Xilizhra wrote...
What are they but genocidal marauders by this point?
Slavers. They're not out to kill every single mage, they're out to bring them back to the Circles, under presumably much harsher restrictions.
The Templar perspective
Débuté par
Lotion Soronarr
, juin 06 2013 01:57
#1001
Posté 17 juin 2013 - 02:11
In Exile
-
- Members
- 28 738 messages
Slavers. They're not out to kill every single mage, they're out to bring them back to the Circles, under presumably much harsher restrictions.
Retour en haut
#1002
Posté 17 juin 2013 - 02:14
Riverdaleswhiteflash
-
- Members
- 7 914 messages
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
[quote]Vit246 wrote...
Mages do not solo entire cities. It doesn't work that. Why? Because they are powerful, but they are not that powerful. Mages don't spontaneously become abominations and than spontaneously explode like an "atom bomb" or whatever similar to wiping out a city (people need to stop using the bomb word).[/quote]
You're right on that score; a bomb that takes several nights to empty Redcliffe would be pretty hard to swallow.
[/quote]
Let's also not forget that Redcliffe represented just about the worst possible case. You had a land in the middle of a civil war, the Circle of Magi either under seige or destroyed (and along with it most of the Templars). Finally you had a fairly isolated village and an abomination that was 'lucky' enough to have a working pool of people to start with.[/quote]
In the absence of Templars, I think just about any people around would be a "working pool".
[quote]
In more normal times, (remember that Bann Teagan asked for help many times and that the circle tower is less than a day away), the Templar would come, and that would be that. There would be loss of life but on a much smaller scale. [/quote]
How'd he manage that? If memory serves anyone leaving the village was pounced on starting from exactly when it became obvious the Templars were what was needed.
[quote]
I also note that the nature of the circle system itself was one of the reasons why Isolde her her son's abilities in the first place.[/quote]
The Chantry indocrination against magic was a large part of the problem, and should be remedied. If that's not enough then I would argue Isolde is wrong, not the system. Yes, parents and their unwillingness to surrender children should be considered, but unless it becomes clear that the system is doomed because of it, this should be addressed in ways other than dismantling the Circles.
[quote]No one is saying that untrained mages aren't dangerous, but with the right reforms, perhaps Isolde could have legally gotten a far, far better tutor than Jowan (hard to get one that's much worse IMO).
If so, Redcliffe simply doesn't happen.[/quote]
We have no way of knowing whether or not Jowan was a complete failure as a teacher. He could have been perfectly competent for teaching young mages, for all we know.
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
This is a repetivitive exaageration that has never had any basis. If it did, there's no way civilization would have grown and prospered. Its never happened ever.[/quote]
It happens rarely. A mage could turn, and if that happens the worst case scenario is that a city could fall if the abomination is not stopped in time. This is cited as fact in the Codex, in a letter to a man who one would think is capable of checking up on that fact. So, presumably, if this point didn't hold water it wouldn't be used, since there's already enough points in that letter that such a potentially costly exaggeration wouldn't be used.
[/quote]
That is untrue. There are a number of psychological studies that show that people will believe things with complete credulity that aren't true and never have been true, if it's repeated and asserted often enough especially by those in authority. The chantry from the Nevarran accords on has always held (publically anyway) that unchecked mages are an active danger that can 'go abomination' by stubbing their toes, and so needed to be locked away for the public good. The Chanty even insists that training doesn't change that (in fact Cullen says this repeatedly). The problem is the evidence doesn't support that, but it dfoesn't stop the Templars from claiming it (and too few people have challenged it until recently). I note that in private and with better educated audienances (nobility) the Chantry uses a different justification....fear of a Tevinter Magocracy.[/quote]
The letter I was referring to was to a lord who was questioning the need for the Circles, and the Grand Cleric who responded used both arguments. He is exactly the demographic you think the main argument won't fly with, and yet she raises both. Nor does the "Big Lie" technique really apply here, since this is a person who is questioning authority despite his culture telling him not to.
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]The Ferelden Circle was FULL of mages who had just become even worse than before. By this logic, perhaps Ferelden should've been wiped off the map?
[/quote]
That might well have happened, except that the Warden is essentially a god. As for why the standoff lasted as long as it did, don't forget there was a magical barrier blocking them, and that Uldred hadn't finished turning the other mages yet when the Warden reached him. Thus, the weaker demons were held in check, and the Pride Abomination in a Senior Enchanter hadn't turned his attention to removing that problem yet.
[/quote]
Any trained mage with manaclash could have retaken the tower. Really. It's not very hard.[/quote]
And yet Wynne and Irving didn't. Nor did any of the other trained mages.
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]Dark Korsar wrote...
3)before deamon, Uldred was a Enchanter with big powers and knoledges(maybe more than Irving had)...but still he was stoped by 1-4 peoples when he was become a deamon....Uldred can't massacre city especially when Fereldens have a Litanny of Andralla
[/quote]
This group was a smaller subset of the group that ended a Blight in a year. For reference, those usually last centuries. Don't use them as evidence that abominations aren't that tough; they really aren't compelling evidence in that direction.
[/quote]
Abominations really aren't that tough. We have no in game evidence of that.
-Polaris[/quote]
You are aware that I just addressed that line of thinking with the argument you think you just argued against?
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
[quote]Vit246 wrote...
Mages do not solo entire cities. It doesn't work that. Why? Because they are powerful, but they are not that powerful. Mages don't spontaneously become abominations and than spontaneously explode like an "atom bomb" or whatever similar to wiping out a city (people need to stop using the bomb word).[/quote]
You're right on that score; a bomb that takes several nights to empty Redcliffe would be pretty hard to swallow.
[/quote]
Let's also not forget that Redcliffe represented just about the worst possible case. You had a land in the middle of a civil war, the Circle of Magi either under seige or destroyed (and along with it most of the Templars). Finally you had a fairly isolated village and an abomination that was 'lucky' enough to have a working pool of people to start with.[/quote]
In the absence of Templars, I think just about any people around would be a "working pool".
[quote]
In more normal times, (remember that Bann Teagan asked for help many times and that the circle tower is less than a day away), the Templar would come, and that would be that. There would be loss of life but on a much smaller scale. [/quote]
How'd he manage that? If memory serves anyone leaving the village was pounced on starting from exactly when it became obvious the Templars were what was needed.
[quote]
I also note that the nature of the circle system itself was one of the reasons why Isolde her her son's abilities in the first place.[/quote]
The Chantry indocrination against magic was a large part of the problem, and should be remedied. If that's not enough then I would argue Isolde is wrong, not the system. Yes, parents and their unwillingness to surrender children should be considered, but unless it becomes clear that the system is doomed because of it, this should be addressed in ways other than dismantling the Circles.
[quote]No one is saying that untrained mages aren't dangerous, but with the right reforms, perhaps Isolde could have legally gotten a far, far better tutor than Jowan (hard to get one that's much worse IMO).
If so, Redcliffe simply doesn't happen.[/quote]
We have no way of knowing whether or not Jowan was a complete failure as a teacher. He could have been perfectly competent for teaching young mages, for all we know.
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
This is a repetivitive exaageration that has never had any basis. If it did, there's no way civilization would have grown and prospered. Its never happened ever.[/quote]
It happens rarely. A mage could turn, and if that happens the worst case scenario is that a city could fall if the abomination is not stopped in time. This is cited as fact in the Codex, in a letter to a man who one would think is capable of checking up on that fact. So, presumably, if this point didn't hold water it wouldn't be used, since there's already enough points in that letter that such a potentially costly exaggeration wouldn't be used.
[/quote]
That is untrue. There are a number of psychological studies that show that people will believe things with complete credulity that aren't true and never have been true, if it's repeated and asserted often enough especially by those in authority. The chantry from the Nevarran accords on has always held (publically anyway) that unchecked mages are an active danger that can 'go abomination' by stubbing their toes, and so needed to be locked away for the public good. The Chanty even insists that training doesn't change that (in fact Cullen says this repeatedly). The problem is the evidence doesn't support that, but it dfoesn't stop the Templars from claiming it (and too few people have challenged it until recently). I note that in private and with better educated audienances (nobility) the Chantry uses a different justification....fear of a Tevinter Magocracy.[/quote]
The letter I was referring to was to a lord who was questioning the need for the Circles, and the Grand Cleric who responded used both arguments. He is exactly the demographic you think the main argument won't fly with, and yet she raises both. Nor does the "Big Lie" technique really apply here, since this is a person who is questioning authority despite his culture telling him not to.
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]The Ferelden Circle was FULL of mages who had just become even worse than before. By this logic, perhaps Ferelden should've been wiped off the map?
[/quote]
That might well have happened, except that the Warden is essentially a god. As for why the standoff lasted as long as it did, don't forget there was a magical barrier blocking them, and that Uldred hadn't finished turning the other mages yet when the Warden reached him. Thus, the weaker demons were held in check, and the Pride Abomination in a Senior Enchanter hadn't turned his attention to removing that problem yet.
[/quote]
Any trained mage with manaclash could have retaken the tower. Really. It's not very hard.[/quote]
And yet Wynne and Irving didn't. Nor did any of the other trained mages.
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]Dark Korsar wrote...
3)before deamon, Uldred was a Enchanter with big powers and knoledges(maybe more than Irving had)...but still he was stoped by 1-4 peoples when he was become a deamon....Uldred can't massacre city especially when Fereldens have a Litanny of Andralla
[/quote]
This group was a smaller subset of the group that ended a Blight in a year. For reference, those usually last centuries. Don't use them as evidence that abominations aren't that tough; they really aren't compelling evidence in that direction.
[/quote]
Abominations really aren't that tough. We have no in game evidence of that.
-Polaris[/quote]
You are aware that I just addressed that line of thinking with the argument you think you just argued against?
Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 17 juin 2013 - 02:18 .
#1003
Posté 17 juin 2013 - 02:15
SamaraDraven
-
- Members
- 2 312 messages
I'd wager that Uldred would have used his abominations to possess and enslave everyone in the tower.Then he'd use the same tactic on others. Blood magic would turn everyone into his minions. He'd have his own army, given time. He may have believed, he could succeed at this. But that's not the way it went.Uldred was killed by the Warden. Either with the help of the Litany of Adralla or without it, Uldred meets the Warden's sword. So everything else is just conjecture. Using the Darkspawn war as a basis for drawing conclusions about the strength of abominations is still skewed inappropriately. Had the Darkspawn not been the issue, Uldred and his abominations, left unchecked, would have done devastating damage. I'd also point out that the Darkspawn are pretty stupid. If and when Uldred fell to them, considerable carnage would still have resulted beforehand. On a usual day, an abomination is a very severe threat. Connor laid waste to Redcliffe and he was a boy possessed by a desire demon. Dozens of men and women - maybe hundreds - died as a result. The Warden was scraping the barrel to bolster the ranks of able bodied men to fight. I twisted Lloyd's arm into volunteering, and that elven spy, paid Dwyn to help and convinced that blacksmith to do his job. Redcliffe was in sorry shape, thanks to one kid and Jowan's botched career as an assassin.
#1004
Posté 17 juin 2013 - 02:18
IanPolaris
-
- Members
- 9 650 messages
SamaraDraven wrote...
I'd wager that Uldred would have used his abominations to possess and enslave everyone in the tower.Then he'd use the same tactic on others. Blood magic would turn everyone into his minions. He'd have his own army, given time. He may have believed, he could succeed at this. But that's not the way it went.Uldred was killed by the Warden. Either with the help of the Litany of Adralla or without it, Uldred meets the Warden's sword. So everything else is just conjecture. Using the Darkspawn war as a basis for drawing conclusions about the strength of abominations is still skewed inappropriately. Had the Darkspawn not been the issue, Uldred and his abominations, left unchecked, would have done devastating damage. I'd also point out that the Darkspawn are pretty stupid. If and when Uldred fell to them, considerable carnage would still have resulted beforehand. On a usual day, an abomination is a very severe threat. Connor laid waste to Redcliffe and he was a boy possessed by a desire demon. Dozens of men and women - maybe hundreds - died as a result. The Warden was scraping the barrel to bolster the ranks of able bodied men to fight. I twisted Lloyd's arm into volunteering, and that elven spy, paid Dwyn to help and convinced that blacksmith to do his job. Redcliffe was in sorry shape, thanks to one kid and Jowan's botched career as an assassin.
Except there is a limit to how much you can enslave. If there wasn't the Tevinter Imperium never would have fallen. Bottom line, there is simply too much Fereldan to cover esp with a blight coming.
-Polaris
#1005
Posté 17 juin 2013 - 02:24
SamaraDraven
-
- Members
- 2 312 messages
IanPolaris wrote...
BlueMagitek wrote...
I believe some of the developers said they were going to make abominations more badass. Especially because abominations are supposed to use the magic potential of both demon and mage, while they just sort of run at you and suicide bomb you in game.of gameplay and story.
Pity they didn't in DA2 other than Pride Abominations, but wound up breaking most of the other lore in DA2 instead (summoning Abominations? Really?)
Yes I know about gameplay/story segregation. It's a trope, but if taken too far it harms WSD and it's taken too far here. The fact is abominations really aren't a big deal.
-Polaris
To us, as players, they're not a big deal. But to the people of Thedas, they're a huge deal. You can't hold the difficulties you have as a player up to the standard that dictates how big a threat abominations are to everyday people. If you, yourself as a person honestly encountered a demon or an abomination, you would die. Quickly. The poeple in Thedas are largely normal people. Most villages don't have armies. Farmers and merchants are taken from their homes by their lords to fight in wars they have no training for. There's never very many skilled fighters and the ones that do exist are providing their expertise elsewhere. An abomination would have a field day with this. You as a player may find them no big deal, but to the regular folk of Thedas, they're a horrible catastrophe.
Though it would be nice if the abominations were more of a challenge for players. lol!
#1006
Posté 17 juin 2013 - 02:31
IanPolaris
-
- Members
- 9 650 messages
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
[quote]Vit246 wrote...
Mages do not solo entire cities. It doesn't work that. Why? Because they are powerful, but they are not that powerful. Mages don't spontaneously become abominations and than spontaneously explode like an "atom bomb" or whatever similar to wiping out a city (people need to stop using the bomb word).[/quote]
You're right on that score; a bomb that takes several nights to empty Redcliffe would be pretty hard to swallow.
[/quote]
Let's also not forget that Redcliffe represented just about the worst possible case. You had a land in the middle of a civil war, the Circle of Magi either under seige or destroyed (and along with it most of the Templars). Finally you had a fairly isolated village and an abomination that was 'lucky' enough to have a working pool of people to start with.[/quote]
In the absence of Templars, I think just about any people around would be a "working pool".
[/quote]
I don't think so. The people that Conner-abomination started with were castle staff, i.e those closest to Conner himself. Notice that the Conner abomintaion does not mind-control anyone other than Bann Teagon either. Apparently there are strong limits to how much a demon (or anyone) can use bloodmagic to mind control. I also note that in more normal cases, messengers could have been sent to the circle within days and there would be regular trade, and the King's forces would be available to help.
No, Redcliffe was the worst possible case scenario.
[quote]
[quote]
In more normal times, (remember that Bann Teagan asked for help many times and that the circle tower is less than a day away), the Templar would come, and that would be that. There would be loss of life but on a much smaller scale. [/quote]
How'd he manage that? If memory serves anyone leaving the village was pounced on starting from exactly when it became obvious the Templars were what was needed.
[/quote]
This only happened AFTER the village had been effectively cut off because of the Civil War. Even then there were dark rumors (listen to the Lothering barkeep) that something wasn't right in Redcliffe. In more normal times, either Bann Teagon gets a messenger off, or one of his neighboring lords investigates. It doesn't go nearly this far. Also remember too that the castle was understaffed because Isolde sent out the knights. We also know that Redcliffe has a local knight commander in normal times.
Any or all of these could easily have shortstopped the situation.
[quote]
[quote]
I also note that the nature of the circle system itself was one of the reasons why Isolde her her son's abilities in the first place.[/quote]
The Chantry indocrination against magic was a large part of the problem, and should be remedied. If that's not enough then I would argue Isolde is wrong, not the system. Yes, parents and their unwillingness to surrender children should be considered, but unless it becomes clear that the system is doomed because of it, this should be addressed in ways other than dismantling the Circles.
[/quote]
Let me be very clear. I have never been against the circles per se. I have always held that education for mages should be mandatory and that magic comes wtih responsibility. Painting all mage-supporters as "let mages all be free without restrictions or consequences" is a canard of the worst sort. What the circle should NOT be is a prison. That means you don't forcibly seperate mothers from children. You don't take away babies at birth, and you DON"T put an organization that hates magic to be in charge,capiche'?
[quote]
[quote]No one is saying that untrained mages aren't dangerous, but with the right reforms, perhaps Isolde could have legally gotten a far, far better tutor than Jowan (hard to get one that's much worse IMO).
If so, Redcliffe simply doesn't happen.[/quote]
We have no way of knowing whether or not Jowan was a complete failure as a teacher. He could have been perfectly competent for teaching young mages, for all we know.
[/quote]
We've seen Jowan in game. I think I'm on very safe ground to say he's not who I'd pick to apprentice young mages.
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
This is a repetivitive exaageration that has never had any basis. If it did, there's no way civilization would have grown and prospered. Its never happened ever.[/quote]
It happens rarely. A mage could turn, and if that happens the worst case scenario is that a city could fall if the abomination is not stopped in time. This is cited as fact in the Codex, in a letter to a man who one would think is capable of checking up on that fact. So, presumably, if this point didn't hold water it wouldn't be used, since there's already enough points in that letter that such a potentially costly exaggeration wouldn't be used.
[/quote]
That is untrue. There are a number of psychological studies that show that people will believe things with complete credulity that aren't true and never have been true, if it's repeated and asserted often enough especially by those in authority. The chantry from the Nevarran accords on has always held (publically anyway) that unchecked mages are an active danger that can 'go abomination' by stubbing their toes, and so needed to be locked away for the public good. The Chanty even insists that training doesn't change that (in fact Cullen says this repeatedly). The problem is the evidence doesn't support that, but it dfoesn't stop the Templars from claiming it (and too few people have challenged it until recently). I note that in private and with better educated audienances (nobility) the Chantry uses a different justification....fear of a Tevinter Magocracy.[/quote]
The letter I was referring to was to a lord who was questioning the need for the Circles, and the Grand Cleric who responded used both arguments. He is exactly the demographic you think the main argument won't fly with, and yet she raises both. Nor does the "Big Lie" technique really apply here, since this is a person who is questioning authority despite his culture telling him not to.
[/quote]
Dont put words in my mouth. I never said that the better educated people would reject the abomination argument. I only say that it's not the primary line of defense for Chantry Apologetics in the upper classes (and it's not...the no Tevinter 2.0 line is). Actually the "Big Lie" does apply. I would say the Big Lie has been going on for so long that most in power in the Chantry genuinely believe it, but they've never really tested it or learned enough about demons or the fade to find out if it's really true. How else could they have gotten the nature of tranquility so badly wrong for almost a thousand years (Asunder)? How else could they not even sanction the careful and controlled studies of demons in order to fight against them? (Something WIlhelm of Honneleth bitterly complains about). How else could the chantry effectively neuter the study of medicine because of fear of bloodmagic (and I mean mundane medicine such as surgery).
[SNIP] The rest is about story/game segretation and how the game does not reflect what we are being asked to believe about abominations.
-Polaris
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
[quote]Vit246 wrote...
Mages do not solo entire cities. It doesn't work that. Why? Because they are powerful, but they are not that powerful. Mages don't spontaneously become abominations and than spontaneously explode like an "atom bomb" or whatever similar to wiping out a city (people need to stop using the bomb word).[/quote]
You're right on that score; a bomb that takes several nights to empty Redcliffe would be pretty hard to swallow.
[/quote]
Let's also not forget that Redcliffe represented just about the worst possible case. You had a land in the middle of a civil war, the Circle of Magi either under seige or destroyed (and along with it most of the Templars). Finally you had a fairly isolated village and an abomination that was 'lucky' enough to have a working pool of people to start with.[/quote]
In the absence of Templars, I think just about any people around would be a "working pool".
[/quote]
I don't think so. The people that Conner-abomination started with were castle staff, i.e those closest to Conner himself. Notice that the Conner abomintaion does not mind-control anyone other than Bann Teagon either. Apparently there are strong limits to how much a demon (or anyone) can use bloodmagic to mind control. I also note that in more normal cases, messengers could have been sent to the circle within days and there would be regular trade, and the King's forces would be available to help.
No, Redcliffe was the worst possible case scenario.
[quote]
[quote]
In more normal times, (remember that Bann Teagan asked for help many times and that the circle tower is less than a day away), the Templar would come, and that would be that. There would be loss of life but on a much smaller scale. [/quote]
How'd he manage that? If memory serves anyone leaving the village was pounced on starting from exactly when it became obvious the Templars were what was needed.
[/quote]
This only happened AFTER the village had been effectively cut off because of the Civil War. Even then there were dark rumors (listen to the Lothering barkeep) that something wasn't right in Redcliffe. In more normal times, either Bann Teagon gets a messenger off, or one of his neighboring lords investigates. It doesn't go nearly this far. Also remember too that the castle was understaffed because Isolde sent out the knights. We also know that Redcliffe has a local knight commander in normal times.
Any or all of these could easily have shortstopped the situation.
[quote]
[quote]
I also note that the nature of the circle system itself was one of the reasons why Isolde her her son's abilities in the first place.[/quote]
The Chantry indocrination against magic was a large part of the problem, and should be remedied. If that's not enough then I would argue Isolde is wrong, not the system. Yes, parents and their unwillingness to surrender children should be considered, but unless it becomes clear that the system is doomed because of it, this should be addressed in ways other than dismantling the Circles.
[/quote]
Let me be very clear. I have never been against the circles per se. I have always held that education for mages should be mandatory and that magic comes wtih responsibility. Painting all mage-supporters as "let mages all be free without restrictions or consequences" is a canard of the worst sort. What the circle should NOT be is a prison. That means you don't forcibly seperate mothers from children. You don't take away babies at birth, and you DON"T put an organization that hates magic to be in charge,capiche'?
[quote]
[quote]No one is saying that untrained mages aren't dangerous, but with the right reforms, perhaps Isolde could have legally gotten a far, far better tutor than Jowan (hard to get one that's much worse IMO).
If so, Redcliffe simply doesn't happen.[/quote]
We have no way of knowing whether or not Jowan was a complete failure as a teacher. He could have been perfectly competent for teaching young mages, for all we know.
[/quote]
We've seen Jowan in game. I think I'm on very safe ground to say he's not who I'd pick to apprentice young mages.
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
This is a repetivitive exaageration that has never had any basis. If it did, there's no way civilization would have grown and prospered. Its never happened ever.[/quote]
It happens rarely. A mage could turn, and if that happens the worst case scenario is that a city could fall if the abomination is not stopped in time. This is cited as fact in the Codex, in a letter to a man who one would think is capable of checking up on that fact. So, presumably, if this point didn't hold water it wouldn't be used, since there's already enough points in that letter that such a potentially costly exaggeration wouldn't be used.
[/quote]
That is untrue. There are a number of psychological studies that show that people will believe things with complete credulity that aren't true and never have been true, if it's repeated and asserted often enough especially by those in authority. The chantry from the Nevarran accords on has always held (publically anyway) that unchecked mages are an active danger that can 'go abomination' by stubbing their toes, and so needed to be locked away for the public good. The Chanty even insists that training doesn't change that (in fact Cullen says this repeatedly). The problem is the evidence doesn't support that, but it dfoesn't stop the Templars from claiming it (and too few people have challenged it until recently). I note that in private and with better educated audienances (nobility) the Chantry uses a different justification....fear of a Tevinter Magocracy.[/quote]
The letter I was referring to was to a lord who was questioning the need for the Circles, and the Grand Cleric who responded used both arguments. He is exactly the demographic you think the main argument won't fly with, and yet she raises both. Nor does the "Big Lie" technique really apply here, since this is a person who is questioning authority despite his culture telling him not to.
[/quote]
Dont put words in my mouth. I never said that the better educated people would reject the abomination argument. I only say that it's not the primary line of defense for Chantry Apologetics in the upper classes (and it's not...the no Tevinter 2.0 line is). Actually the "Big Lie" does apply. I would say the Big Lie has been going on for so long that most in power in the Chantry genuinely believe it, but they've never really tested it or learned enough about demons or the fade to find out if it's really true. How else could they have gotten the nature of tranquility so badly wrong for almost a thousand years (Asunder)? How else could they not even sanction the careful and controlled studies of demons in order to fight against them? (Something WIlhelm of Honneleth bitterly complains about). How else could the chantry effectively neuter the study of medicine because of fear of bloodmagic (and I mean mundane medicine such as surgery).
[SNIP] The rest is about story/game segretation and how the game does not reflect what we are being asked to believe about abominations.
-Polaris
#1007
Posté 17 juin 2013 - 02:31
SamaraDraven
-
- Members
- 2 312 messages
IanPolaris wrote...
Except there is a limit to how much you can enslave. If there wasn't the Tevinter Imperium never would have fallen. Bottom line, there is simply too much Fereldan to cover esp with a blight coming.
-Polaris
Perhaps with a Blight raging, perhaps. Perhaps Uldred saw it as an opportunity? Uldred was also part of a fraternity, was he not? There are others who felt as he did. He'd find more on the way. Plus the mages he forcibly possessed were now abominations who could enslave others' minds. A single Pride demon put the Warden and all of her friends to sleep in seconds. And they had help getting out. If Uldred had managed to force-possess all the mages in the tower, he'd be able to enslave many more minds with his abominations' help. I still think he'd be a good threat and do a lot of damage before he was stopped. He may also have gone into hiding while the Blight was dealt with and came out of the woodwork after it was over before Ferelden could rebuild.
#1008
Posté 17 juin 2013 - 02:37
BlueMagitek
-
- Members
- 3 583 messages
That was, I believe, a Sloth Demon, not a Pride demon. ~_^
#1009
Posté 17 juin 2013 - 02:42
IanPolaris
-
- Members
- 9 650 messages
SamaraDraven wrote...
IanPolaris wrote...
Except there is a limit to how much you can enslave. If there wasn't the Tevinter Imperium never would have fallen. Bottom line, there is simply too much Fereldan to cover esp with a blight coming.
-Polaris
Perhaps with a Blight raging, perhaps. Perhaps Uldred saw it as an opportunity? Uldred was also part of a fraternity, was he not? There are others who felt as he did. He'd find more on the way. Plus the mages he forcibly possessed were now abominations who could enslave others' minds. A single Pride demon put the Warden and all of her friends to sleep in seconds. And they had help getting out. If Uldred had managed to force-possess all the mages in the tower, he'd be able to enslave many more minds with his abominations' help. I still think he'd be a good threat and do a lot of damage before he was stopped. He may also have gone into hiding while the Blight was dealt with and came out of the woodwork after it was over before Ferelden could rebuild.
First off, let's make a distinction between Uldred and Uldred-Abomination. They are two different beings.
Uldred's plan was to essentially get the circle to openly back Loghain in the civil war. In return, Loghain would cut Chantry control over the circle and give mages more and better rights (apparently this is an old idea going all the way back to Calenhad. Apparently the Fereldan nobility and Fereldan itself has always been somewhat mage-friendly). In addition on a personal level, Uldred was to become the next First Enchanter with Loghain's backing.
Uldred came within a hair of pulling this off without any violence whatsoever. Nail tells you that the Senior Enchanters including Irving were abouit to take Loghain up on his deal...until Wynne came back, and that's when the fecal matter hit the wall. Even then Uldred had a backup plan. Pull a coup within the tower, seize the First Enchanter's chair and kick the Templars out. Then explain to Loghain what happened in the hope that Loghain would see it his way (or rather Loghain would rather have an alliance with the Fereldan tower rather than worrying about the sensibilities of the chantry). That too nearly worked....until Uldred did a dance with a demon that he didn't have the strength to control. At that point the Story of Uldred ends.
Near as I can tell, Uldred-Abomination didn't have much of a coherent plan other than taking over the tower and 'converting' as many mages as possible. According to Irving, he was going to then destroy the Templars, but after that it gets fuzzy. Remember too, that the mind-control magic that we are shown is extremely limited. Sure Uldred was able to turn mages into abominations against their will, but apparently only after a very long period of extensive torture and deprivation....and even then not everyone was susceptable (Cullen wasn't for example). If it takes weeks to break a prisoner in order to take over their mind, then that form of mind-control is limited at best and really isn't a threat to make a mass breakout (nor is it really a threat to influence the mind of a king or grand-cleric since a kidnapping and extensive torture would be needed,and that would both be very difficult to arrange,and alternate means of command and control could be found while the person is away).
-Polaris
#1010
Posté 17 juin 2013 - 02:45
IanPolaris
-
- Members
- 9 650 messages
SamaraDraven wrote...
IanPolaris wrote...
Except there is a limit to how much you can enslave. If there wasn't the Tevinter Imperium never would have fallen. Bottom line, there is simply too much Fereldan to cover esp with a blight coming.
-Polaris
Perhaps with a Blight raging, perhaps. Perhaps Uldred saw it as an opportunity? Uldred was also part of a fraternity, was he not? There are others who felt as he did. He'd find more on the way. Plus the mages he forcibly possessed were now abominations who could enslave others' minds. A single Pride demon put the Warden and all of her friends to sleep in seconds. And they had help getting out. If Uldred had managed to force-possess all the mages in the tower, he'd be able to enslave many more minds with his abominations' help. I still think he'd be a good threat and do a lot of damage before he was stopped. He may also have gone into hiding while the Blight was dealt with and came out of the woodwork after it was over before Ferelden could rebuild.
I don't know about your warden, but my warden needed no help getting out. It was simply a matter of solving the puzzle, and it was a sloth demon and it wasn't mind control (except perhaps on the crudest level). Basically the secret was that you had to want to believe and live in your dreams rather than struggle. If you struggled you could get out (although admittedly for most getting out meant death). Not only that but Uldred-Abomination shows absolutely no signs of that sort of ability (or else he could have ended the harrowing chamber battle instantly). The Mind Control we do see, takes times and is only effective on victims whose will has already been beaten out of them by torture and deprivation.
-Polaris
Modifié par IanPolaris, 17 juin 2013 - 02:46 .
#1011
Posté 17 juin 2013 - 02:48
SamaraDraven
-
- Members
- 2 312 messages
IanPolaris wrote...
I don't think so. The people that Conner-abomination started with were castle staff, i.e those closest to Conner himself. Notice that the Conner abomintaion does not mind-control anyone other than Bann Teagon either. Apparently there are strong limits to how much a demon (or anyone) can use bloodmagic to mind control. I also note that in more normal cases, messengers could have been sent to the circle within days and there would be regular trade, and the King's forces would be available to help.
No, Redcliffe was the worst possible case scenario.
I think you're assuming here. Uldred had several fellow mages attack the Warden if you didn't use the Litany. Simply because Connor didn't control doesn't mean he couldn't. If you confront Connor violently, you also have to fight all the Redcliffe castle staff there because he wascontrolling them too. Connor sent hordes of undead out into the town each night. Many were the bodies of those he'd already killed. Many had gone into the castle to try rescuing the people who all died. Connor enslaved many minds. But the demon couldn't control him all the time which seemed to be a special incident to him. So those limits seem more a matter of your conclusion rather than fact. When I didn't use the Litany against Uldred, the templars were all that was left to help against the Blight and Greagoir expresses sadness that the mages are all gone but that it couldn't be helped.
In normal cases when they're wasn't a Blight, a messenger could have been sent to help. That's why the Blight isn't as much of a hindrance to Uldred as you claim. Without a normal response system, Uldred could do a lot of harm before he was stopped. So would have Connor if the Warden hadn't shown up when she/he did. The Blight can't be both a huge thing that can stop an abomination's march AND something that helps. That's a blatant contradiction.
#1012
Posté 17 juin 2013 - 02:51
Riverdaleswhiteflash
-
- Members
- 7 914 messages
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
*large swath of text snipped*
Any or all of these could easily have shortstopped the situation.[/quote]
I don't see how being isolated by the Civil War would have stopped a messenger from leaving, and how long would it have taken a neighboring lord to send investigators? How long would it have taken them to contact the Templars when it was established this was what was needed? Not having a Knight-Commander around can't have helped much, but I'm not sure of the legitmacy of the other points. Especially the point where Isolde emptying the castle of knights contributed noticably to the problem. Unless they can nullify magic, I don't know how much good they would be.
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
I also note that the nature of the circle system itself was one of the reasons why Isolde her her son's abilities in the first place.[/quote]
The Chantry indocrination against magic was a large part of the problem, and should be remedied. If that's not enough then I would argue Isolde is wrong, not the system. Yes, parents and their unwillingness to surrender children should be considered, but unless it becomes clear that the system is doomed because of it, this should be addressed in ways other than dismantling the Circles.
[/quote]
Let me be very clear. I have never been against the circles per se. I have always held that education for mages should be mandatory and that magic comes wtih responsibility. Painting all mage-supporters as "let mages all be free without restrictions or consequences" is a canard of the worst sort. What the circle should NOT be is a prison. That means you don't forcibly seperate mothers from children. You don't take away babies at birth, and you DON"T put an organization that hates magic to be in charge,capiche'?[/quote]
I agree that the Circle should not feel like a prison. But it's for the best that the mages be isolated and surrounded by Templars. Visits to family outside the Circle should be allowed to make this feel less onerous, but it's for the best that the children be separated, and some mothers just aren't going to be okay with that.
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]No one is saying that untrained mages aren't dangerous, but with the right reforms, perhaps Isolde could have legally gotten a far, far better tutor than Jowan (hard to get one that's much worse IMO).
If so, Redcliffe simply doesn't happen.[/quote]
We have no way of knowing whether or not Jowan was a complete failure as a teacher. He could have been perfectly competent for teaching young mages, for all we know.
[/quote]
We've seen Jowan in game. I think I'm on very safe ground to say he's not who I'd pick to apprentice young mages.[/quote]
He might have been able to get across the very limited stuff Isolde needed, and the lessons on not doing deals with demons. That probably doesn't require vast talent as a teacher or mage. (Though I'll agree Jowan probably lacks on both counts.)
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
This is a repetivitive exaageration that has never had any basis. If it did, there's no way civilization would have grown and prospered. Its never happened ever.[/quote]
It happens rarely. A mage could turn, and if that happens the worst case scenario is that a city could fall if the abomination is not stopped in time. This is cited as fact in the Codex, in a letter to a man who one would think is capable of checking up on that fact. So, presumably, if this point didn't hold water it wouldn't be used, since there's already enough points in that letter that such a potentially costly exaggeration wouldn't be used.
[/quote]
That is untrue. There are a number of psychological studies that show that people will believe things with complete credulity that aren't true and never have been true, if it's repeated and asserted often enough especially by those in authority. The chantry from the Nevarran accords on has always held (publically anyway) that unchecked mages are an active danger that can 'go abomination' by stubbing their toes, and so needed to be locked away for the public good. The Chanty even insists that training doesn't change that (in fact Cullen says this repeatedly). The problem is the evidence doesn't support that, but it dfoesn't stop the Templars from claiming it (and too few people have challenged it until recently). I note that in private and with better educated audienances (nobility) the Chantry uses a different justification....fear of a Tevinter Magocracy.[/quote]
The letter I was referring to was to a lord who was questioning the need for the Circles, and the Grand Cleric who responded used both arguments. He is exactly the demographic you think the main argument won't fly with, and yet she raises both. Nor does the "Big Lie" technique really apply here, since this is a person who is questioning authority despite his culture telling him not to.
[/quote]
Dont put words in my mouth. I never said that the better educated people would reject the abomination argument. I only say that it's not the primary line of defense for Chantry Apologetics in the upper classes (and it's not...the no Tevinter 2.0 line is). Actually the "Big Lie" does apply. I would say the Big Lie has been going on for so long that most in power in the Chantry genuinely believe it, but they've never really tested it or learned enough about demons or the fade to find out if it's really true. How else could they have gotten the nature of tranquility so badly wrong for almost a thousand years (Asunder)? How else could they not even sanction the careful and controlled studies of demons in order to fight against them? (Something WIlhelm of Honneleth bitterly complains about). How else could the chantry effectively neuter the study of medicine because of fear of bloodmagic (and I mean mundane medicine such as surgery).[/quote]
Their shocking ignorance in other matters aside, the fact remains that that doesn't necessarily indicate they're wrong on other mattters in their purview. And while there is in-game evidence to indicate that letting trained mages walk around more or less freely is safe, the fact remains that there is also ample evidence to indicate that there is a danger to the public from untrained mages.
[quote]
[SNIP] The rest is about story/game segretation and how the game does not reflect what we are being asked to believe about abominations.
-Polaris[/quote]
It does in places. At any rate, I'm going with the lore until reason is given to do otherwise.
*large swath of text snipped*
Any or all of these could easily have shortstopped the situation.[/quote]
I don't see how being isolated by the Civil War would have stopped a messenger from leaving, and how long would it have taken a neighboring lord to send investigators? How long would it have taken them to contact the Templars when it was established this was what was needed? Not having a Knight-Commander around can't have helped much, but I'm not sure of the legitmacy of the other points. Especially the point where Isolde emptying the castle of knights contributed noticably to the problem. Unless they can nullify magic, I don't know how much good they would be.
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
I also note that the nature of the circle system itself was one of the reasons why Isolde her her son's abilities in the first place.[/quote]
The Chantry indocrination against magic was a large part of the problem, and should be remedied. If that's not enough then I would argue Isolde is wrong, not the system. Yes, parents and their unwillingness to surrender children should be considered, but unless it becomes clear that the system is doomed because of it, this should be addressed in ways other than dismantling the Circles.
[/quote]
Let me be very clear. I have never been against the circles per se. I have always held that education for mages should be mandatory and that magic comes wtih responsibility. Painting all mage-supporters as "let mages all be free without restrictions or consequences" is a canard of the worst sort. What the circle should NOT be is a prison. That means you don't forcibly seperate mothers from children. You don't take away babies at birth, and you DON"T put an organization that hates magic to be in charge,capiche'?[/quote]
I agree that the Circle should not feel like a prison. But it's for the best that the mages be isolated and surrounded by Templars. Visits to family outside the Circle should be allowed to make this feel less onerous, but it's for the best that the children be separated, and some mothers just aren't going to be okay with that.
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]No one is saying that untrained mages aren't dangerous, but with the right reforms, perhaps Isolde could have legally gotten a far, far better tutor than Jowan (hard to get one that's much worse IMO).
If so, Redcliffe simply doesn't happen.[/quote]
We have no way of knowing whether or not Jowan was a complete failure as a teacher. He could have been perfectly competent for teaching young mages, for all we know.
[/quote]
We've seen Jowan in game. I think I'm on very safe ground to say he's not who I'd pick to apprentice young mages.[/quote]
He might have been able to get across the very limited stuff Isolde needed, and the lessons on not doing deals with demons. That probably doesn't require vast talent as a teacher or mage. (Though I'll agree Jowan probably lacks on both counts.)
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
This is a repetivitive exaageration that has never had any basis. If it did, there's no way civilization would have grown and prospered. Its never happened ever.[/quote]
It happens rarely. A mage could turn, and if that happens the worst case scenario is that a city could fall if the abomination is not stopped in time. This is cited as fact in the Codex, in a letter to a man who one would think is capable of checking up on that fact. So, presumably, if this point didn't hold water it wouldn't be used, since there's already enough points in that letter that such a potentially costly exaggeration wouldn't be used.
[/quote]
That is untrue. There are a number of psychological studies that show that people will believe things with complete credulity that aren't true and never have been true, if it's repeated and asserted often enough especially by those in authority. The chantry from the Nevarran accords on has always held (publically anyway) that unchecked mages are an active danger that can 'go abomination' by stubbing their toes, and so needed to be locked away for the public good. The Chanty even insists that training doesn't change that (in fact Cullen says this repeatedly). The problem is the evidence doesn't support that, but it dfoesn't stop the Templars from claiming it (and too few people have challenged it until recently). I note that in private and with better educated audienances (nobility) the Chantry uses a different justification....fear of a Tevinter Magocracy.[/quote]
The letter I was referring to was to a lord who was questioning the need for the Circles, and the Grand Cleric who responded used both arguments. He is exactly the demographic you think the main argument won't fly with, and yet she raises both. Nor does the "Big Lie" technique really apply here, since this is a person who is questioning authority despite his culture telling him not to.
[/quote]
Dont put words in my mouth. I never said that the better educated people would reject the abomination argument. I only say that it's not the primary line of defense for Chantry Apologetics in the upper classes (and it's not...the no Tevinter 2.0 line is). Actually the "Big Lie" does apply. I would say the Big Lie has been going on for so long that most in power in the Chantry genuinely believe it, but they've never really tested it or learned enough about demons or the fade to find out if it's really true. How else could they have gotten the nature of tranquility so badly wrong for almost a thousand years (Asunder)? How else could they not even sanction the careful and controlled studies of demons in order to fight against them? (Something WIlhelm of Honneleth bitterly complains about). How else could the chantry effectively neuter the study of medicine because of fear of bloodmagic (and I mean mundane medicine such as surgery).[/quote]
Their shocking ignorance in other matters aside, the fact remains that that doesn't necessarily indicate they're wrong on other mattters in their purview. And while there is in-game evidence to indicate that letting trained mages walk around more or less freely is safe, the fact remains that there is also ample evidence to indicate that there is a danger to the public from untrained mages.
[quote]
[SNIP] The rest is about story/game segretation and how the game does not reflect what we are being asked to believe about abominations.
-Polaris[/quote]
It does in places. At any rate, I'm going with the lore until reason is given to do otherwise.
#1013
Posté 17 juin 2013 - 02:56
IanPolaris
-
- Members
- 9 650 messages
SamaraDraven wrote...
IanPolaris wrote...
I don't think so. The people that Conner-abomination started with were castle staff, i.e those closest to Conner himself. Notice that the Conner abomintaion does not mind-control anyone other than Bann Teagon either. Apparently there are strong limits to how much a demon (or anyone) can use bloodmagic to mind control. I also note that in more normal cases, messengers could have been sent to the circle within days and there would be regular trade, and the King's forces would be available to help.
No, Redcliffe was the worst possible case scenario.
I think you're assuming here. Uldred had several fellow mages attack the Warden if you didn't use the Litany. Simply because Connor didn't control doesn't mean he couldn't. If you confront Connor violently, you also have to fight all the Redcliffe castle staff there because he wascontrolling them too. Connor sent hordes of undead out into the town each night. Many were the bodies of those he'd already killed. Many had gone into the castle to try rescuing the people who all died. Connor enslaved many minds. But the demon couldn't control him all the time which seemed to be a special incident to him. So those limits seem more a matter of your conclusion rather than fact. When I didn't use the Litany against Uldred, the templars were all that was left to help against the Blight and Greagoir expresses sadness that the mages are all gone but that it couldn't be helped.
Uldred was only able to turn those mages after a rather lengthy ritual and only after those mages had been tortured and deprived over a period of weeks. This is not the typical situation. If you fight Conner violently, you fight the undead castle staff (a good way to get extra corpse galls btw for a certain side quest). Again Conner-Abomination is only shown to actually mind-control one person (Bann Teagan) and apparently that was the limit. The point is this: If mind control were as easy to do and as undetectable as the Chantry fears, the Tevinter (which does have mind control magic) never would have fallen because everyone would have been mind controlled. Yet that didn't happen. We consistantly see in the games that mindcontrol while powerful and dangerous comes with limits.
In normal cases when they're wasn't a Blight, a messenger could have been sent to help. That's why the Blight isn't as much of a hindrance to Uldred as you claim. Without a normal response system, Uldred could do a lot of harm before he was stopped. So would have Connor if the Warden hadn't shown up when she/he did. The Blight can't be both a huge thing that can stop an abomination's march AND something that helps. That's a blatant contradiction.
No it's not. You are trying to make a fake contradiction. Uldred's plan had nothing to do with their being a blight other than Uldred saw this as an opportunity to rid the circle of Chantry control and Loghain was willing to play ball. We also know from Gregoire that messengers WERE sent for help (and hadn't come back yet).
Not seeing any contradiction here, blatent or otherwise. (By contrast we know that Bann Teagan was cut off in the way that KC Gregoire was not.)
-Polaris
#1014
Posté 17 juin 2013 - 03:00
SamaraDraven
-
- Members
- 2 312 messages
IanPolaris wrote...
SamaraDraven wrote...
IanPolaris wrote...
Except there is a limit to how much you can enslave. If there wasn't the Tevinter Imperium never would have fallen. Bottom line, there is simply too much Fereldan to cover esp with a blight coming.
-Polaris
Perhaps with a Blight raging, perhaps. Perhaps Uldred saw it as an opportunity? Uldred was also part of a fraternity, was he not? There are others who felt as he did. He'd find more on the way. Plus the mages he forcibly possessed were now abominations who could enslave others' minds. A single Pride demon put the Warden and all of her friends to sleep in seconds. And they had help getting out. If Uldred had managed to force-possess all the mages in the tower, he'd be able to enslave many more minds with his abominations' help. I still think he'd be a good threat and do a lot of damage before he was stopped. He may also have gone into hiding while the Blight was dealt with and came out of the woodwork after it was over before Ferelden could rebuild.
I don't know about your warden, but my warden needed no help getting out. It was simply a matter of solving the puzzle, and it was a sloth demon and it wasn't mind control (except perhaps on the crudest level). Basically the secret was that you had to want to believe and live in your dreams rather than struggle. If you struggled you could get out (although admittedly for most getting out meant death). Not only that but Uldred-Abomination shows absolutely no signs of that sort of ability (or else he could have ended the harrowing chamber battle instantly). The Mind Control we do see, takes times and is only effective on victims whose will has already been beaten out of them by torture and deprivation.
-Polaris
Once all the fight had been beaten out of them, they surrendered and became abominations. those who still had fight left are the ones who weren't changed. That or Uldred hadn't gotten to them yet. True his mind control takes a moment to kick in. But Uldredwas preoccupied.
Yes, it was Sloth. I'd forgotten that. As for the puzzles... the help I was referring to was Niall. But... he was already "It's hopeless!" so maybe not the best example.
That said, I still think you're assuming much based on how the game was for you as a player. In the real world, none of us could fight a demon face to face. When considered from the average Thedosian's perspective, demons and abominations are a devaststing event to suffer. Meredith's sister killed many people before being killed by templars because she was an untrained mage.
She and Connor are prime examples of why I feel mages need instruction and why some kind of oversight should be established to be sure none have fallen victim to a demon.
#1015
Posté 17 juin 2013 - 03:03
IanPolaris
-
- Members
- 9 650 messages
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
*large swath of text snipped*
Any or all of these could easily have shortstopped the situation.[/quote]
I don't see how being isolated by the Civil War would have stopped a messenger from leaving, and how long would it have taken a neighboring lord to send investigators? How long would it have taken them to contact the Templars when it was established this was what was needed? Not having a Knight-Commander around can't have helped much, but I'm not sure of the legitmacy of the other points. Especially the point where Isolde emptying the castle of knights contributed noticably to the problem. Unless they can nullify magic, I don't know how much good they would be.
[/quote]
The civil war means that the situation wasn't noticed until the Warden stumbled in on it (although there were rumors prior to that). Without a civil war, someone is going to wonder after a few days why the trade routes aren't working and investigate. It's also very hard to stop some news from getting back in such a case.
I also note this: The Templars were already in Redcliff and could have stopped this situation except that Loghain (because of the Civil War) captured or killed them. This does have a direct effect don't you think?
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
I also note that the nature of the circle system itself was one of the reasons why Isolde her her son's abilities in the first place.[/quote]
The Chantry indocrination against magic was a large part of the problem, and should be remedied. If that's not enough then I would argue Isolde is wrong, not the system. Yes, parents and their unwillingness to surrender children should be considered, but unless it becomes clear that the system is doomed because of it, this should be addressed in ways other than dismantling the Circles.
[/quote]
Let me be very clear. I have never been against the circles per se. I have always held that education for mages should be mandatory and that magic comes wtih responsibility. Painting all mage-supporters as "let mages all be free without restrictions or consequences" is a canard of the worst sort. What the circle should NOT be is a prison. That means you don't forcibly seperate mothers from children. You don't take away babies at birth, and you DON"T put an organization that hates magic to be in charge,capiche'?[/quote]
I agree that the Circle should not feel like a prison. But it's for the best that the mages be isolated and surrounded by Templars. Visits to family outside the Circle should be allowed to make this feel less onerous, but it's for the best that the children be separated, and some mothers just aren't going to be okay with that.
[/quote]
The UN calls it genocide. Seriously, seperating children from mothers is about the vilest thing you can do, and the evidence is not there that suggests this is necessary. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that mages can get perfectly good magical educations without such extreme measures (and seperating childreon from mothers is extreme hence my first sentence).
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]No one is saying that untrained mages aren't dangerous, but with the right reforms, perhaps Isolde could have legally gotten a far, far better tutor than Jowan (hard to get one that's much worse IMO).
If so, Redcliffe simply doesn't happen.[/quote]
We have no way of knowing whether or not Jowan was a complete failure as a teacher. He could have been perfectly competent for teaching young mages, for all we know.
[/quote]
We've seen Jowan in game. I think I'm on very safe ground to say he's not who I'd pick to apprentice young mages.[/quote]
He might have been able to get across the very limited stuff Isolde needed, and the lessons on not doing deals with demons. That probably doesn't require vast talent as a teacher or mage. (Though I'll agree Jowan probably lacks on both counts.)
[/quote]
I think it's safe to say that if Isolde could have hired openly, she could have gotten a much better teacher than Jowan. Can we agree on that?
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
This is a repetivitive exaageration that has never had any basis. If it did, there's no way civilization would have grown and prospered. Its never happened ever.[/quote]
It happens rarely. A mage could turn, and if that happens the worst case scenario is that a city could fall if the abomination is not stopped in time. This is cited as fact in the Codex, in a letter to a man who one would think is capable of checking up on that fact. So, presumably, if this point didn't hold water it wouldn't be used, since there's already enough points in that letter that such a potentially costly exaggeration wouldn't be used.
[/quote]
That is untrue. There are a number of psychological studies that show that people will believe things with complete credulity that aren't true and never have been true, if it's repeated and asserted often enough especially by those in authority. The chantry from the Nevarran accords on has always held (publically anyway) that unchecked mages are an active danger that can 'go abomination' by stubbing their toes, and so needed to be locked away for the public good. The Chanty even insists that training doesn't change that (in fact Cullen says this repeatedly). The problem is the evidence doesn't support that, but it dfoesn't stop the Templars from claiming it (and too few people have challenged it until recently). I note that in private and with better educated audienances (nobility) the Chantry uses a different justification....fear of a Tevinter Magocracy.[/quote]
The letter I was referring to was to a lord who was questioning the need for the Circles, and the Grand Cleric who responded used both arguments. He is exactly the demographic you think the main argument won't fly with, and yet she raises both. Nor does the "Big Lie" technique really apply here, since this is a person who is questioning authority despite his culture telling him not to.
[/quote]
Dont put words in my mouth. I never said that the better educated people would reject the abomination argument. I only say that it's not the primary line of defense for Chantry Apologetics in the upper classes (and it's not...the no Tevinter 2.0 line is). Actually the "Big Lie" does apply. I would say the Big Lie has been going on for so long that most in power in the Chantry genuinely believe it, but they've never really tested it or learned enough about demons or the fade to find out if it's really true. How else could they have gotten the nature of tranquility so badly wrong for almost a thousand years (Asunder)? How else could they not even sanction the careful and controlled studies of demons in order to fight against them? (Something WIlhelm of Honneleth bitterly complains about). How else could the chantry effectively neuter the study of medicine because of fear of bloodmagic (and I mean mundane medicine such as surgery).[/quote]
Their shocking ignorance in other matters aside, the fact remains that that doesn't necessarily indicate they're wrong on other mattters in their purview. And while there is in-game evidence to indicate that letting trained mages walk around more or less freely is safe, the fact remains that there is also ample evidence to indicate that there is a danger to the public from untrained mages.
[/quote]
Once again, I challenge you to prove it. If you are going to insist that a morally problematic solution is the best/only one for public safety, then you need to show that to be true. The Chantry in over a thousand years hasn't even come close or even tried to other than bald assertions without facts to back them.
-Polaris
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
*large swath of text snipped*
Any or all of these could easily have shortstopped the situation.[/quote]
I don't see how being isolated by the Civil War would have stopped a messenger from leaving, and how long would it have taken a neighboring lord to send investigators? How long would it have taken them to contact the Templars when it was established this was what was needed? Not having a Knight-Commander around can't have helped much, but I'm not sure of the legitmacy of the other points. Especially the point where Isolde emptying the castle of knights contributed noticably to the problem. Unless they can nullify magic, I don't know how much good they would be.
[/quote]
The civil war means that the situation wasn't noticed until the Warden stumbled in on it (although there were rumors prior to that). Without a civil war, someone is going to wonder after a few days why the trade routes aren't working and investigate. It's also very hard to stop some news from getting back in such a case.
I also note this: The Templars were already in Redcliff and could have stopped this situation except that Loghain (because of the Civil War) captured or killed them. This does have a direct effect don't you think?
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
I also note that the nature of the circle system itself was one of the reasons why Isolde her her son's abilities in the first place.[/quote]
The Chantry indocrination against magic was a large part of the problem, and should be remedied. If that's not enough then I would argue Isolde is wrong, not the system. Yes, parents and their unwillingness to surrender children should be considered, but unless it becomes clear that the system is doomed because of it, this should be addressed in ways other than dismantling the Circles.
[/quote]
Let me be very clear. I have never been against the circles per se. I have always held that education for mages should be mandatory and that magic comes wtih responsibility. Painting all mage-supporters as "let mages all be free without restrictions or consequences" is a canard of the worst sort. What the circle should NOT be is a prison. That means you don't forcibly seperate mothers from children. You don't take away babies at birth, and you DON"T put an organization that hates magic to be in charge,capiche'?[/quote]
I agree that the Circle should not feel like a prison. But it's for the best that the mages be isolated and surrounded by Templars. Visits to family outside the Circle should be allowed to make this feel less onerous, but it's for the best that the children be separated, and some mothers just aren't going to be okay with that.
[/quote]
The UN calls it genocide. Seriously, seperating children from mothers is about the vilest thing you can do, and the evidence is not there that suggests this is necessary. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that mages can get perfectly good magical educations without such extreme measures (and seperating childreon from mothers is extreme hence my first sentence).
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]No one is saying that untrained mages aren't dangerous, but with the right reforms, perhaps Isolde could have legally gotten a far, far better tutor than Jowan (hard to get one that's much worse IMO).
If so, Redcliffe simply doesn't happen.[/quote]
We have no way of knowing whether or not Jowan was a complete failure as a teacher. He could have been perfectly competent for teaching young mages, for all we know.
[/quote]
We've seen Jowan in game. I think I'm on very safe ground to say he's not who I'd pick to apprentice young mages.[/quote]
He might have been able to get across the very limited stuff Isolde needed, and the lessons on not doing deals with demons. That probably doesn't require vast talent as a teacher or mage. (Though I'll agree Jowan probably lacks on both counts.)
[/quote]
I think it's safe to say that if Isolde could have hired openly, she could have gotten a much better teacher than Jowan. Can we agree on that?
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
This is a repetivitive exaageration that has never had any basis. If it did, there's no way civilization would have grown and prospered. Its never happened ever.[/quote]
It happens rarely. A mage could turn, and if that happens the worst case scenario is that a city could fall if the abomination is not stopped in time. This is cited as fact in the Codex, in a letter to a man who one would think is capable of checking up on that fact. So, presumably, if this point didn't hold water it wouldn't be used, since there's already enough points in that letter that such a potentially costly exaggeration wouldn't be used.
[/quote]
That is untrue. There are a number of psychological studies that show that people will believe things with complete credulity that aren't true and never have been true, if it's repeated and asserted often enough especially by those in authority. The chantry from the Nevarran accords on has always held (publically anyway) that unchecked mages are an active danger that can 'go abomination' by stubbing their toes, and so needed to be locked away for the public good. The Chanty even insists that training doesn't change that (in fact Cullen says this repeatedly). The problem is the evidence doesn't support that, but it dfoesn't stop the Templars from claiming it (and too few people have challenged it until recently). I note that in private and with better educated audienances (nobility) the Chantry uses a different justification....fear of a Tevinter Magocracy.[/quote]
The letter I was referring to was to a lord who was questioning the need for the Circles, and the Grand Cleric who responded used both arguments. He is exactly the demographic you think the main argument won't fly with, and yet she raises both. Nor does the "Big Lie" technique really apply here, since this is a person who is questioning authority despite his culture telling him not to.
[/quote]
Dont put words in my mouth. I never said that the better educated people would reject the abomination argument. I only say that it's not the primary line of defense for Chantry Apologetics in the upper classes (and it's not...the no Tevinter 2.0 line is). Actually the "Big Lie" does apply. I would say the Big Lie has been going on for so long that most in power in the Chantry genuinely believe it, but they've never really tested it or learned enough about demons or the fade to find out if it's really true. How else could they have gotten the nature of tranquility so badly wrong for almost a thousand years (Asunder)? How else could they not even sanction the careful and controlled studies of demons in order to fight against them? (Something WIlhelm of Honneleth bitterly complains about). How else could the chantry effectively neuter the study of medicine because of fear of bloodmagic (and I mean mundane medicine such as surgery).[/quote]
Their shocking ignorance in other matters aside, the fact remains that that doesn't necessarily indicate they're wrong on other mattters in their purview. And while there is in-game evidence to indicate that letting trained mages walk around more or less freely is safe, the fact remains that there is also ample evidence to indicate that there is a danger to the public from untrained mages.
[/quote]
Once again, I challenge you to prove it. If you are going to insist that a morally problematic solution is the best/only one for public safety, then you need to show that to be true. The Chantry in over a thousand years hasn't even come close or even tried to other than bald assertions without facts to back them.
-Polaris
#1016
Posté 17 juin 2013 - 03:06
IanPolaris
-
- Members
- 9 650 messages
SamaraDraven wrote...
She and Connor are prime examples of why I feel mages need instruction and why some kind of oversight should be established to be sure none have fallen victim to a demon.
This may suprise you, but I completely AGREE! I have for years. I simply think the Chantry's Circle system is not only not the way to do this, but is actually counterproductive to this noble goal.
But YES, I agree that magic should have strict oversight and that mages should have mandatory education (and it should be enforced by a police/military arm able to deal with such threats on their level....so I am not even opposed to the idea of a templar-like order....one that includes mages and isn't under the control of the chantry).
-Polaris
#1017
Posté 17 juin 2013 - 03:14
SamaraDraven
-
- Members
- 2 312 messages
In Exile wrote...
Xilizhra wrote...
What are they but genocidal marauders by this point?
Slavers. They're not out to kill every single mage, they're out to bring them back to the Circles, under presumably much harsher restrictions.
"The more you tighten your grip, the more they slip through your fingers..." haha! Sorry. I have Star Wars on the brain. But as Einstein said, "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result." So the Order needs to learn that something should change. I don't see why schools can't be an option. Or why mages have to removed from their parents. I do think it's possible to reach a compromise, despite what Anders claims. Though I can't support letting the mages just go off and be their own nation either. It's in man's nature to desire power and someone will fall prey to it. I think the Order should work smarter, not harder; find ways to keep laws that provide oversight of mages. We legislate gun control and use. We don't lock gun owners away so I really do think the Chantry needs to rethink their approach. They've focused too much on making magic serve them instead of ensuring that magic never rules over man but are too prideful to admit it.
#1018
Posté 17 juin 2013 - 03:14
Riverdaleswhiteflash
-
- Members
- 7 914 messages
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
*large swath of text snipped*
Any or all of these could easily have shortstopped the situation.[/quote]
I don't see how being isolated by the Civil War would have stopped a messenger from leaving, and how long would it have taken a neighboring lord to send investigators? How long would it have taken them to contact the Templars when it was established this was what was needed? Not having a Knight-Commander around can't have helped much, but I'm not sure of the legitmacy of the other points. Especially the point where Isolde emptying the castle of knights contributed noticably to the problem. Unless they can nullify magic, I don't know how much good they would be.
[/quote]
The civil war means that the situation wasn't noticed until the Warden stumbled in on it (although there were rumors prior to that). Without a civil war, someone is going to wonder after a few days why the trade routes aren't working and investigate. It's also very hard to stop some news from getting back in such a case.[/quote]
And would this have happened in time to stop the village from being destroyed?
[quote]
I also note this: The Templars were already in Redcliff and could have stopped this situation except that Loghain (because of the Civil War) captured or killed them. This does have a direct effect don't you think?[/quote]
Citation needed.
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
I also note that the nature of the circle system itself was one of the reasons why Isolde her her son's abilities in the first place.[/quote]
The UN calls it genocide. Seriously, seperating children from mothers is about the vilest thing you can do, and the evidence is not there that suggests this is necessary. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that mages can get perfectly good magical educations without such extreme measures (and seperating childreon from mothers is extreme hence my first sentence).[/quote]
Okay, and what happens when this fails? When a mage turns in the Circle, it is surrounded by Templars. When a mage turns in the populace, the people closest to it are far less likely to be able to defend themselves.
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]No one is saying that untrained mages aren't dangerous, but with the right reforms, perhaps Isolde could have legally gotten a far, far better tutor than Jowan (hard to get one that's much worse IMO).
If so, Redcliffe simply doesn't happen.[/quote]
We have no way of knowing whether or not Jowan was a complete failure as a teacher. He could have been perfectly competent for teaching young mages, for all we know.
[/quote]
We've seen Jowan in game. I think I'm on very safe ground to say he's not who I'd pick to apprentice young mages.[/quote]
He might have been able to get across the very limited stuff Isolde needed, and the lessons on not doing deals with demons. That probably doesn't require vast talent as a teacher or mage. (Though I'll agree Jowan probably lacks on both counts.)
[/quote]
I think it's safe to say that if Isolde could have hired openly, she could have gotten a much better teacher than Jowan. Can we agree on that?[/quote]
We can. Are we sure that would have been enough? One virtue to the Circle system is that when a mage turns, he turns surrounded by Templars.
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
The letter I was referring to was to a lord who was questioning the need for the Circles, and the Grand Cleric who responded used both arguments. He is exactly the demographic you think the main argument won't fly with, and yet she raises both. Nor does the "Big Lie" technique really apply here, since this is a person who is questioning authority despite his culture telling him not to.
[/quote]
Dont put words in my mouth. I never said that the better educated people would reject the abomination argument. I only say that it's not the primary line of defense for Chantry Apologetics in the upper classes (and it's not...the no Tevinter 2.0 line is). Actually the "Big Lie" does apply. I would say the Big Lie has been going on for so long that most in power in the Chantry genuinely believe it, but they've never really tested it or learned enough about demons or the fade to find out if it's really true. How else could they have gotten the nature of tranquility so badly wrong for almost a thousand years (Asunder)? How else could they not even sanction the careful and controlled studies of demons in order to fight against them? (Something WIlhelm of Honneleth bitterly complains about). How else could the chantry effectively neuter the study of medicine because of fear of bloodmagic (and I mean mundane medicine such as surgery).[/quote]
Their shocking ignorance in other matters aside, the fact remains that that doesn't necessarily indicate they're wrong on other mattters in their purview. And while there is in-game evidence to indicate that letting trained mages walk around more or less freely is safe, the fact remains that there is also ample evidence to indicate that there is a danger to the public from untrained mages.
[/quote]
Once again, I challenge you to prove it. If you are going to insist that a morally problematic solution is the best/only one for public safety, then you need to show that to be true. The Chantry in over a thousand years hasn't even come close or even tried to other than bald assertions without facts to back them.
-Polaris[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]
Okay, how's this? Thrask knew the dangers of magic, or else believed the Chantry's Big Lie to be true. From this, it is most likely that his daughter was as well trained as an apostate could be. She turned anyway. Furthermore, there's a First Enchanter of the Kirkwall Circle who turned, apparently despite her will, and a member of the Mage's Collective who was killed by his abomination apprentice who he could not keep from doing stupid things. Your argument against the first two will be that the rules are different in Kirkwall because of the nature of the place; notwithstanding that I think it's a pretty weak assertion that the Veil is thin enough for magic to follow different rules, it doesn't explain the third problem.
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
*large swath of text snipped*
Any or all of these could easily have shortstopped the situation.[/quote]
I don't see how being isolated by the Civil War would have stopped a messenger from leaving, and how long would it have taken a neighboring lord to send investigators? How long would it have taken them to contact the Templars when it was established this was what was needed? Not having a Knight-Commander around can't have helped much, but I'm not sure of the legitmacy of the other points. Especially the point where Isolde emptying the castle of knights contributed noticably to the problem. Unless they can nullify magic, I don't know how much good they would be.
[/quote]
The civil war means that the situation wasn't noticed until the Warden stumbled in on it (although there were rumors prior to that). Without a civil war, someone is going to wonder after a few days why the trade routes aren't working and investigate. It's also very hard to stop some news from getting back in such a case.[/quote]
And would this have happened in time to stop the village from being destroyed?
[quote]
I also note this: The Templars were already in Redcliff and could have stopped this situation except that Loghain (because of the Civil War) captured or killed them. This does have a direct effect don't you think?[/quote]
Citation needed.
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
I also note that the nature of the circle system itself was one of the reasons why Isolde her her son's abilities in the first place.[/quote]
The UN calls it genocide. Seriously, seperating children from mothers is about the vilest thing you can do, and the evidence is not there that suggests this is necessary. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that mages can get perfectly good magical educations without such extreme measures (and seperating childreon from mothers is extreme hence my first sentence).[/quote]
Okay, and what happens when this fails? When a mage turns in the Circle, it is surrounded by Templars. When a mage turns in the populace, the people closest to it are far less likely to be able to defend themselves.
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]No one is saying that untrained mages aren't dangerous, but with the right reforms, perhaps Isolde could have legally gotten a far, far better tutor than Jowan (hard to get one that's much worse IMO).
If so, Redcliffe simply doesn't happen.[/quote]
We have no way of knowing whether or not Jowan was a complete failure as a teacher. He could have been perfectly competent for teaching young mages, for all we know.
[/quote]
We've seen Jowan in game. I think I'm on very safe ground to say he's not who I'd pick to apprentice young mages.[/quote]
He might have been able to get across the very limited stuff Isolde needed, and the lessons on not doing deals with demons. That probably doesn't require vast talent as a teacher or mage. (Though I'll agree Jowan probably lacks on both counts.)
[/quote]
I think it's safe to say that if Isolde could have hired openly, she could have gotten a much better teacher than Jowan. Can we agree on that?[/quote]
We can. Are we sure that would have been enough? One virtue to the Circle system is that when a mage turns, he turns surrounded by Templars.
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
The letter I was referring to was to a lord who was questioning the need for the Circles, and the Grand Cleric who responded used both arguments. He is exactly the demographic you think the main argument won't fly with, and yet she raises both. Nor does the "Big Lie" technique really apply here, since this is a person who is questioning authority despite his culture telling him not to.
[/quote]
Dont put words in my mouth. I never said that the better educated people would reject the abomination argument. I only say that it's not the primary line of defense for Chantry Apologetics in the upper classes (and it's not...the no Tevinter 2.0 line is). Actually the "Big Lie" does apply. I would say the Big Lie has been going on for so long that most in power in the Chantry genuinely believe it, but they've never really tested it or learned enough about demons or the fade to find out if it's really true. How else could they have gotten the nature of tranquility so badly wrong for almost a thousand years (Asunder)? How else could they not even sanction the careful and controlled studies of demons in order to fight against them? (Something WIlhelm of Honneleth bitterly complains about). How else could the chantry effectively neuter the study of medicine because of fear of bloodmagic (and I mean mundane medicine such as surgery).[/quote]
Their shocking ignorance in other matters aside, the fact remains that that doesn't necessarily indicate they're wrong on other mattters in their purview. And while there is in-game evidence to indicate that letting trained mages walk around more or less freely is safe, the fact remains that there is also ample evidence to indicate that there is a danger to the public from untrained mages.
[/quote]
Once again, I challenge you to prove it. If you are going to insist that a morally problematic solution is the best/only one for public safety, then you need to show that to be true. The Chantry in over a thousand years hasn't even come close or even tried to other than bald assertions without facts to back them.
-Polaris[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]
Okay, how's this? Thrask knew the dangers of magic, or else believed the Chantry's Big Lie to be true. From this, it is most likely that his daughter was as well trained as an apostate could be. She turned anyway. Furthermore, there's a First Enchanter of the Kirkwall Circle who turned, apparently despite her will, and a member of the Mage's Collective who was killed by his abomination apprentice who he could not keep from doing stupid things. Your argument against the first two will be that the rules are different in Kirkwall because of the nature of the place; notwithstanding that I think it's a pretty weak assertion that the Veil is thin enough for magic to follow different rules, it doesn't explain the third problem.
Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 17 juin 2013 - 03:17 .
#1019
Posté 17 juin 2013 - 03:18
lil yonce
-
- Members
- 2 319 messages
IanPolaris wrote...
This may suprise you, but I completely AGREE! I have for years. I simply think the Chantry's Circle system is not only not the way to do this, but is actually counterproductive to this noble goal.
The templars are pretty much the only players in the game right now. At this moment in time there is no one else to do the job. And convincing regular soldiers to do it might be kinda hard after they find out they have to sign up for a lyrium addiction to combat magic effectively. When the templar job is no longer a sacred duty or a special duty, people might be less inclined to go along with that sort of stipulation. So, keep the templars and reform the Circles with a strong Lucrosian leader who can pave the way for integration and lasting Circle independence in the future.
Modifié par Youth4Ever, 17 juin 2013 - 03:19 .
#1020
Posté 17 juin 2013 - 03:24
IanPolaris
-
- Members
- 9 650 messages
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
*large swath of text snipped*
Any or all of these could easily have shortstopped the situation.[/quote]
I don't see how being isolated by the Civil War would have stopped a messenger from leaving, and how long would it have taken a neighboring lord to send investigators? How long would it have taken them to contact the Templars when it was established this was what was needed? Not having a Knight-Commander around can't have helped much, but I'm not sure of the legitmacy of the other points. Especially the point where Isolde emptying the castle of knights contributed noticably to the problem. Unless they can nullify magic, I don't know how much good they would be.
[/quote]
The civil war means that the situation wasn't noticed until the Warden stumbled in on it (although there were rumors prior to that). Without a civil war, someone is going to wonder after a few days why the trade routes aren't working and investigate. It's also very hard to stop some news from getting back in such a case.[/quote]
And would this have happened in time to stop the village from being destroyed?
[/quote]
Since in the actual game, the series of incidents took weeks (in total to play out), yes I think so.
[quote]
[quote]
I also note this: The Templars were already in Redcliff and could have stopped this situation except that Loghain (because of the Civil War) captured or killed them. This does have a direct effect don't you think?[/quote]
Citation needed.
[/quote]
Knight-Lieutenant Iriminric tells you that he and his men were in Redcliff and had just captured Jowan when they were ambushed by the Teyrn's men. In addition, after Redcliffe, you find that that there is a Knight Commander and templars permanently posted to Redcliff.
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
I also note that the nature of the circle system itself was one of the reasons why Isolde her her son's abilities in the first place.[/quote]
The UN calls it genocide. Seriously, seperating children from mothers is about the vilest thing you can do, and the evidence is not there that suggests this is necessary. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that mages can get perfectly good magical educations without such extreme measures (and seperating childreon from mothers is extreme hence my first sentence).[/quote]
Okay, and what happens when this fails? When a mage turns in the Circle, it is surrounded by Templars. When a mage turns in the populace, the people closest to it are far less likely to be able to defend themselves.
[/quote]
What happens if the sun explodes tomorrow. I get real tired of people saying, "What if X" fails when someone even suggests that there might be better ways. Of course any system designed by humans is going to fail somewhere, but with the appropraite supervision, I think the costs of that failure can be mitigated. What I am suggesting is that mages and magical-police be more integrated into society as a whole (and that would mean that responses to emergencies could happen much faster).
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]No one is saying that untrained mages aren't dangerous, but with the right reforms, perhaps Isolde could have legally gotten a far, far better tutor than Jowan (hard to get one that's much worse IMO).
If so, Redcliffe simply doesn't happen.[/quote]
We have no way of knowing whether or not Jowan was a complete failure as a teacher. He could have been perfectly competent for teaching young mages, for all we know.
[/quote]
We've seen Jowan in game. I think I'm on very safe ground to say he's not who I'd pick to apprentice young mages.[/quote]
He might have been able to get across the very limited stuff Isolde needed, and the lessons on not doing deals with demons. That probably doesn't require vast talent as a teacher or mage. (Though I'll agree Jowan probably lacks on both counts.)
[/quote]
I think it's safe to say that if Isolde could have hired openly, she could have gotten a much better teacher than Jowan. Can we agree on that?[/quote]
We can. Are we sure that would have been enough? One virtue to the Circle system is that when a mage turns, he turns surrounded by Templars.
[/quote]
I think so. I note that the Chasind, Avvars, Rivvanni, and Dalish work very well with a master-apprentice system. We also learn that the Mages Collective uses such a system underground. It seems to work.
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
That is untrue. There are a number of psychological studies that show that people will believe things with complete credulity that aren't true and never have been true, if it's repeated and asserted often enough especially by those in authority. The chantry from the Nevarran accords on has always held (publically anyway) that unchecked mages are an active danger that can 'go abomination' by stubbing their toes, and so needed to be locked away for the public good. The Chanty even insists that training doesn't change that (in fact Cullen says this repeatedly). The problem is the evidence doesn't support that, but it dfoesn't stop the Templars from claiming it (and too few people have challenged it until recently). I note that in private and with better educated audienances (nobility) the Chantry uses a different justification....fear of a Tevinter Magocracy.[/quote]
The letter I was referring to was to a lord who was questioning the need for the Circles, and the Grand Cleric who responded used both arguments. He is exactly the demographic you think the main argument won't fly with, and yet she raises both. Nor does the "Big Lie" technique really apply here, since this is a person who is questioning authority despite his culture telling him not to.
[/quote]
Dont put words in my mouth. I never said that the better educated people would reject the abomination argument. I only say that it's not the primary line of defense for Chantry Apologetics in the upper classes (and it's not...the no Tevinter 2.0 line is). Actually the "Big Lie" does apply. I would say the Big Lie has been going on for so long that most in power in the Chantry genuinely believe it, but they've never really tested it or learned enough about demons or the fade to find out if it's really true. How else could they have gotten the nature of tranquility so badly wrong for almost a thousand years (Asunder)? How else could they not even sanction the careful and controlled studies of demons in order to fight against them? (Something WIlhelm of Honneleth bitterly complains about). How else could the chantry effectively neuter the study of medicine because of fear of bloodmagic (and I mean mundane medicine such as surgery).[/quote]
Their shocking ignorance in other matters aside, the fact remains that that doesn't necessarily indicate they're wrong on other mattters in their purview. And while there is in-game evidence to indicate that letting trained mages walk around more or less freely is safe, the fact remains that there is also ample evidence to indicate that there is a danger to the public from untrained mages.
[/quote]
Once again, I challenge you to prove it. If you are going to insist that a morally problematic solution is the best/only one for public safety, then you need to show that to be true. The Chantry in over a thousand years hasn't even come close or even tried to other than bald assertions without facts to back them.
-Polaris[/quote]
Okay, how's this? Thrask knew the dangers of magic, or else believed the Chantry's Big Lie to be true. From this, it is most likely that his daughter was as well trained as an apostate could be. She turned anyway. Furthermore, there's a First Enchanter of the Kirkwall Circle who turned, apparently despite her will, and a member of the Mage's Collective who was killed by his abomination apprentice who he could not keep from doing stupid things. Your argument against the first two will be that the rules are different in Kirkwall because of the nature of the place; notwithstanding that I think it's a pretty weak assertion that the Veil is thin enough for magic to follow different rules, it doesn't explain the third problem.
[/quote]
No, it means that Thrask believed it. I also automatically ignore any incident occuring in Kirkwall because of the lack of a Veil there. The rules are apparently different in Kirkwall than in the rest of Thedas. As for the apprentice that turned in the Mages Collective Quest, the Mages collective took quick action to control the situation and casualties were limited to two. I challenge the Templars to do as well.
Edit: Regarding Thrask, actually chances are very good his daughter would have been completely untrained. There is no way a templar in good standing would be able to make contact with underground mages and no way that such conduct over a period of years wouldn't be found out and remarked upon by his superiors. When one of those Superiors is Meredith I think it's very safe to think that Olivia had no magical training at all.
As for the rules being different, it's not just me 'assertion', there is entire list of codex entries (Enigma of Kirkwall) that explains it. I note in Kirkwall that abominations can be summoned which isn't supposed to be possible, and that demons can cross over unassisted and can give mundanes (like Lady Harriman) the power of mages without actually being mages. Best to consider all of Kirkwall to be a Hellmouth and a special case.
-Polaris
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
[quote]Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
*large swath of text snipped*
Any or all of these could easily have shortstopped the situation.[/quote]
I don't see how being isolated by the Civil War would have stopped a messenger from leaving, and how long would it have taken a neighboring lord to send investigators? How long would it have taken them to contact the Templars when it was established this was what was needed? Not having a Knight-Commander around can't have helped much, but I'm not sure of the legitmacy of the other points. Especially the point where Isolde emptying the castle of knights contributed noticably to the problem. Unless they can nullify magic, I don't know how much good they would be.
[/quote]
The civil war means that the situation wasn't noticed until the Warden stumbled in on it (although there were rumors prior to that). Without a civil war, someone is going to wonder after a few days why the trade routes aren't working and investigate. It's also very hard to stop some news from getting back in such a case.[/quote]
And would this have happened in time to stop the village from being destroyed?
[/quote]
Since in the actual game, the series of incidents took weeks (in total to play out), yes I think so.
[quote]
[quote]
I also note this: The Templars were already in Redcliff and could have stopped this situation except that Loghain (because of the Civil War) captured or killed them. This does have a direct effect don't you think?[/quote]
Citation needed.
[/quote]
Knight-Lieutenant Iriminric tells you that he and his men were in Redcliff and had just captured Jowan when they were ambushed by the Teyrn's men. In addition, after Redcliffe, you find that that there is a Knight Commander and templars permanently posted to Redcliff.
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
I also note that the nature of the circle system itself was one of the reasons why Isolde her her son's abilities in the first place.[/quote]
The UN calls it genocide. Seriously, seperating children from mothers is about the vilest thing you can do, and the evidence is not there that suggests this is necessary. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that mages can get perfectly good magical educations without such extreme measures (and seperating childreon from mothers is extreme hence my first sentence).[/quote]
Okay, and what happens when this fails? When a mage turns in the Circle, it is surrounded by Templars. When a mage turns in the populace, the people closest to it are far less likely to be able to defend themselves.
[/quote]
What happens if the sun explodes tomorrow. I get real tired of people saying, "What if X" fails when someone even suggests that there might be better ways. Of course any system designed by humans is going to fail somewhere, but with the appropraite supervision, I think the costs of that failure can be mitigated. What I am suggesting is that mages and magical-police be more integrated into society as a whole (and that would mean that responses to emergencies could happen much faster).
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]No one is saying that untrained mages aren't dangerous, but with the right reforms, perhaps Isolde could have legally gotten a far, far better tutor than Jowan (hard to get one that's much worse IMO).
If so, Redcliffe simply doesn't happen.[/quote]
We have no way of knowing whether or not Jowan was a complete failure as a teacher. He could have been perfectly competent for teaching young mages, for all we know.
[/quote]
We've seen Jowan in game. I think I'm on very safe ground to say he's not who I'd pick to apprentice young mages.[/quote]
He might have been able to get across the very limited stuff Isolde needed, and the lessons on not doing deals with demons. That probably doesn't require vast talent as a teacher or mage. (Though I'll agree Jowan probably lacks on both counts.)
[/quote]
I think it's safe to say that if Isolde could have hired openly, she could have gotten a much better teacher than Jowan. Can we agree on that?[/quote]
We can. Are we sure that would have been enough? One virtue to the Circle system is that when a mage turns, he turns surrounded by Templars.
[/quote]
I think so. I note that the Chasind, Avvars, Rivvanni, and Dalish work very well with a master-apprentice system. We also learn that the Mages Collective uses such a system underground. It seems to work.
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
That is untrue. There are a number of psychological studies that show that people will believe things with complete credulity that aren't true and never have been true, if it's repeated and asserted often enough especially by those in authority. The chantry from the Nevarran accords on has always held (publically anyway) that unchecked mages are an active danger that can 'go abomination' by stubbing their toes, and so needed to be locked away for the public good. The Chanty even insists that training doesn't change that (in fact Cullen says this repeatedly). The problem is the evidence doesn't support that, but it dfoesn't stop the Templars from claiming it (and too few people have challenged it until recently). I note that in private and with better educated audienances (nobility) the Chantry uses a different justification....fear of a Tevinter Magocracy.[/quote]
The letter I was referring to was to a lord who was questioning the need for the Circles, and the Grand Cleric who responded used both arguments. He is exactly the demographic you think the main argument won't fly with, and yet she raises both. Nor does the "Big Lie" technique really apply here, since this is a person who is questioning authority despite his culture telling him not to.
[/quote]
Dont put words in my mouth. I never said that the better educated people would reject the abomination argument. I only say that it's not the primary line of defense for Chantry Apologetics in the upper classes (and it's not...the no Tevinter 2.0 line is). Actually the "Big Lie" does apply. I would say the Big Lie has been going on for so long that most in power in the Chantry genuinely believe it, but they've never really tested it or learned enough about demons or the fade to find out if it's really true. How else could they have gotten the nature of tranquility so badly wrong for almost a thousand years (Asunder)? How else could they not even sanction the careful and controlled studies of demons in order to fight against them? (Something WIlhelm of Honneleth bitterly complains about). How else could the chantry effectively neuter the study of medicine because of fear of bloodmagic (and I mean mundane medicine such as surgery).[/quote]
Their shocking ignorance in other matters aside, the fact remains that that doesn't necessarily indicate they're wrong on other mattters in their purview. And while there is in-game evidence to indicate that letting trained mages walk around more or less freely is safe, the fact remains that there is also ample evidence to indicate that there is a danger to the public from untrained mages.
[/quote]
Once again, I challenge you to prove it. If you are going to insist that a morally problematic solution is the best/only one for public safety, then you need to show that to be true. The Chantry in over a thousand years hasn't even come close or even tried to other than bald assertions without facts to back them.
-Polaris[/quote]
Okay, how's this? Thrask knew the dangers of magic, or else believed the Chantry's Big Lie to be true. From this, it is most likely that his daughter was as well trained as an apostate could be. She turned anyway. Furthermore, there's a First Enchanter of the Kirkwall Circle who turned, apparently despite her will, and a member of the Mage's Collective who was killed by his abomination apprentice who he could not keep from doing stupid things. Your argument against the first two will be that the rules are different in Kirkwall because of the nature of the place; notwithstanding that I think it's a pretty weak assertion that the Veil is thin enough for magic to follow different rules, it doesn't explain the third problem.
[/quote]
No, it means that Thrask believed it. I also automatically ignore any incident occuring in Kirkwall because of the lack of a Veil there. The rules are apparently different in Kirkwall than in the rest of Thedas. As for the apprentice that turned in the Mages Collective Quest, the Mages collective took quick action to control the situation and casualties were limited to two. I challenge the Templars to do as well.
Edit: Regarding Thrask, actually chances are very good his daughter would have been completely untrained. There is no way a templar in good standing would be able to make contact with underground mages and no way that such conduct over a period of years wouldn't be found out and remarked upon by his superiors. When one of those Superiors is Meredith I think it's very safe to think that Olivia had no magical training at all.
As for the rules being different, it's not just me 'assertion', there is entire list of codex entries (Enigma of Kirkwall) that explains it. I note in Kirkwall that abominations can be summoned which isn't supposed to be possible, and that demons can cross over unassisted and can give mundanes (like Lady Harriman) the power of mages without actually being mages. Best to consider all of Kirkwall to be a Hellmouth and a special case.
-Polaris
Modifié par IanPolaris, 17 juin 2013 - 03:33 .
#1021
Posté 17 juin 2013 - 03:28
IanPolaris
-
- Members
- 9 650 messages
Youth4Ever wrote...
The templars are pretty much the only players in the game right now. At this moment in time there is no one else to do the job. And convincing regular soldiers to do it might be kinda hard after they find out they have to sign up for a lyrium addiction to combat magic effectively. When the templar job is no longer a sacred duty or a special duty, people might be less inclined to go along with that sort of stipulation. So, keep the templars and reform the Circles with a strong Lucrosian leader who can pave the way for integration and lasting Circle independence in the future.IanPolaris wrote...
This may suprise you, but I completely AGREE! I have for years. I simply think the Chantry's Circle system is not only not the way to do this, but is actually counterproductive to this noble goal.
Are they? For that matter who says lyrium is required? I point to one Alistair and his trainees that says it's not.
-Polaris
#1022
Posté 17 juin 2013 - 03:31
IanPolaris
-
- Members
- 9 650 messages
Youth4Ever wrote...
The templars are pretty much the only players in the game right now. At this moment in time there is no one else to do the job. And convincing regular soldiers to do it might be kinda hard after they find out they have to sign up for a lyrium addiction to combat magic effectively. When the templar job is no longer a sacred duty or a special duty, people might be less inclined to go along with that sort of stipulation. So, keep the templars and reform the Circles with a strong Lucrosian leader who can pave the way for integration and lasting Circle independence in the future.IanPolaris wrote...
This may suprise you, but I completely AGREE! I have for years. I simply think the Chantry's Circle system is not only not the way to do this, but is actually counterproductive to this noble goal.
Not only that, but at some point, however the enforcement arm is worked out, there has to be an understanding that mages are PEOPLE and are to be treated as people. That means the chantry should not be involved in magical enforcement at all. Not only won't the mages accept that, but the Chantry had their chance and blew it. I also think that mages should be a PART of this enforcement.
In any event, a written stipulation regarding the rights of mages and the responsibilities of magic should be made that everyone can agree on (or disagree on the least).
-Polaris
#1023
Posté 17 juin 2013 - 03:32
SamaraDraven
-
- Members
- 2 312 messages
IanPolaris wrote...
No it's not. You are trying to make a fake contradiction. Uldred's plan had nothing to do with their being a blight other than Uldred saw this as an opportunity to rid the circle of Chantry control and Loghain was willing to play ball. We also know from Gregoire that messengers WERE sent for help (and hadn't come back yet).
Not seeing any contradiction here, blatent or otherwise. (By contrast we know that Bann Teagan was cut off in the way that KC Gregoire was not.)
-Polaris
When you finally get to Connor, in the main hall, you fight several Redcliffe men that he was controlling and not just Teagan.
The contradiction is that in another post, you claim the Blight would hinder Uldred if he were to attempt a serious takeover of Ferelden due to all the Darkspawn running everywhere but then, in Connor's case, you mentioned how that same Blight cut off communication from Redcliffe and how that was a part of why Redcliffe was so bad off. That is a contradiction. I did already mention that I believe Uldred saw an opportunity and took it.
I didn't claim an abomination's mind control powers are limitless. I do think they have limits. I just think we disagree with how much they have. And left alone in society, unchecked in any way, I do think the possibility and temptation of mages controlling people for personal gain is very real and very great. Not because they're mages but because they're human. They're fallible. Their powers give them a huge advantage over mundanes. I think it's only reasonable to put laws and procedures in place to curb bad behavior. And without a system that can keep tabs on mages, how will potential abominations be spotted before they wreak havoc? Before lives are lost? A blood mage isn't going to just announce their wrongdoing and their abuses could continue for a long time before being discovered, if they ever are. Having untrained mages on the loose is a big gamble and there are examples that we know of the gamble not going in favor of people.
Modifié par SamaraDraven, 17 juin 2013 - 03:38 .
#1024
Posté 17 juin 2013 - 03:39
IanPolaris
-
- Members
- 9 650 messages
SamaraDraven wrote...
IanPolaris wrote...
No it's not. You are trying to make a fake contradiction. Uldred's plan had nothing to do with their being a blight other than Uldred saw this as an opportunity to rid the circle of Chantry control and Loghain was willing to play ball. We also know from Gregoire that messengers WERE sent for help (and hadn't come back yet).
Not seeing any contradiction here, blatent or otherwise. (By contrast we know that Bann Teagan was cut off in the way that KC Gregoire was not.)
-Polaris
When you finally get to Connor, in the main hall, you fight several Redcliffe men that he was controlling and not just Teagan.
You fight many men of Redcliff and Conner is the acting Arl. There is no evidence that any of them are mind-controlled....just following the orders of their Liege Lord. It's Teagan that's clearly mind controlled.
The contradiction is that in another post, you claim the Blight would hinder Uldred if he were to attempt a serious takeover of Ferelden due to all the Darkspawn running everywhere but then you mentioned how that same Blight cut off communication from Redcliffe and how that was a part of why Redcliffe was so bad off. That is a contradiction. I did already mention that I believe Uldred saw an opportunity and took it.
That isn't a contradiction at all no matter how hard you try. It's part and parcel of the same thing. Regions of Fereldan are isolated. Without that isolation, Redcliff would not have happened or at the very least it would have been known about and countered before it got so bad. I note that there were Templars in Redcliff that were prevented from functioning because of the civil war. Had those templars been left alone, Redcliff doesn't happen.
Let's assume that Uldred-Abomination (as opposed to Uldred) takes over the entire tower. It will cost him some of his abominations. Then what? He can take over the village by Lake Calanhad, but then his group is days away from anywhere (except Redcliff which will be of no help at all), and the land is ravaged by the blight?
Can you say, "All dressed up and no where to go?" Uldred-Abomination simply did not think this through.
Uldred did, but Uldred had a completely different set of motivations.
-Polaris
Modifié par IanPolaris, 17 juin 2013 - 03:40 .
#1025
Posté 17 juin 2013 - 03:39
IanPolaris
-
- Members
- 9 650 messages
SamaraDraven wrote...
I didn't claim an abomination's mind control powers are limitless. I do think they have limits. I just think we disagree with how much they have. And left alone in society, unchecked in any way, I do think the possibility and temptation of mages controlling people for personal gain is very real and very great. Not because they're mages but because they're human. They're fallible. Their powers give them a huge advantage over mundanes. I think it's only reasonable to put laws and procedures in place to curb bad behavior. And without a system that can keep tabs on mages, how will potential abominations be spotted before they wreak havoc? Before lives are lost? A blood mage isn't going to just announce their wrongdoing and their abuses could continue for a long time before being discovered, if they ever are. Having untrained mages on the loose is a big gamble and there are examples that we know of the gamble not going in favor of people.
I have never sanctioned or supported having untrained mages on the loose.
-Polaris
Modifié par IanPolaris, 17 juin 2013 - 03:43 .
