1799 réponses à ce sujet

[Silfren]

MisterJB wrote...

Silfren wrote...
Did you read your own words here?  It's preferable to BARGAIN WITH A DEMON than to make concessions toward mages?!?

Unlike mages, demons are politically neutral and lack an history of conflict with non-mages which means reaching an agreement with it will be easier. They are also less complex than an entire population of individuals which means its goals can be more easily predicted and countered. They also lack allies meaning one can trap one demon and not fear a rescue mission.
One demon or even a small group; even if they escape; are liable to cause less damage than whatever concessions would be granted to mages would. Also, if mages do not participate in the saving of the world, they also can't pull up the sympathy card in the aftermath.
Lastly, a demon or a group we can kill (depending on the size) after they've done what we needed. Not so with mages.

Er, I don't think Pride Demons are nearly as simplistic as you believe.  And given that we're told to expect DA:I to introduce new classes of demons...

Besides which, I'm guessing that the ginormous Veil tear we see in the trailer is due to the massive death toll.  I don't think you'll be seeing a small handful of demons coming out of that one. 

And there's no indication anywhere that demons can't and don't make alliances.  You do remember the Broken Circle quest, right? 

In point of fact, I think a Pride Demon could look at your list of rationalizations here and conclude that you would be a great target to manipulate.

Modifié par Silfren, 01 juillet 2013 - 11:44 .

[BlueMagitek]

Actually, it was pointed out that a similar Fade Tear was caused by a stolen Dalish artifact.

The more you know.

[The Hierophant]

^For real?

[TheKomandorShepard]

MWImexico wrote...

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

They try in Qunari wars , try helping during fifth blight and possible two heroes (warden and hawke) are mages something was changed a bit nope as long culture will be teaching something should be feared and hate they will do that ,that touch mostly immature peoples .

Well, look at what can happen to the clan of Merrill because of hatred. What I'm saying is, maybe this is a great opportunity to show the best side of the mages (and to save their own skin by the way). 

You can help poor who are harmed by the government but as long that goverment exist your good deeds will be neutralized by that goverment so first you need crush goverment then help peoples , when mages will help peoples then chantry throw them into prison again people will forget and another one thousand years to rebellion.

[LobselVith8]

The Hierophant wrote...

^For real?

It was the Mask of Fen'Harel, and the ritual to open a portal into the Fade (that took place at Sundermount) required elven blood. However, the Mask was shattered.

[MisterJB]

Silfren wrote...
Er, I don't think Pride Demons are nearly as simplistic as you believe.  And given that we're told to expect DA:I to introduce new classes of demons...

Besides which, I'm guessing that the ginormous Veil tear we see in the trailer is due to the massive death toll.  I don't think you'll be seeing a small handful of demons coming out of that one. 

And there's no indication anywhere that demons can't and don't make alliances.  You do remember the Broken Circle quest, right? 

In point of fact, I think a Pride Demon could look at your list of rationalizations here and conclude that you would be a great target to manipulate.

Demons are not stupid, that's true. But they are also not complex, at least not in the way humans are. They have one emotion defining them and that's the extent of it.
I'm not talking of proposing an alliance with all the demons who crawl out of the Fade or anything similar. All I propose is that Pro-Templar Inquisitors have the option to, at the very least, attempt to trick a demon into closing the tear over giving the mages such a powerful bargaining tool.
One demon that; even if it escapes; is going to be hunted down is preferable to whatever concessions the mages could dream up.

We would need to be extremely careful but I don't think it's outside of the realm of possibilities.

[In Exile]

MisterJB wrote...
I'm not talking of proposing an alliance with all the demons who crawl out of the Fade or anything similar. All I propose is that Pro-Templar Inquisitors have the option to, at the very least, attempt to trick a demon into closing the tear over giving the mages such a powerful bargaining tool.

My irony radar is melting. Just one bargain with a demon, for the greater good? This scenario is literally the one the templars exist to prevent. Even the rationalizations you're using, that's the argument for why a mage is dangerous in the first place. I think you've made a compelling case at this point for why mundanes, when paired when demons, are far more dangerous than either side of the debate anticipated. 

[BlueMagitek]

The Hierophant wrote...

^For real?

I don't lie to you bro.

[BlueMagitek]

In Exile wrote...

My irony radar is melting. Just one bargain with a demon, for the greater good? This scenario is literally the one the templars exist to prevent. Even the rationalizations you're using, that's the argument for why a mage is dangerous in the first place. I think you've made a compelling case at this point for why mundanes, when paired when demons, are far more dangerous than either side of the debate anticipated. 

Actually if the demon is a rapper, they don't seem to care.  Look at my boy Grand Oak.

[AngryFrozenWater]

After playing DA2 several times I don't think mages deserve the benefit of the doubt. I used to think they deserve a chance, but the more I played DA2 the more I got convinced that there is something very wrong with each and all of them. It seems that they enjoy making deals with demons. If they don't they are fond of necromancy. One even used my mother to practice on. Even Orsino knew about that "incident", but couldn't be bothered to interfere. Even though I tried to help these mages anyway, he turned against me. Let's just say that they need to change their attitude drastically before I take any of them seriously.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 02 juillet 2013 - 12:25 .

[MisterJB]

In Exile wrote...
My irony radar is melting. Just one bargain with a demon, for the greater good? This scenario is literally the one the templars exist to prevent. Even the rationalizations you're using, that's the argument for why a mage is dangerous in the first place. I think you've made a compelling case at this point for why mundanes, when paired when demons, are far more dangerous than either side of the debate anticipated. 

Blood magic is dangerous when given to idiots like Jowan or monsters like Tahrone but it doesn't mean it can't be used responsably ffor the greater good such as in the Joining or the creation of Phylacteries.
This is no different and it's not like the games haven't acknowledged this in the past. In Warden's Keep, you can trick "Sophia" into mending the Veil and kill her immediatelly afterwards.

But hey, if you want, I can do an Illusive Man impression.
"I' warned you, Inquisitor. Control is the means to survival. Control of the mages, of the demons...and of you, if necessary."
Ok, better not joke with that.

Modifié par MisterJB, 02 juillet 2013 - 12:24 .

[In Exile]

MisterJB wrote...
Blood magic is dangerous when given to idiots like Jowan or monsters like Tahrone but it doesn't mean it can't be used responsably ffor the greater good such as in the Joining or the creation of Phylacteries.

So then where does the justification for imprisoning mages come from? Becuase in this case, we can have a mundane templar make who knows what sort of deal with who knows what sort of demo, and avoiding this scenario is essentially the entire justification for the Circles. 

In Warden's Keep, you can trick "Sophia" into mending the Veil and kill her immediatelly afterwards.

And what if the kind of demon you have to deal to fix whatever damage is done in DAI can't be axed so easily? Or what if part of what it tells you it needs to fix the veil is a, really, a way for it to protect itself from you after the fact? Without mages, how would you even know?

"I' warned you, Inquisitor. Control is the means to survival. Control of the mages, of the demons...and of you, if necessary."

Anytime anyone is quoting TIM as having a good idea, the argument is in trouble. 

[Silfren]

MisterJB wrote...

In Exile wrote...
My irony radar is melting. Just one bargain with a demon, for the greater good? This scenario is literally the one the templars exist to prevent. Even the rationalizations you're using, that's the argument for why a mage is dangerous in the first place. I think you've made a compelling case at this point for why mundanes, when paired when demons, are far more dangerous than either side of the debate anticipated. 

Blood magic is dangerous when given to idiots like Jowan or monsters like Tahrone but it doesn't mean it can't be used responsably ffor the greater good such as in the Joining or the creation of Phylacteries.
This is no different and it's not like the games haven't acknowledged this in the past. In Warden's Keep, you can trick "Sophia" into mending the Veil and kill her immediatelly afterwards.

But hey, if you want, I can do an Illusive Man impression.
"I' warned you, Inquisitor. Control is the means to survival. Control of the mages, of the demons...and of you, if necessary."
Ok, better not joke with that.

....I can't believe the irony, and the hypocrisy, of your statement, after mountains of posts by you on how dangerous demons are and how much destruction can be caused just from rationalizing one little deal...is sailing completely over your head.  Right now you're sounding EXACTLY like one of your own scenarios about how mages can rationalize using blood magic only to have it descend into ever greater depths of evil and depravity.

[drake heath]

Mages are innately dangerous and have proven that if their backs are against the wall they'll use blood magic and consort with demons.

They should be treated like psykers in 40k, dangerous and dealt with much suspicion, only allowed to rise to a position of authority if proven to be trustworthy and loyal.
Even then, the suspicion shouldn't go away and only if they are sanctioned by the Chantry to leave the circle.

Someone who can shoot fire from their fingertips and control minds shouldn't be treated normally.

[MisterJB]

In Exile wrote...
So then where does the justification for imprisoning mages come from? Becuase in this case, we can have a mundane templar make who knows what sort of deal with who knows what sort of demo, and avoiding this scenario is essentially the entire justification for the Circles

The justification is the same as the one used in gun legislation. Some weapons are simply too dangerous to be carried around by common citizens so, we place them in the hands trained professionals who answer to superiors who asnwer to the people (in theory, anyway). Sadly, it just so happens that, in Thedas, guns are people.
A mundane templar wouldn't be able to summon a demon without help which would leave a trail straight to him. Plus, while he could make a deal, that's not as great a danger as a mage simply being possessed on the spot and becoming a mearly unstoppable machine of destruction.

And what if the kind of demon you have to deal to fix whatever damage is done in DAI can't be axed so easily? Or what if part of what it tells you it needs to fix the veil is a, really, a way for it to protect itself from you after the fact? Without mages, how would you even know?

I can't tell if I would be able to know without an example. I can only say this is a dangerous plan and we must be extremelly careful.

Anytime anyone is quoting TIM as having a good idea, the argument is in trouble. 

That was a joke.
He did have a good idea, though. It backfired because the devs needed human enemies to fight.

[BlueMagitek]

TIM was robbed, man.

[AngryFrozenWater]

To the mages' defense: I think magic is not the problem. A fire ball here and there doesn't seem to be more harmful than a shower of a rogue's arrows. The problem are demons and necromancy. Those blood mages all seem to like that kind of stuff. Where as Mage Hawke, not able to raise a dead rabbit, is able to stand above them and make some sense. If the story permits that of course.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 02 juillet 2013 - 12:45 .

[MisterJB]

Silfren wrote...
....I can't believe the irony, and the hypocrisy, of your statement, after mountains of posts by you on how dangerous demons are and how much destruction can be caused just from rationalizing one little deal...is sailing completely over your head.  Right now you're sounding EXACTLY like one of your own scenarios about how mages can rationalize using blood magic only to have it descend into ever greater depths of evil and depravity.

Is it hipocrisy for governments to keep tanks away from the people while arming their military with them? Or just common sense?
This plan would, of course, have to be approved by the highest echelons of authority and enacted by the most trained and disciplined of warriors. Not Joe the Templar or Jimmy the Mage.

[Silfren]

drake heath wrote...

Mages are innately dangerous and have proven that if their backs are against the wall they'll use blood magic and consort with demons.

That's not a mage thing, that's a human thing.  You force anyone into a corner, with their life being the stake, and you cannot complain when they use any means at their disposal to save it.

[BlueMagitek]

I dunno, the Qunari seem to be totally okay with dying.

[Silfren]

MisterJB wrote...

Silfren wrote...
....I can't believe the irony, and the hypocrisy, of your statement, after mountains of posts by you on how dangerous demons are and how much destruction can be caused just from rationalizing one little deal...is sailing completely over your head.  Right now you're sounding EXACTLY like one of your own scenarios about how mages can rationalize using blood magic only to have it descend into ever greater depths of evil and depravity.

Is it hipocrisy for governments to keep tanks away from the people while arming their military with them? Or just common sense?
This plan would, of course, have to be approved by the highest echelons of authority and enacted by the most trained and disciplined of warriors. Not Joe the Templar or Jimmy the Mage.

I would actually be cool with this kind of scenario...as long as it was a mid-game solution that had hugely disastrous consequences and, most importantly, the world saw the Templars make the most egregious mistake of their entire history of existence and loose the Apocalypse on Thedas.  Oh yeah, after all those centuries of preaching about the dangers of the Fade and of demons and of the sheer futility of making deals that don't backfire...nothing would kill the Templar organization faster. 

[KainD]

MisterJB wrote...
Is it hipocrisy for governments to keep tanks away from the people while arming their military with them? Or just common sense?

Both. 

[In Exile]

MisterJB wrote...
The justification is the same as the one used in gun legislation. Some weapons are simply too dangerous to be carried around by common citizens so, we place them in the hands trained professionals who answer to superiors who asnwer to the people (in theory, anyway). Sadly, it just so happens that, in Thedas, guns are people.

Yes, but we don't detonate nukes on our own cities. In this analogy, using the dangerous, banned weapon is the deal with the demon. We'd use these weapons, sure, if the need was great enough - but the very existence of mages at all in DA makes the need not great enough in your own scenario. 

A mundane templar wouldn't be able to summon a demon without help which would leave a trail straight to him. Plus, while he could make a deal, that's not as great a danger as a mage simply being possessed on the spot and becoming a mearly unstoppable machine of destruction.

Or maybe the rather clever demon, dealing with the templar who isn't at all schooled in magic, is not only going to trick him into making it unkillable, but into letting it find a tasty, tasy mage to become an abomination with. 


That's what makes demons dangerous when they

I can't tell if I would be able to know without an example. I can only say this is a dangerous plan and we must be extremelly careful.

My point is that whatever concession you think you're making to mages, and whatever danger you think that might lead to, you're causing something much worse, almost guaranteed (by your own logic) in the present. 

The only way you can argue around that is to say that a mundane templar can somehow beat an incredibly powerful demon at its own game... and if the templar can do that, then there's no real justification as to why a mage cant't. 

[Silfren]

I gotta wonder about someone who is so completely distrusting of mages that they'd sooner try to work with a demon instead.  It especially seems like a templar who thought this way would be in some serious need of a psych eval, considering that it's the fact of demons that's supposed to be a fundamental part of what makes mages so supremely dangerous.  Why make a concession to a mage when it makes so much more sense to play Russian roulette with a demon and just hope you can control the outcome.

Not that some really great stories haven't been written about exactly this kind of scenario, exploring the kind of batsh*t a person will stoop to when their paranoia gets so bad they come completely unhinged...

Desire, Sloth, and Pride demons are cunning enough that a templar who's priorities are so skewed they'd rather work with demons than mages...would probably be easy pickings. 

Wasn't it discussed in another thread in a galaxy far, far away that demons don't simply seek out beings with considerable firepower (mages) but also persons in positions of power and influence, too?  I'll have to get TEWR looking into that one for me.