1081 réponses à ce sujet

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

[quote]IanPolaris wrote...

Since in the actual game, the series of incidents took weeks (in total to play out), yes I think so.[/quote]

Okay, point. This is a really bad scenario. When you argue that it lessens its value as an argument for my case (since I think that's why you bring this up,) I think you're wrong though. It shows the danger when uneducated mages turn in the populace, rather than in the Circle.

[quote]
[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]

Okay, Loghain took out some of the Templars who were in Redcliffe. It's just that the implication was that he'd taken out all of them, or so it seemed to me.

[quote]
[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]

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]

What I'm arguing is that the Circle is designed to fail safely, and that your system is not. This is a legitimate problem with a system you believe to be better, rather than the kneejerk fault-finding you seem to take it for. You argue that the costs of failure can be mitigated? Cool. But my argument is that this mitigates them more.[/quote][/quote]

[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[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]

Usually, because most mages don't turn anyway.

[quote]
[quote]
[quote]
[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.[/quote]

Could you clarify? I don't understand this point.

[quote]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.  [/quote]

An entire Circle very nearly turned. The demons seem to have been trapped in the Tower. The Mage's Collective by comparison put a missing person's complaint on a Job Board and the situation was contained by The Warden despite a complete lack of forewarning. Leaving aside the lore stating that abominations are worse than the game shows, the monster the Warden killed was already boss-level. Were it anyone but the Warden who responds, or really anyone but the Warden who shows up on the scene accidentally, that would probably would not have ended so well.

[quote]
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]

Yeah, I know that the Veil is weak and that more mages go bad in Kirkwall. I just think it's a questionable assumption that the very basic rules change as a result.

There's no real evidence that demons aren't supposed to be able to grant magic to mundanes, is there? I mean, one of the specializations for Warriors involves becoming slightly magical due to using Fade Spirits in place of the Fade powers you don't have. As for summoning abominations, are we sure Varric didn't make that up? Cassandra's words at the end of the game, IIRC, are that she believes his story is "largely true."

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 17 juin 2013 - 07:07 .

[lil yonce]

IanPolaris wrote...

Youth4Ever wrote...

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.

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

I think that sort of revolution can take place in the future but not now. The mages are at Andoral's Reach and the templars have an army gathered to confront them. A compromise is very likely IMO because a straight up siege attempt by the templars or a wild escape attempt by the mages will result in a lot of casualties on both sides.

There is bound to be a divisional split between the mages after that questionable Aequitarian vote, and the templars have lost Lambert and are without the force that unifed them in this campaign. A compromise will get both sides to stand down and the mages can negotiate within reason for a better Circle of Magi with the templars and a sympathetic Justinia V.

EDIT: And who has the money to supply a new sentinel order with lyrium? Not the mages. A country perhaps but if a nation is in control of lyrium and thus a policing force-- the mages have then traded one master in the Chantry for another in X country.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 17 juin 2013 - 01:35 .

[LobselVith8]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

As for summoning abominations, are we sure Varric didn't make that up? Cassandra's words at the end of the game, IIRC, are that she believes his story is "largely true."

One of the developers admitted that the abominations being summoned like creatures was not canonical, and was simply a game mechanic. Ethereal Writer probably remembers who, specifically.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

IanPolaris wrote...

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

Unless the Chantry moderates its view on how sinful magic is a lot, I think I'll have to agree with you. And if they are given one more chance and blow it (there is an argument to be made that they should not be given even that one chance, I think) then they should not under any circumstances be given another.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 17 juin 2013 - 04:05 .

[dragonflight288]

I know I most certainly don't trust the Chantry or the templars to do the job, as they have already blown it big time.

[SamaraDraven]

IanPolaris wrote...

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

I didn't say you had. That was me stating what I think. You seem to be arguing a minimalist view of what Connor and Uldred did/could have done. Connor being a mage on the loose and arguing that under normal circumstances it wouldn't have been as bad strikes me as wishful. But, let's say you're right, and that normal conditions would allow for a quicker response to Connor's possession: people still would have died before help came. Whether or not the Warden fights possessed Redcliff men who are or aren't possessed has no apparent basis and we're both conjecturing on that. Though I would point out that they attack when Connor does, after it's already been established that he's a mage (mages aren't supposed to be able to hold titles, remember? Thus he's not an Arl to them and being a mage, they should have been trying to apprehend him, according to the law as it stood at the time.) and he's possessed (something the largely Andrastian people abhor and run away from rather than fight to defend). So I will continue to believe they were possessed. It's also true that none of those men are Templars. In the time it took to retrieve Templars, many would still have died.


Had the Warden not stumbled upon the circle problem, I don't see what would have stopped Uldred from finishing off the Circle. That barrier was sustained by Wynne and she even admits to not being sure she could have maintained it much longer. Without the PC, the Circle would have all fallen to Uldred. Without a Blight, the lands would have been more able to fight back against Uldred. With the Blight, Uldred had an opportunity and took it. Had he succeeded, the villages were far too weak to resist, especially the smaller villages like Lothering. I doubt very much that a few days or weeks travel means much to a force of abominations.  So I find your assertion that the Blight hinders Uldred, a fully trained mage with a legion of demons and abominations but helps Connor to be in error. It seems the Blight helps both. Had the Blight not been a factor, both incidents would have been more easily dealt with, though not without considerable loss of life first.

I suppose it's something we will have to disagree about because we're simply splitting hairs over it now and neither you or I have enough canon info to support our stance and can both easily assume what we want out of things.

I thought you were arguing for full on mage freedom, which I disagree with. Mages DO have an advantage over others that can be exploited and untrained mages DO become abominations that can take a lot of lives before being dealt with so I will never ascribe to the idea that mages should be sent off to be their own nation or simply left alone. But if that's not your stance, then we're just speaking in circles about technicalities and artificial details, which is tiresome.

Modifié par SamaraDraven, 17 juin 2013 - 04:27 .

[TEWR]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

As for summoning abominations, are we sure Varric didn't make that up? Cassandra's words at the end of the game, IIRC, are that she believes his story is "largely true."

One of the developers admitted that the abominations being summoned like creatures was not canonical, and was simply a game mechanic. Ethereal Writer probably remembers who, specifically.

John Epler. IIRC, he said a year or so ago that the matter would be addressed in the future (and that it was a gameplay thing, yes) along with making Abominations more credible enemies instead of being, as I like to call them, mindless drunkards.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 17 juin 2013 - 04:47 .

[SamaraDraven]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

As for summoning abominations, are we sure Varric didn't make that up? Cassandra's words at the end of the game, IIRC, are that she believes his story is "largely true."

One of the developers admitted that the abominations being summoned like creatures was not canonical, and was simply a game mechanic. Ethereal Writer probably remembers who, specifically.

Exactly! What was done for the player's gratification in the game doesn't accurately reflect the Thedosian lore. If it did, the game would become almost prohibitively hard to play. Though, for myself, I think I'd prefer that. Or use fewer abominations and more realistic opponents.

[IanPolaris]

SamaraDraven wrote...

I thought you were arguing for full on mage freedom, which I disagree with. Mages DO have an advantage over others that can be exploited and untrained mages DO become abominations that can take a lot of lives before being dealt with so I will never ascribe to the idea that mages should be sent off to be their own nation or simply left alone. But if that's not your stance, then we're just speaking in circles about technicalities and artificial details, which is tiresome.

My stance is roughly this.  I think mages should be 'free' which does not mean "free to do whatever they want" but rather 'free' in that they are in general granted the same rights and opportunities that anyone else is.  However, I take no issue with the notion that magic needs to be regulated and strongly regulated, and that this can impose some reasonable requirements on otherwise free citizens (such as mandatory education which really does seem to be a public safety issue).

So in short, mages should be free, but their magic needs to be regulated.  The need to regulate magic grants the state/society the right to place reasonable restrictions on those that have magic (but the idea that mages are people and free citizens needs to be upheld).

Of course, the nub is what is meant and tolerable as 'reasonable restrictions'>

-Polaris

[SamaraDraven]

Filament wrote...

I don't remember the conversation playing out exactly like that. I remember him describing different hierarchies of abomination power depending on the power of the host, not just magically but also in society, and the power of the demon itself...

So half-justifying weaker abominations, if not the rise-from-your-grave implementation of DA2.

Ah. My mistake then.

I detest the waves of dropping-from-the-rooftops implementation in DA2. I thought the grave resurrecting ones were also in DAO? Bodies littering the floor is usually a dead (snic) giveaway.

[In Exile]

IanPolaris wrote...
So in short, mages should be free, but their magic needs to be regulated.  The need to regulate magic grants the state/society the right to place reasonable restrictions on those that have magic (but the idea that mages are people and free citizens needs to be upheld).

Of course, the nub is what is meant and tolerable as 'reasonable restrictions'>

-Polaris

That's all rhethoric, though. I'm sure someone pro-templar will just say that keeping them all in Circles and regulated solely by mundanes is reasonable. 

[TEWR]

Filament wrote...

I don't remember the conversation playing out exactly like that. I remember him describing different hierarchies of abomination power depending on the power of the host, not just magically but also in society, and the power of the demon itself...

So half-justifying weaker abominations, if not the rise-from-your-grave implementation of DA2.

Correct. However, he did say that they would work on making Abominations more credible threats instead of a be-all end-all mook Abomination display we see, which was the crux of my point. That Abomination gameplay as we have seen it is, in fact, a limitation imposed upon the game that detracts from the overall image we're supposed to receive and this will be rectified.

Which doesn't negate the possibility of mindless drunkards, of course. Only that they won't be as prevalent.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 17 juin 2013 - 05:36 .

[IanPolaris]

In Exile wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...
So in short, mages should be free, but their magic needs to be regulated.  The need to regulate magic grants the state/society the right to place reasonable restrictions on those that have magic (but the idea that mages are people and free citizens needs to be upheld).

Of course, the nub is what is meant and tolerable as 'reasonable restrictions'>

-Polaris

That's all rhethoric, though. I'm sure someone pro-templar will just say that keeping them all in Circles and regulated solely by mundanes is reasonable. 

Of course they would which is why I said that the nub of the disagreement was 'reasonable restrictions'.  I would simply posit that treatment of mages that would qualify as genocide under UN law isn't exactly reasonable.....

-Polaris

[In Exile]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
Correct. However, he did say that they would work on making Abominations more credible threats instead of a be-all end-all mook Abomination display we see, which was the crux of my point. That Abomination gameplay as we have seen it is, in fact, a limitation imposed upon the game that detracts from the overall image we're supposed to receive and this will be rectified.

Which doesn't negate the possibility of mindless drunkards, of course. Only that they won't be as prevalent.

Another related problem is that we as player-mages never actualy deal with any of the so-called issues with being a mage (e.g. nightmare whispers). It's hard to take the arguments that mages are plagued by demons seriously as a result. 

[In Exile]

IanPolaris wrote...
Of course they would which is why I said that the nub of the disagreement was 'reasonable restrictions'.  I would simply posit that treatment of mages that would qualify as genocide under UN law isn't exactly reasonable.....

-Polaris

I think I'd be very difficult to meet the genocide cut off, because the intent of the Chantry is self-perpetuating prisons. A crime against humanity, probably, but not genocide. 

Anyway, I'm sure the counter-argument is something something no control ticking time-bomb abomination bad, and the response is freedom human rights principle respect for dignity. 

[SamaraDraven]

Filament wrote...

SamaraDraven wrote...

I detest the waves of dropping-from-the-rooftops implementation in DA2. I thought the grave resurrecting ones were also in DAO? Bodies littering the floor is usually a dead (snic) giveaway. 

Bodies rising from the surface of the ground is totally fine IMO-- if predictable, like you said. The thing with DA2 is that abominations were rising from beneath the ground, like demons do, as if they've been summoned (which is about as nonsensical as summoning an elf)... or just waiting in a shallow grave for a blood mage to come wake them up. Right.

True. Hell, to kill Connor's demon, you had to go to the Fade because it wasn't IN him physically. Maybe Kirkwall being some kind of Veil weak point has something to do with why demons can just pop up? Still...Why only when a capable party of fighters is present? Why aren't they swarming up out of the floor all the time if the Veil thing is true? It never made much sense. It's a game.

[Sir JK]

In Exile wrote...

Another related problem is that we as player-mages never actualy deal with any of the so-called issues with being a mage (e.g. nightmare whispers). It's hard to take the arguments that mages are plagued by demons seriously as a result. 

Agreed, completely. This is something I really wish we could be shown to us directly, ideally to the extent of having a situation come up where we literally have to figure out it's a demon we're talking to and must say no or "game over". Though even if we don't get that, having reminders of the constant presence of demons and such would be satisfactory to me.

[IanPolaris]

Sir JK wrote...

In Exile wrote...

Another related problem is that we as player-mages never actualy deal with any of the so-called issues with being a mage (e.g. nightmare whispers). It's hard to take the arguments that mages are plagued by demons seriously as a result. 

Agreed, completely. This is something I really wish we could be shown to us directly, ideally to the extent of having a situation come up where we literally have to figure out it's a demon we're talking to and must say no or "game over". Though even if we don't get that, having reminders of the constant presence of demons and such would be satisfactory to me.

Actually the very best opportunity for that was in DAO Origins in the Mage background.  I had "mouse" pegged as untrustworthy even on my first playthrough very quickly.  However, I think it would have been interesting if during that final conversation with Mouse the one or two convo options that offer to help mouse actually resulted in "game over" for the Warden.  I note that this option existed in Witcher 2.  If you didn't want to cooperate, you died before the first chapter started.  Literally.

-Polaris

[Lotion Soronarr]

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

Wrong.
Every single precaution in the Cirlce is 100% justified. EVERY. LAST. ONE.

Gameplay and story segragation are really big in DA and it leads to peoepl having compeltely skewed perspective on abominations and mages. We DO have in-game sources telling us how horrible things were before the Circles. Of course, you're gonna say "but that book was written by Genitivi!"
Don't care. It's still a scoure. And DG confirmed it. Of course, you will deny it (as you always do) and argue against him.

The truth is really simple.
Mages are dangerous and MUST be segregated. It's not slavery and it's not "genocide". The Circles are mostly fine, the Chatnry policies are mostly fine.

[Lotion Soronarr]

IanPolaris wrote...
I have never sanctioned or supported having untrained mages on the loose.

-Polaris

Becaue a mage being trained makes him perfectly safe? Suuuuuure.

It's not like we've seen trained mages abuse magic like hell or fall prey to abominations. Never.
Cullen is completely wrong. The Harrowing does make a mage completely safe from possesion. :innocent:

[Xilizhra]

In Exile wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
Correct. However, he did say that they would work on making Abominations more credible threats instead of a be-all end-all mook Abomination display we see, which was the crux of my point. That Abomination gameplay as we have seen it is, in fact, a limitation imposed upon the game that detracts from the overall image we're supposed to receive and this will be rectified.

Which doesn't negate the possibility of mindless drunkards, of course. Only that they won't be as prevalent.

Another related problem is that we as player-mages never actualy deal with any of the so-called issues with being a mage (e.g. nightmare whispers). It's hard to take the arguments that mages are plagued by demons seriously as a result. 

More likely, it's just not something that happens very often; once a year, if that? Perhaps not even then. I've never even heard of a mage being at risk in a dream.

[Ieldra]

Xilizhra wrote...

In Exile wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...
Correct. However, he did say that they would work on making Abominations more credible threats instead of a be-all end-all mook Abomination display we see, which was the crux of my point. That Abomination gameplay as we have seen it is, in fact, a limitation imposed upon the game that detracts from the overall image we're supposed to receive and this will be rectified.

Which doesn't negate the possibility of mindless drunkards, of course. Only that they won't be as prevalent.

Another related problem is that we as player-mages never actualy deal with any of the so-called issues with being a mage (e.g. nightmare whispers). It's hard to take the arguments that mages are plagued by demons seriously as a result. 

More likely, it's just not something that happens very often; once a year, if that? Perhaps not even then. I've never even heard of a mage being at risk in a dream.

Feynriel.

Though that underscores the point: it's not mages who are a problem, it's mages who haven't learned to control their power.

[Xilizhra]

Feynriel.

Though that underscores the point: it's not mages who are a problem, it's mages who haven't learned to control their power.

Fenyriel's results are not typical of mages; being a dreamer, he's an active beacon for demons.