1470 réponses à ce sujet

[leaguer of one]

Xilizhra wrote...

One not in your fantasy land, presumably.

.

Even the dalish want there mages about sudden demon attacks and the are even more stict about spirts then curcle mages.

[Shadow Fox]

*eats popcorn*

[Cainhurst Crow]

This is bad comedy.

[Shadow Fox]

Megatron is that you?

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

So this is what the thread has become?

Fire at will commander.

https://encrypted-tb...g6zcmfHUKnIaysq

Modifié par Grand Admiral Cheesecake, 24 août 2013 - 04:37 .

[Ausstig]

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

Megatron is that you?

Here's a hint!

Also, the daemon in Redcliff wasn't summoned was it? It came to Conner, it 'sensed' him and his desire to save his 'dad'.

[Cainhurst Crow]

And than conner took the deal and proceed to slaughter almost everyone in the village and castle, all under it's influence, because he was never trained in a place to resist such temptations.

But let's not focus on that crucial detail since it detracts from the "chantry is evil" and "templars are monsters" rhetoric people seem to be embracing.

[Dave of Canada]

Connor is a good comparison of the average pro-mages poster, he saved someone who wasn't dying and killed everyone else. All the while yelling at anyone who questions them.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 24 août 2013 - 06:06 .

[Maria Caliban]

I think Conner has been the best example of a pro-Circle situation we've seen. I don't judge him for his actions but the repercussions were serious.

I see this as being better than DA II, where our examples of 'bad mages' were typically heartless blood mages or mages who'd undergone the Harrowing but succumbed easily to possession.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

Xil aren't you perfectly comfortable with some kind of all powerful "protector" figure whos sole purpose is to protect people from themselves?

Or is that just when it is you in control?

[Shadow Fox]

This should be good.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

Morocco Mole wrote...

Grand Admiral Cheesecake wrote...

Xil aren't you perfectly comfortable with some kind of all powerful "protector" figure whos sole purpose is to protect people from themselves?

Or is that just when it is you in control?

As for my choice in ME, it was some form of control, or genocide.

Xilizhra will control you or completely exterminate you my friend.

*post indoctrination*

Remember citizen that unhappiness is treason, treason is punishable by death. Are you happy citizen?

Modifié par Grand Admiral Cheesecake, 24 août 2013 - 07:41 .

[Star fury]

Morocco Mole wrote...

You never turn two sides into buffonish, strawmannish caricatures like DA2. That's just bad writing.

Pretty much. Bioware writers tried to make all-gray conflict instead of black and white, they failed miserably.

[Xilizhra]

Xil aren't you perfectly comfortable with some kind of all powerful "protector" figure whos sole purpose is to protect people from themselves?

Or is that just when it is you in control?

Control's "sole purpose" is to make it out of the Catalyst's choice in the least damaging manner possible, and in any case, that only applies when said protector is wholly benevolent.

The writers mentioned in the "Mages and Templars" GI feature that DA ][ was deliberately extreme, for both Templars and mages.

So presumably Asunder is a more accurate look at the templars?

[In Exile]

Xilizhra wrote...
Control's "sole purpose" is to make it out of the Catalyst's choice in the least damaging manner possible, and in any case, that only applies when said protector is wholly benevolent.

Lots of "protectors" believe they're wholly benevolent and/or justified in their methods. TIM being the best example of it in ME2, and the Chantry certainly believes it's a "wholly benevolent" protector. 

I'm not trying to make this about ME3 control, but rather about the problem with the justification in general. "Wholly benevolent" is not a real concept, because no one is "wholly benevolent". Not even paragon Shepard, who in ME1/ME2 got to where (s)he was through quite lot of bodies, including when it came down to it 300,000 batarians. 

Modifié par In Exile, 24 août 2013 - 02:09 .

[DPSSOC]

[quote]Xilizhra wrote...


[quote]Some do yes, but it's not like it's a policy of the Order. Templars need better oversight, I agree, but just because corrupt police and prison guards exist doesn't mean we tear down the penal system.[/quote]
We don't, however, make bigotry part of standard education for said guards[/quote]
 
Yes we do, we call it profiling.  We pretty it up a good deal but we do teach police and to an extent prison guards to make snap judgements about people and sadly race does play into it.

[quote]Xilizhra wrote...
and have them all be drug-addled soldiers of a grasping religious institution.[/quote]

If giving police a highly addictive and damaging drug were the only way they could effectively do their job you're damn right we'd do it.

[quote]Xilizhra wrote...


[quote]But Templars you're perfectly fine with? [/quote]
The Templar Order is fundamentally evil.[/quote]

People are fundamentally evil, it's really something you should get used to.

[quote]Xilizhra wrote...
[quote]In Exile wrote...
[quote]dragonflight288 wrote...
[quote]In Exile wrote...
[quote]Xilizhra wrote...
We don't, however, make bigotry part of standard education for said guards and have them all be drug-addled soldiers of a grasping religious institution. [/quote]

No, but in the real world it isn't uncommon for prison guards to have less than savory beliefs because of the demographics of the guard population and the demographics of the prison population. 

There are also serious power dynamic problems with just being a prison guard that arguably greatly increase the incidence of abuse.[/quote]

Add in that most templars genuinely believe that they have dominion over all mages by divine right, and therefore their treatment of mages is holy and cannot be questioned. [/quote]

And that belief won't change if the Chantry isn't officially running the templars. Most humans are Andrastians. If you subject mages to the authority of human kingdoms, then you'll either just have the same people with new bosses or you'll have the same kinds of people learning their old tricks 
The circles won't work with a secular character. Partly because thedas isn't secular. [/quote]

That's why the Circles have to be independent and not beholden to any higher authority.
[/quote]

So you basically want the set up the Chantry enjoyed, independent control of the mages answerable ultimately to no one, just without the vested interest in keeping mages in line.  This is setting off so many warning lights it feels like Vegas.

[quote]Xilizhra wrote...


[quote]Any mage that's been lucky enough to be educated about their situation are very much aware of possession. That when they dream is the most dangerous time.[/quote]
It's only a statistically significant danger in a thin Veil area.[/quote]

No.  This is true of demons crossing over and possessing an individual who is awake, but whenever anyone dreams their soul/spirit/consciousness passes through the Veil into the Fade.  Doesn't matter what the Veil's condition is in the are, if you dream you've passed into the Fade and demons can come after you.

[leaguer of one]

In Exile wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
Control's "sole purpose" is to make it out of the Catalyst's choice in the least damaging manner possible, and in any case, that only applies when said protector is wholly benevolent.

Lots of "protectors" believe they're wholly benevolent and/or justified in their methods. TIM being the best example of it in ME2, and the Chantry certainly believes it's a "wholly benevolent" protector. 

I'm not trying to make this about ME3 control, but rather about the problem with the justification in general. "Wholly benevolent" is not a real concept, because no one is "wholly benevolent". Not even paragon Shepard, who in ME1/ME2 got to where (s)he was through quite lot of bodies, including when it came down to it 300,000 batarians. 

But unlike cerberus, The templar are not dealing with a grey area and have a point.

[In Exile]

Xilizhra wrote...
That's why the Circles have to be independent and not beholden to any higher authority.

The problem with that is that you're asking a kingdom to have part of their land annex so that a self-governing mage commune can live there. I can't see how any aristrocracy could tolerate that much of a threat to their power. 

[In Exile]

leaguer of one wrote...
But unlike cerberus, The templar are not dealing with a grey area and have a point.

Cerberus had a "point" - protecting humanity from potentially hostile aliens. Cerberus just happened to be b0nkers and pursued the aim in the most reckless and insane manner possible. 

Like I said early on in this thread, whatever atrocity you can find for Cereberus, the Templars have perpretrated one as bad or worse. 

[leaguer of one]

In Exile wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...
But unlike cerberus, The templar are not dealing with a grey area and have a point.

Cerberus had a "point" - protecting humanity from potentially hostile aliens. Cerberus just happened to be b0nkers and pursued the aim in the most reckless and insane manner possible. 

Like I said early on in this thread, whatever atrocity you can find for Cereberus, the Templars have perpretrated one as bad or worse. 

1. Humanity already had that with the alliance. Ceberus goal to protect and advance humanity reguardless to the say of humanity.  Under normal conditions they were not needed. Cerberus problem is they did this with out ethics from day one.

And no Templars have not done anything like cerberus has. Templars can't make harvesters.

[Cheylus]

I asked the questions there already, but haven't got any response.

Don't you think Thedas need a "special force" of some kind anyway, built specifically to counter some users and effects of magic?

Don't you think a specific, compulsory education is needed for mages?