant they are born and most never see the sky again. Child services is not like that. The templars do forcibly take children and lock them up for the rest of their life.

Stop acting like that, it makes you look like a moron.

[Ausstig]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Ausstig wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...
"they're not all bad" (qunari). and hate would-be conquerors (qunari). the good side of the qunari need to be shown - and shown in a manner that leaves no doubt that they exist. But the fact that the writing team wants to bring this home to even the most biased or oblivious player results in overstressing the point - and we get DA2's portrayal of mages and MotA's forced complicity in a qunari plot.

When were the Qunari shown as bad?

I hate how everyone (except the oh so evil Sister Petrice) likes them. Alister reaches out to them, the Arishock is shown as being pushed, the Vicount's son loves them, he is also made to look very sympathic to modern views. And Hawk sides with them, always in the case MotA and by defult (unless you are very agressive) in the main game.

When were they shown as bad? Well, when Sten admits that they'll eventually come conquering. When it is pointed out that people in their domains who don't agree with their philosophy are brainwashed to become good little followers? This may be too subtle for some people, but this is actually worse than the slavery in Tevinter, right on track with mind-control by blood magic.

No I agree that they are worse then Tevinter. I want to know why the people (Alister, Hawk, etc) don't trat as the horrible monsters they are and those that do (SisterPetrice, Duke Prosper) are treated as wrong and evil, sorry if my point wasn't claer.

I know they are the biggest threat to thedas, next to the darkspawn, but why don't they get treated as such?

[KiwiQuiche]

Ausstig wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Ausstig wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...
"they're not all bad" (qunari). and hate would-be conquerors (qunari). the good side of the qunari need to be shown - and shown in a manner that leaves no doubt that they exist. But the fact that the writing team wants to bring this home to even the most biased or oblivious player results in overstressing the point - and we get DA2's portrayal of mages and MotA's forced complicity in a qunari plot.

When were the Qunari shown as bad?

I hate how everyone (except the oh so evil Sister Petrice) likes them. Alister reaches out to them, the Arishock is shown as being pushed, the Vicount's son loves them, he is also made to look very sympathic to modern views. And Hawk sides with them, always in the case MotA and by defult (unless you are very agressive) in the main game.

When were they shown as bad? Well, when Sten admits that they'll eventually come conquering. When it is pointed out that people in their domains who don't agree with their philosophy are brainwashed to become good little followers? This may be too subtle for some people, but this is actually worse than the slavery in Tevinter, right on track with mind-control by blood magic.

No I agree that they are worse then Tevinter. I want to know why the people (Alister, Hawk, etc) don't trat as the horrible monsters they are and those that do (SisterPetrice, Duke Prosper) are treated as wrong and evil, sorry if my point wasn't claer.

I know they are the biggest threat to thedas, next to the darkspawn, but why don't they get treated as such?

I think it's because the qunari haven't started kicking some ass yet; they are just biding their time, whereas the darkspawn turned into a Blight, which got everyones attention and most assume the qunari are occupied with Tevinter.

[Bleachrude]

KiwiQuiche wrote...

The mages are not permitted to ever contact their families and friends, they are completely cut off from their life and basically wiped from that record (such as never being able to hold titles and treated as if they are diseased). That is also something child services does not do.

Mages aren't able to be adopted. They are locked up in a tower and never allowed to leave their entire life barring a few. Their children are taken from them the instant they are born and most never see the sky again. Child services is not like that. The templars do forcibly take children and lock them up for the rest of their life.

Given that senior enchanters seem to be able to come and go as they please, not seeing this at all.

Furthermore, both Orlais and Ferelden have mages which have contact with not only their family but also with the wider world....again, people are using Kirkwall as the standard even though both Orlais and Ferelden are in direct contrast with this.

Again, I'm not sure how much I can say this but it is VERY unlikely that your typical commoner can afford the time or money to visit a child in a circle but that's due to classism.

[Ausstig]

Vortex13 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

All of which shows that mages need to have special and mandatory training, and that acts of magic should not be treated the same way as mundane acts even if they are otherwise the same crime. I would treat the use of magic as an automatic aggravating factor, and THOSE mages that use their magic criminally should be locked away and locked away very security (if not outright killed in some cases).

That does not justify putting all mages into what amounts to concentration camps though.

Yes it does.

The concentration camp comparison doesn't really fit into this discussion; we aren't dealing with the same thing here.

I don't agree with the opinion that Mutant Registration Act (Marvel comics) or the Circle equals a WW2 concentration camp. The MRA and the Circle are based on legitimate danger posed by a person being able to flatten a city block with their mind. The Greman concentration camps were based on racism and hatred. If a Jewish person could shoot fire out of their hands or melt a person's face off by looking at them, then yes the comparison would be valid, but not when one is dealing with super powered beings and the other is propaganda and racism.

I agree with the Circle system, but not the MRA, each mutant has different powers while some are dangerious, a lot aren't so taring them all with the same brush seems wrong. ALL mages howecer have the power to be bloodmages and/or abominations so taking actions with them, ie putting them in Boer war era Concentration camps (places to 'concentrate' the local population inorder to stop them helping the Boer Commandos[read resistiance]).

[KiwiQuiche]

Bleachrude wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

The mages are not permitted to ever contact their families and friends, they are completely cut off from their life and basically wiped from that record (such as never being able to hold titles and treated as if they are diseased). That is also something child services does not do.

Mages aren't able to be adopted. They are locked up in a tower and never allowed to leave their entire life barring a few. Their children are taken from them the instant they are born and most never see the sky again. Child services is not like that. The templars do forcibly take children and lock them up for the rest of their life.

Given that senior enchanters seem to be able to come and go as they please, not seeing this at all.

Furthermore, both Orlais and Ferelden have mages which have contact with not only their family but also with the wider world....again, people are using Kirkwall as the standard even though both Orlais and Ferelden are in direct contrast with this.

Again, I'm not sure how much I can say this but it is VERY unlikely that your typical commoner can afford the time or money to visit a child in a circle but that's due to classism.

Did you read the part where I said "barring a few"? Guess not.

In Fereldan? Where? Only the oldest mages can leave or contact anyone else and Wynn points out how her son was taken from her as soon as she gave birth.

Indeed it is. There is no reason to steal someones child and lock them up, which the templars are able to do with the Chantry's blessing.