1799 réponses à ce sujet

[Ziggeh]

Oof, analogies to historical themes are always going to be clumsy as this situation was designed to have no right or wrong answer.

While there's certainly a poltical element to the mages opression, it's not like disenfranchised ex slaves might accidentally eat your village.

[Medhia Nox]

@LobselVith8: I only support the concept of Tranquility as a fascinating and terrifying aspect of the Dragon Age universe.

Sure - get rid of the Rite of Annulment.

As I've stated before, on specific topics I'd probably agree a great deal with what you think should be changed (or removed) - but that a rebellion of violence was the first and best choice I wholeheartedly disagree.

[LobselVith8]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@LobselVith8: I only support the concept of Tranquility as a fascinating and terrifying aspect of the Dragon Age universe.

Sure - get rid of the Rite of Annulment.

As I've stated before, on specific topics I'd probably agree a great deal with what you think should be changed (or removed) - but that a rebellion of violence was the first and best choice I wholeheartedly disagree.

It wasn't a rebellion of violence; it was a vote for autonomy after nearly a thousand years of the Chantry controlled Circles.

[Medhia Nox]

@LobselVith8: I cannot ignore that it rides on the coattails of Ander's actions - and therefore cannot condone it.

I could never fight for civil liberty under a banner of violence against civilians - and I could not separate what Ander's did from the Templar reaction in the books (which I still cannot properly react to)

[Xilizhra]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@LobselVith8: I cannot ignore that it rides on the coattails of Ander's actions - and therefore cannot condone it.

I could never fight for civil liberty under a banner of violence against civilians - and I could not separate what Ander's did from the Templar reaction in the books (which I still cannot properly react to)

So... you can't separate it because you refuse to take into account the information that shows how it was separated? In any case, Anders wasn't even part of the Circle; the Circle itself chose nothing in DA2 and only started fighting out of self-defense. Also, the Circle's never attacked civilians.

[Medhia Nox]

@Xilizhra: That would not be the perception of the populations of Thedas (well, it might - since this is an invented world).

A mage blew up a church - the Templars acted against the bad mages - and then the mages abandoned the Chantry and demand autonomy.

Again, I'll have to wait to see what Bioware writes in the game - but honestly, how the populaces of Thedas wouldn't react negatively is beyond me.

[Xilizhra]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@Xilizhra: That would not be the perception of the populations of Thedas (well, it might - since this is an invented world).

A mage blew up a church - the Templars acted against the bad mages - and then the mages abandoned the Chantry and demand autonomy.

Again, I'll have to wait to see what Bioware writes in the game - but honestly, how the populaces of Thedas wouldn't react negatively is beyond me.

It depends entirely on how the war's gone. Also, you're still lacking a great deal of context for the discussion (namely, that Anders' act didn't actually start the war).

[Medhia Nox]

Nothing would make me happier - because then Anders would have totally failed. He was a psychotic - and his assertions that he forced the hands of mages and Chantry would have been totally wrong.

[Xilizhra]

Medhia Nox wrote...

Nothing would make me happier - because then Anders would have totally failed. He was a psychotic - and his assertions that he forced the hands of mages and Chantry would have been totally wrong.

Well, he ratcheted up the tensions between both sides, but did not actually start the war right then. That happened after the Lord Seeker tried to kill and/or imprison the entire leading council of Enchanters, and things snowballed from there.

[Medhia Nox]

@Xilizhra: So was he, or was he not, a catalyst for the war?

[Xilizhra]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@Xilizhra: So was he, or was he not, a catalyst for the war?

He was not the catalyst for the war; the Kirkwall Annulment was just the last in a long line of incidents over the centuries that have deteriorated the desire of the Circle to stay chained, and it took one or two more for that chain to finally snap.

[LobselVith8]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@LobselVith8: I cannot ignore that it rides on the coattails of Ander's actions - and therefore cannot condone it.

Mages have sought independence and autonomy long before Anders was even born. Fiona's actions in trying to spearhead the liberation of her people ride on almost a thousand years of injustice that they have had to face due to religious dogma.

Medhia Nox wrote...

I could never fight for civil liberty under a banner of violence against civilians - and I could not separate what Ander's did from the Templar reaction in the books (which I still cannot properly react to)

The Chantry of Andraste isn't a civilian organization.

[Medhia Nox]

@LobselVith8: Again, not going to argue what blowing up the Chantry actually did in Kirkwall... watch the YouTube video. City blocks were on fire quite a distance from the explosion... the explosion of massive masonry block that rained down all over the city.

[dragonflight288]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@LobselVith8: Again, not going to argue what blowing up the Chantry actually did in Kirkwall... watch the YouTube video. City blocks were on fire quite a distance from the explosion... the explosion of massive masonry block that rained down all over the city.

And were the results of one man only. Gaider said that the right of annullment was not justified in Kirkwall, and that Meredith's superiors would have come down on Meredith hard.

Anders' actions were not the catalyst for the war itself. Lamberts actions were.

[cicero740]

my hawke was usually supports the mages bethany, but also helps out the templars sometimes. my warden dosen't care anything to get the job done. I needed First enchanter Irving to help connor so i did not murder anything in their I let Blood mages go when ever I use Wynn (hardly) just to rub it in her face. In real life I would be thanking the maker that the templars are in charge.

[Vit246]

dragonflight288 wrote...
And were the results of one man only. Gaider said that the right of annullment was not justified in Kirkwall, and that Meredith's superiors would have come down on Meredith hard. 

Anders' actions were not the catalyst for the war itself. Lamberts actions were.

It would've be nice if Lambert and Asunder and whatever else had all been internally in the game instead of being externally essential and necessary information in a lousy book.

Modifié par Vit246, 24 juin 2013 - 08:00 .

[mopotter]

I'd love to have an "Asunder" option where I can get some mages and some templars joined together to get rid of the extremist and a support the mage option and a support the templar option and a Yes - kill the crazy one option.

[Bekkael]

Luiren wrote...

What side will you pick in the next Dragon Age game? Will you stand with the mages or templars?

*snip*

Yes. Both.

I don't know how anyone can play a BioWare game less than 2-3 times, you miss out on too much if you only play once. My mage characters will be (mostly) passionately pro-mage, and my other characters will cover all the Templar or unknown choice angles.

[IanPolaris]

Medhia Nox wrote...

Slavery had already been abolished in MANY nations without a war.  

You need to reread your history.  Slavery as a globally recognized and 'acceptable' institution largely and very abruptly vanished in most places around the globe starting from about 1810 through about 1840.  This was almost entirely due to the high-handed and unilateral actions of the Royal Navy whose admiralty despised slavery and acted against it around the globe even before British Parliament got around to absolishing slavery.

So I think you need to reassess.  The brutal fact is that it was British Imperialism and the force of the Royal Navy (often brutal naked force) that brought an end to international slavery.

Interestingly the US Navy also took a dim view towards slavery ever since it's undeclared war on Algeria and the Corsairs of the North African Coast (the Barbary Wars).  However, the US Navy at that time was a purely regional Navy/Force.  It was the guns of the Royal Navy that made the difference.

-Polaris

[DKJaigen]

Xilizhra wrote...

Medhia Nox wrote...

@SerenityRebirth: With luck - "hunting down the forces of chaos..." will mean crushing both fanatical factions is a choice.

There's only one fanatical faction that we know of yet. And if the rings are any indication of factions as a whole, it seems highly likely that the mage rebellion will be one of the moderate factions along with the Seekers, with the fanatics being the templars and whoever the red glowy people are.

One of my own theories is that the rings are thropies (and not orgins as some people believe) and he is proudly displaying the amount of asses he has been kicking of late. 
The person also holds a helm and a sword with dragon icons on it. I theorise that the man is a reaver and a follower of the old gods. Which would make sense because if the templars, the circle, the seekers and especially the chantry would fall into ruin they have free reign.

[dragonflight288]

Vit246 wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...
And were the results of one man only. Gaider said that the right of annullment was not justified in Kirkwall, and that Meredith's superiors would have come down on Meredith hard. 

Anders' actions were not the catalyst for the war itself. Lamberts actions were.

It would've be nice if Lambert and Asunder and whatever else had all been internally in the game instead of being externally essential and necessary information in a lousy book.

That's true. Asunder did take place 2 years after the events in Kirkwall, and some things may change based on individual gameplay, so they'll likely cover it as a codex entry or something in Inquisition, or maybe part of the prologue.

[Kenshen]

It won't be an option but to me both sides are wrong but since I most likely won't be allowed to stay on the sidelines I will support the mages because it isn't their fault they are not understood and are poorly trained. Besides I can't stand religious zealots and that is how I view the templars, pawns of the chantry.

[dragonflight288]

aryon69 wrote...

It won't be an option but to me both sides are wrong but since I most likely won't be allowed to stay on the sidelines I will support the mages because it isn't their fault they are not understood and are poorly trained. Besides I can't stand religious zealots and that is how I view the templars, pawns of the chantry.

Pawns of the chantry who abandoned the chantry, at any rate. :happy:

[DPSSOC]

IceHawk-181 wrote...

DPSSOC wrote...
Ok but then you run into the problem of trusting the mages to extradite their own to face justice, otherwise a mage can just commit a crime and then run back to territory they control to avoid punishment,  because as we've seen unless it effects them the mages won't police their own.

An interesting claim considering the Mage Origin.

You mean where the First Enchanter admits he wouldn't punish Jowan were it up to him?
 
[

IceHawk-181 wrote...
And wouldn't this problem be solved if we stopped treating Mages like sovereign entities and start treating them like Ferelden citizens subject to Ferelden law.

Yes it would but that didn't seem to be what Xil was suggesting.
 

IceHawk-181 wrote...
But that would necessitate all the effort of actually forcing the Landsmeet, the King, and the Mages to sit down and work out a meaningful solution.
 
And we all know that is impossible, well, just cuz....

Well it'd be difficult bordering on impossible to convince the mages to accept a new set of mundane mandates to follow after casting off the old ones.

DKJaigen wrote...

Bleachrude wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

IceHawk-181 wrote...
But that would necessitate all the effort of actually forcing the Landsmeet, the King, and the Mages to sit down and work out a meaningful solution.
 
And we all know that is impossible, well, just cuz....

As a matter of fact in DAO there is precedent for this.  In the case of Jowan, you can point out that Jowan is a malificar and his crimes and what he's done stem from his misuse of magic.  As such, he should be judged by the Circle of Magi.  I think that's a very interesting and solid precedent (because Eamon agrees with yoiu and turns Jowan over to the circle for judgement) to permit mages to at least have a role in judging their own.

-Polaris

Wait...you're actually arguing this is a _GOOD_ thing?

So if a mage steals something via magic, the government of Ferelden has no recourse but to turn said mage over to the circle which is controlled entirely by mages?

Am I the only one that sees this as completely contradicting the pro-mage argument that "mages should be treated like regular people"?

In the medical world its common that doctors are judged by their peers if something goes wrong. Why you ask? because most people now to little about human anatomy to reach the correct judgement. If Finn was caught by a templar  while using the ritual to find the lights of Arlathan he would likely be excecuted for use of bloodmagic. At the same time a templar can stroll into a mages laboratory in tower not realising that the mage is conducting unethical experiments.

Mages can only be judged by mages.

Except Bleach is talking about mundane crime not magical crime.  If a doctor steals or commits murder he isn't judged solely by doctors.  Sure for magical malpractice let mages judge mages but for everything else they should face, at least, the same justice as everyone else, if not harsher.

[IanPolaris]

[quote]DPSSOC wrote...

[quote]IceHawk-181 wrote...
[quote]DPSSOC wrote...
Ok but then you run into the problem of trusting the mages to extradite their own to face justice, otherwise a mage can just commit a crime and then run back to territory they control to avoid punishment,  because as we've seen unless it effects them the mages won't police their own.[/quote]

An interesting claim considering the Mage Origin.[/quote]

You mean where the First Enchanter admits he wouldn't punish Jowan were it up to him?
[/quote]

Nope.  The first enchanter said that if it were up to him, things might be different.  Remember that at that time, we have absolutely no evidence that Jowan has done anything wrong other than dally with an initiate and get someone to send hate-mail about him to Gregoire.  In fact I sort of suspect that the 'witness' that ratted Jowan out was none other than Uldred himself. 

[quote]
[quote]IceHawk-181 wrote...
And wouldn't this problem be solved if we stopped treating Mages like sovereign entities and start treating them like Ferelden citizens subject to Ferelden law.[/quote]

Yes it would but that didn't seem to be what Xil was suggesting.
[/quote]

Ideally, mages and magic crime would be defined under the law (with perhaps the use of magic being an aggravating factor).  This would be a point that would have to be negotiated in good faith. 


[quote]
[quote]IceHawk-181 wrote...
But that would necessitate all the effort of actually forcing the Landsmeet, the King, and the Mages to sit down and work out a meaningful solution.
 
And we all know that is impossible, well, just cuz....
[/quote]

Well it'd be difficult bordering on impossible to convince the mages to accept a new set of mundane mandates to follow after casting off the old ones.
[/quote]

Almost all the reasonable mages (and certainly it's the cornerstone of the Aequtarian Fraternity) believe that mages should be subject to rules and codes of conduct (and even the outlaw Mage's Collective enforces this in DAO).  As long as the circles had a SAW in what those laws and mandates were, I don't see that the reasonable circle representatives would object.


[quote]
[quote]DKJaigen wrote...
[quote]Bleachrude wrote...
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
[quote]IceHawk-181 wrote...
But that would necessitate all the effort of actually forcing the Landsmeet, the King, and the Mages to sit down and work out a meaningful solution.
 
And we all know that is impossible, well, just cuz....
[/quote]

As a matter of fact in DAO there is precedent for this.  In the case of Jowan, you can point out that Jowan is a malificar and his crimes and what he's done stem from his misuse of magic.  As such, he should be judged by the Circle of Magi.  I think that's a very interesting and solid precedent (because Eamon agrees with yoiu and turns Jowan over to the circle for judgement) to permit mages to at least have a role in judging their own.

-Polaris[/quote]

Wait...you're actually arguing this is a _GOOD_ thing?

So if a mage steals something via magic, the government of Ferelden has no recourse but to turn said mage over to the circle which is controlled entirely by mages?

Am I the only one that sees this as completely contradicting the pro-mage argument that "mages should be treated like regular people"?

[/quote]

In the medical world its common that doctors are judged by their peers if something goes wrong. Why you ask? because most people now to little about human anatomy to reach the correct judgement. If Finn was caught by a templar  while using the ritual to find the lights of Arlathan he would likely be excecuted for use of bloodmagic. At the same time a templar can stroll into a mages laboratory in tower not realising that the mage is conducting unethical experiments.

Mages can only be judged by mages.

[/quote]

Except Bleach is talking about mundane crime not magical crime.  If a doctor steals or commits murder he isn't judged solely by doctors.  Sure for magical malpractice let mages judge mages but for everything else they should face, at least, the same justice as everyone else, if not harsher.[/quote]

In the case of Redcliff, Jowan was guilty of both a mundane crime (poisoning the Arl) but also of a purely magical one.  Not only that but the damage caused by Jowan's actions stemmed almost entirely from the fact that both he and Conner were mages.  That being so, it seems a very reasonable thing to ask the circle to judge it's own.  However, that is a point that could be negotiated in good faith.

-Polaris