1656 réponses à ce sujet

[Ieldra]

RepHope wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

MisterJB wrote...
Cultures are hardly perfect guidelines on how  to live.
Just because the rivains have no problem with it, it doesn't mean spirits, regardless of nature, aren't dangerous or that the templars should just have left possessed mages alone.

Are you serious? All right, I'm afraid you are, but consider:

The Rivaini lived as they wanted and no harm was done to anyone by it. Non-mages and mages alike were ok with the state of things, there was no widespread chaos. Within the constraints of what life usually is like, people were happy. And you're telling me that the templars, this is fanatical anti-mage organization whose members are recruited for religious fervor, was *justified* in killing them all?

I've usually defended pro-Templars from the accusation of being crazy fanatics, but it seems they were right.

Where was it stated that nothing bad ever happened or that all were happy with the arrangement?

You think that if there had been widespread chaos, World of Thedas would've mentioned it. The account of the Annulment specifically states that it's the mere fact that the Rivaini mages lived with their families and they had regular contact with spirits was what made the templars attack. No mention of abominations running amok, no mention of blood magic.

[RepHope]

Plaintiff wrote...

TK514 wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

I will laugh and laugh and laugh if DA:I ends with the "return of magic" and everybody being made a mage. I can just imagine the apoplectic rage that will ensue from the pro-Templar side.

How mature.

Oh boohoo. All I said was that it will amuse me, I didn't say it would be a well-written ending. But at least it doesn't strip an entire class option from all future DA games.

I'm amused by fan rage in general. The hatred for the ME3 endings amuses me too. Especially the hate for Synthesis.

Synthesis supporters amuse me especially the amount of headcanon they use to make it less retarded. I miss Wulfie but thankfully Sevial is still around.

[Plaintiff]

Youth4Ever wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

Please, allow me to direct you to a thread I made on the subject of Meredit's Annulment in particular, not the Right in general. I think I made a pretty good case as to why one should support the templars to save the greater number of lifes.
http://social.biowar...ndex/16428346/1

Meredith receives too much flack IMO. I think we must judge her by the alternative and not by the almighty or some rose-colored ideal.

"Don't be a complete whackadoo and actually pay attention to what your subordinates are doing" isn't exactly beyond the lofty realms of reasonable expectations. I'd say that's the bare minimum that ought to be required of anyone in a command position.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 25 juin 2013 - 05:27 .

[Plaintiff]

RepHope wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

TK514 wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

I will laugh and laugh and laugh if DA:I ends with the "return of magic" and everybody being made a mage. I can just imagine the apoplectic rage that will ensue from the pro-Templar side.

How mature.

Oh boohoo. All I said was that it will amuse me, I didn't say it would be a well-written ending. But at least it doesn't strip an entire class option from all future DA games.

I'm amused by fan rage in general. The hatred for the ME3 endings amuses me too. Especially the hate for Synthesis.

Synthesis supporters amuse me especially the amount of headcanon they use to make it less retarded. I miss Wulfie but thankfully Sevial is still around.

"Retarded" in what sense?

[Ieldra]

I would like this thread to remain on-topic. I would be delighted to continue discussion of the other topic in the relevant thread linked in my sig.

[Ieldra]

Plaintiff wrote...

Youth4Ever wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

Please, allow me to direct you to a thread I made on the subject of Meredit's Annulment in particular, not the Right in general. I think I made a pretty good case as to why one should support the templars to save the greater number of lifes.
http://social.biowar...ndex/16428346/1

Meredith receives too much flack IMO. I think we must judge her by the alternative and not by the almighty or some rose-colored ideal.

"Don't be a complete whackadoo and actually pay attention to what your subordinates are doing" isn't exactly beyond the lofty realms of reasonable expectations. I'd say that's the bare minimum that ought to be required of anyone in a command position.

What the linked thread totally overlooks is that the templars are the aggressors and the mages the defenders. What it promotes is a variant of "you have no chance anyway, so better agree to be enslaved, and of course don't escalate because then the other slaves will also revolt and nobody wants that". I don't like the mentality speaking out of this suggestion.

[MisterJB]

Ieldra2 wrote...
Are you serious? All right, I'm afraid you are, but consider:

The Rivaini lived as they wanted and no harm was done to anyone by it. Non-mages and mages alike were ok with the state of things, there was no widespread chaos. Within the constraints of what life usually is like, people were happy. And you're telling me that the templars, this is fanatical anti-mage organization whose members are recruited for religious fervor, was *justified* in killing them all? The Annulment of Dairsmuid was an unprovoked act of genocide, so far beyond justification that it serves as an example of the saying that those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities (I think Voltaire said that).

I've usually defended pro-Templars from the accusation of being crazy fanatics, but it seems the people who said that were right at least sometimes.

First, you're making a huge assumpting by saying that everyone was ok with it was no one was being harmed. The simple existence of a faction of human qunari indicate some rivain were less than pleased with their country. Truthfully, Rivain is a divided country with Qunari, Phanteism and Andrastianism in conflict over the people's souls. While I also have no basis to claim there is widespread, I doubt it's all roses.

Second, apparently, rivains regards seers highly due to tradition but when one does go insane; which is not surprising given they have a second voice in their heas that is capable of seeing things only in black and white; the rivains see this as a "natural disaster".
But mages are not natural disasters; they are intelligent beings who should be held accountable for their actions. Mages are not born possessed, they do not need to be possessed to be alive, there is no reason at all they should be possessed. If we can't even ask the mages to not allow themselves to be possessed, what measures can we impose?
Third, WoT also implies the templars first demanded that the rivaini mages simply abide by the rules of the Chantry  and they only called the Right after a prolongued conflict with the mages.

So, maybe things aren't as black and white as all that.

[MisterJB]

Ieldra2 wrote...
What the linked thread totally overlooks is that the templars are the aggressors and the mages the defenders. What it promotes is a variant of "you have no chance anyway, so better agree to be enslaved, and of course don't escalate because then the other slaves will also revolt and nobody wants that". I don't like the mentality speaking out of this suggestion.

That was not the intention at all considering I didn't even mention the effect it would have in the other Circles. My arguments were all tailored around the current conflict between mages and templars in Kirkwall and it will cause casualties in the surrounding civillian population.

[Ieldra]

MisterJB wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...
Are you serious? All right, I'm afraid you are, but consider:

The Rivaini lived as they wanted and no harm was done to anyone by it. Non-mages and mages alike were ok with the state of things, there was no widespread chaos. Within the constraints of what life usually is like, people were happy. And you're telling me that the templars, this is fanatical anti-mage organization whose members are recruited for religious fervor, was *justified* in killing them all? The Annulment of Dairsmuid was an unprovoked act of genocide, so far beyond justification that it serves as an example of the saying that those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities (I think Voltaire said that).

I've usually defended pro-Templars from the accusation of being crazy fanatics, but it seems the people who said that were right at least sometimes.

First, you're making a huge assumpting by saying that everyone was ok with it was no one was being harmed. The simple existence of a faction of human qunari indicate some rivain were less than pleased with their country. Truthfully, Rivain is a divided country with Qunari, Phanteism and Andrastianism in conflict over the people's souls. While I also have no basis to claim there is widespread, I doubt it's all roses.

Second, apparently, rivains regards seers highly due to tradition but when one does go insane; which is not surprising given they have a second voice in their heas that is capable of seeing things only in black and white; the rivains see this as a "natural disaster".
But mages are not natural disasters; they are intelligent beings who should be held accountable for their actions. Mages are not born possessed, they do not need to be possessed to be alive, there is no reason at all they should be possessed. If we can't even ask the mages to not allow themselves to be possessed, what measures can we impose?
Third, WoT also implies the templars first demanded that the rivaini mages simply abide by the rules of the Chantry  and they only called the Right after a prolongued conflict with the mages.

And of course you think they should've backed down and quietly agreed to be re-enslaved. No thanks. Also, there is no need to kill someone for being possessed when being possessed does no harm to anyone, a point DAO and Asunder make with Wynne.

The relevant fact is that the Rivaini proved that the Circle isn't necessary. And of course the templars couldn't let that become known. *That* is why they attacked. That is why they invoked their Right of Genocide.

We can argue about Kirkwall's Circle. Perhaps even about Ferelden's. But in the matter of Dairsmuid I'm afraid that yes, things are very much black and white.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 25 juin 2013 - 05:52 .

[MisterJB]

Ieldra2 wrote...
And of course you think they should've backed down and quietly agreed to be re-enslaved. No thanks. Also, there is no need to kill someone for being possessed when being possessed does no harm to anyone, a point DAO and Asunder make with Wynne.

I do think they should have abided by the laws that help protect non-mages from them, yes, which is not slavery.
Wynne didn't chose to be possessed, she is a special case. On the other hand, DA2 proved all spirits are dangerous. We don't give people weapons of mass destruction and only take them away if they did something wrong with them.

The relevant fact is that the Rivaini proved that the Circle isn't necessary. And of course the templars couldn't let that become known. *That* is why they attacked. That is why they invoked their Right of Genocide.

If anything, Rivain proved that give mages any freedom and they'll dominate society. Page 80 makes it clear Seers usually lead villages while page 82 remarks that, apart from them, the Circle in Rivain is not that different from those elsewhere in Thedas.
 It didn't even took all the mages in Rivain for them to take over the country.

We can argue about Kirkwall's Circle. Perhaps even about Ferelden's. But in the matter of Dairsmuid I'm afraid that yes, things are very much black and white.

A bold claim considering we have only heard one side of the story. Are we not even going to hear the side of the Templars before passing judgement?

Modifié par MisterJB, 25 juin 2013 - 06:28 .

[IceHawk-181]

I like how MisterJB continuously states that a system that forcibly imprisons individuals against their will and holds absolute power of life and death over them is not slavery.

[MisterJB]

IceHawk-181 wrote...

I like how MisterJB continuously states that a system that forcibly imprisons individuals against their will and holds absolute power of life and death over them is not slavery.

By all means, just ignore the fact that in Thedas, all governments have the power of life and death over their subjects.
Here is a common legal proceding in Ferelden. The criminal says what happened, the Constable says what he thinks happened and the lord says what is going to happen. And if he decides the guy who stole two sacks of grain to feed his family deserves to hang, well that is it.
So, according to you, every captured criminal in Thedas is a slave because he is being imprisioned against his will and the lord of the land holds absolute power of life and death over him.

Modifié par MisterJB, 25 juin 2013 - 06:53 .

[WardenWade]

Both sides here have good points.  If it is useful at all, below is a comment Mr. Gaider made some time ago that may be relevant?  The thread, with further comments, is found here.

David Gaider wrote...

The mages aren't slaves.
Some people might refer to them as such-- Anders, for one, though I don't know if he's the sort of supporting argument you want to use-- but I don't think it's a stretch to suggest that not being free and being a slave are different things.
They are definitely not free. In Kirkwall, they are tantamount to prisoners. According to the law of the Circle of Magi, they have a certain amount of rights if very limited personal freedom. How much those laws are respected will vary from tower to tower. Either way, however, they are not owned by the Chantry, nor are they forced into servitude (meaning they are not forced to perform work or any other service on the Chantry's behalf).
If someone wishes to see the Chantry as heartless oppressors, by all means-- there are many ways to interpret the situation, and that's intentional. If someone tries to argue that there are absolutes involved, or that anything we've written suggests there are, they're quite simply deluded-- not to put too fine a point on it.

Modifié par WardenWade, 25 juin 2013 - 07:03 .

[The Baconer]

IceHawk-181 wrote...

I like how MisterJB continuously states that a system that forcibly imprisons individuals against their will and holds absolute power of life and death over them is not slavery.

It's not, though.

[Ieldra]

WardenWade wrote...
Both sides here have good points.  If it is useful at all, below is a comment Mr. Gaider made some time ago that may be relevant?  The thread, with further comments, is found here.

David Gaider wrote...
The mages aren't slaves.
Some people might refer to them as such-- Anders, for one, though I don't know if he's the sort of supporting argument you want to use-- but I don't think it's a stretch to suggest that not being free and being a slave are different things.
They are definitely not free. In Kirkwall, they are tantamount to prisoners. According to the law of the Circle of Magi, they have a certain amount of rights if very limited personal freedom. How much those laws are respected will vary from tower to tower. Either way, however, they are not owned by the Chantry, nor are they forced into servitude (meaning they are not forced to perform work or any other service on the Chantry's behalf).
If someone wishes to see the Chantry as heartless oppressors, by all means-- there are many ways to interpret the situation, and that's intentional. If someone tries to argue that there are absolutes involved, or that anything we've written suggests there are, they're quite simply deluded-- not to put too fine a point on it.

Oh, I don't deny that the moderate pro-Templar position has *some* merit in that they raise points mage supporters need to consider and may need to make concessions for, and no, I don't think the situation as a whole is black and white. I do think the Dairsmuid annullment as an event comes very close, though.

Also, there is a reason why I've written the OP as a manifesto told from a character's POV. It is a political manifesto, not a scholarly dissertation, and in such a document you don't pro-actively mention any merit the other side might have. I can imagine several variations of a dedicated "magic police force" Eorlin Amell might agree with if he were in the position to decide, but he certainly won't suggest them pro-actively. As I see it, while such a "magic police force" might be necessary, the templar order as an organization, if not every individual templar, is burned for the role.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 25 juin 2013 - 07:31 .

[jaza]

IceHawk-181 wrote...

I like how MisterJB continuously states that a system that forcibly imprisons individuals against their will and holds absolute power of life and death over them is not slavery.

That's because it's not.

Get off your computer and go back to school.

Modifié par jaza, 25 juin 2013 - 07:35 .

[Medhia Nox]

When does Wynne become possessed?

Both Codexes on Spirit Healers and the conversation with Wynne both assert that she is not possessed (despite being worried about being an abomination).

The Spirit of Faith that stops her from dying - does not inhabit her body - that assertion is not supported in either game.

It's just misinformation used to support mage unaccountability.

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 25 juin 2013 - 07:37 .

[CronoDragoon]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Also, there is a reason why I've written the OP as a manifesto told from a character's POV. It is a political manifesto, not a scholarly dissertation, and in such a document you don't pro-actively mention any merit the other side might have. I can imagine several variations of a dedicated "magic police force" Eorlin Amell might agree with if he were in the position to decide, but he certainly won't suggest them pro-actively. As I see it, while such a "magic police force" might be necessary, the templar order as an organization, if not every individual templar, is burned for the role.

To what extent does your character believe what he/she is saying? I'm interested in whether or not there's a knowing invocation of certain terms to get a rise out of listeners.

[WardenWade]

Ieldra2 wrote...

WardenWade wrote...
Both sides here have good points.  If it is useful at all, below is a comment Mr. Gaider made some time ago that may be relevant?  The thread, with further comments, is found here.

David Gaider wrote...
The mages aren't slaves.
Some people might refer to them as such-- Anders, for one, though I don't know if he's the sort of supporting argument you want to use-- but I don't think it's a stretch to suggest that not being free and being a slave are different things.
They are definitely not free. In Kirkwall, they are tantamount to prisoners. According to the law of the Circle of Magi, they have a certain amount of rights if very limited personal freedom. How much those laws are respected will vary from tower to tower. Either way, however, they are not owned by the Chantry, nor are they forced into servitude (meaning they are not forced to perform work or any other service on the Chantry's behalf).
If someone wishes to see the Chantry as heartless oppressors, by all means-- there are many ways to interpret the situation, and that's intentional. If someone tries to argue that there are absolutes involved, or that anything we've written suggests there are, they're quite simply deluded-- not to put too fine a point on it.

Oh, I don't deny that the moderate pro-Templar position has *some* merit in that they raise points mage supporters need to consider and may need to make concessions for, and no, I don't think the situation as a whole is black and white. I do think the Dairsmuid annullment as an event comes very close, though.

Also, there is a reason why I've written the OP as a manifesto told from a character's POV. It is a political manifesto, not a scholarly dissertation, and in such a document you don't pro-actively mention any merit the other side might have. I can imagine several variations of a dedicated "magic police force" Eorlin Amell might agree with if he were in the position to decide, but he certainly won't suggest them pro-actively. As I see it, while such a "magic police force" might be necessary, the templar order as an organization, if not every individual templar, is burned for the role.

I definitely agree that the situation is open to interpretation, Ieldra2   Mr. Gaider seemed, in his comments on the linked thread, to take pains to highlight that as well.  Both sides of this issue have good arguments that can be made for them, both positive and negative. 

[Ieldra]

IceHawk-181 wrote...
I like how MisterJB continuously states that a system that forcibly imprisons individuals against their will and holds absolute power of life and death over them is not slavery.

Technically, it's not. The definition of slavery includes ownership and being forced to work for the owner. You'd be more correct to say mages are an oppressed minority group. This not necessariy better - if anything, oppressed minority groups are often treated worse than slaves because with slaves, treating them too badly has adverse economic effects. Still, "slavery", while not technically correct, emphasizes the principal objectionable fact: that Circle mages are unfree in several ways normal people are not, and that there's a group with the lawful power of life and death over them. It's a status comparable to imprisoned criminals, only without the crime. "Circle mages are slaves" is a catchphrase used for effect which is close enough to reality that you can't reject it without appearing overly technical for the sake of your affiliation.

I would still say that calling the Right of Annulment the Right of Genocide is technically correct, if we recognize magical talent as a trait that defines a certain group the same way ethnic traits define groups in the real world. Basically, the term is applicable if you're human (or elf, dwarf etc on Thedas), you're killed because of what you are, not because of what you've done, and that the goal is full or partial extermination.

And now I'm done deconstructing my own manifesto. I just wanted to emphasize that I know what I'm doing.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 25 juin 2013 - 07:54 .

[Medhia Nox]

@Ieldra2: Just curious - is your assertion that the Annulment is the same as genocide also just a bit of roleplaying? Or do you actually believe they're the same thing?

I don't believe the massacre at Wounded Knee was a genocide - or the Massacre of Amritsar was genocide. Terrible atrocities to be sure - but not genocide (though I do believe the annihilation of the indigenous Amerindians was genocide - officially, it is not considered thus).

EDIT: Posted right after your last post.

Addition - in the worlds most infamous genocide - the people in question did not have to "do" something to be annihilated.  They were annihilated as policy.

It simply isn't the same for mages.  Greagor even waits to the point of folly trying to avoid Annulment (I think it's because he loves that Irving fellow.)

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 25 juin 2013 - 07:56 .

[Ieldra]

@Medhia Nox:
The official definition of genocide is "the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, Caste, religious, or national group". I think that magical talent is a trait that defines a group on Thedas in a similar way as the listed traits do in the real world, and "partial destruction" is very much the goal of Annulment.

[Xilizhra]

MisterJB wrote...

IceHawk-181 wrote...

I like how MisterJB continuously states that a system that forcibly imprisons individuals against their will and holds absolute power of life and death over them is not slavery.

By all means, just ignore the fact that in Thedas, all governments have the power of life and death over their subjects.
Here is a common legal proceding in Ferelden. The criminal says what happened, the Constable says what he thinks happened and the lord says what is going to happen. And if he decides the guy who stole two sacks of grain to feed his family deserves to hang, well that is it.
So, according to you, every captured criminal in Thedas is a slave because he is being imprisioned against his will and the lord of the land holds absolute power of life and death over him.

Yes, every captured criminal in Thedas is also open to being horrendously mistreated. We don't talk about them as much because we haven't gotten any widespread nonmage governmental revolutions, though a few are definitely warranted.

[Medhia Nox]

It isn't "systematic" is what I'm trying to assert. *shrugs*

In the same way that those massacres I pointed out weren't systematic. They were due to an event that occurred.

Annulment becomes an option when an event occurs - not simply because they're mages.

Annulment is just "Massacre of Mages when they get out of hand."

Just like the slaughter at Wounded Knee or Amritsar was when indigenous populations were acting against an oppressive authority.

I won't disagree with you that it's an atrocity and alternatives should be found immediately - but I can't accept your assertion that it is methodical "systematic" genocide. ((Not that what I accept matter to anyone but me - but this is a forum for conversation - so there it is.))

[Ieldra]

Medhia Nox wrote...
It isn't "systematic" is what I'm trying to assert. *shrugs*

In the same way that those massacres I pointed out weren't systematic. They were due to an event that occurred.

Annulment becomes an option when an event occurs - not simply because they're mages.

Annulment is just "Massacre of Mages when they get out of hand."

Just like the slaughter at Wounded Knee or Amritsar was when indigenous populations were acting against an oppressive authority.

I won't disagree with you that it's an atrocity and alternatives should be found immediately - but I can't accept your assertion that it is methodical "systematic" genocide. ((Not that what I accept matter to anyone but me - but this is a forum for conversation - so there it is.))

The difference is this: your listed examples are mostly battles gone out of hand. There was no premeditated goal of extermination (well, there may have been but there weren't any official orders to exterminate). However, when Annulment is invoked, the goal is extermination and the mages of the Annulled CIrcle are indeed methodically slaughtered.

Also, it doesn't really matter if there is a triggering event. There usually is one.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 25 juin 2013 - 08:12 .