626 réponses à ce sujet

[Silfren]

MisterJB wrote...

Silfren wrote...
I don't have to admit any such thing.  Reasonable templars don't look at a situation that is generally peaceful and respond by killing people.

Reasonable Templars are not going to allow spirits that all it will take will be a particularly strong emotion to be corrupted into demons to just do as they will.
Obviously, anyone would have been appaled by how much those mages were breaking every rule of the Chantry, not just Templars.

Yet the practice had been going on for quite a while, and was well known.  So obviously it wasn't considered a serious threat.

MisterJB wrote...

Silfren wrote...
What the hell?  When have I EVER claimed that there shouldn't be any security measures?

You are defending the mages of Rivain who didn't even have the most basic set of security measures in place; who just allowed possessed mages to come and go as they pleased; and given the First Enchanter's words, it's obvious they were unwilling to extablish any.

I don't think they had no security measures in place.  I think the fact that they were willing to accept the threat goes to show that they did indeed have a means to control it.

Modifié par Silfren, 01 octobre 2013 - 10:17 .

[Hellion Rex]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

Medhia Nox wrote...

I'd love to see Tevinter support Tranquility as a punishment for mage who overreach.

Do we have any non-headcanon information about how Tevinter sees Tranquility?

I know they have Templars - and those templars have practiced the Rite of Annulment before (though it is stated for different reasons). 

And I'm fairly certain the most pro-mage/advanced mage society also practices the Harrowing (I'd have to reconfirm that though - might be head canon).

I feel like Tevinter is much more lenient in regards towards Harrowings and Tranquility.

Considering their society is baiscally the rule of the strong elite, I'd say they're probably a lot harsher when it comes to harrowings than the other circles. If you can't even conquer one demon, than you weren't worth the magic in your veins.

Good point. And the more I think about it, the magisters might use Tranquility as a weapon to neutralize any challenegers or rivals.

[cjones91]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

No Circle is harmless, but the Rivaini spirit mediums seemed to be communing with their country pretty peacefully.

Key word.
Wasn't there one story where an abomiantion slowly corrupted a city over the course of years. Demons CAN be subtle and they can play the long game. And givne that a demon doens't have to show his true face, he can wear the person he possesed like a puppet for years, appearing compeltely normal and friendly.

People can talk all they want how there was no danger and the communtiy wasn't harmed....but where is the proof?
I'm sorry but "Rivain didn't implode" is not proof.

Did the Rivain Seers start going on violent rampages?No they did'nt and I still find the massacre of the Rivain Circle one of the many reasons I dislike the Tempars and anyone who tried to justify it.

[Hellion Rex]

cjones91 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

No Circle is harmless, but the Rivaini spirit mediums seemed to be communing with their country pretty peacefully.

Key word.
Wasn't there one story where an abomiantion slowly corrupted a city over the course of years. Demons CAN be subtle and they can play the long game. And givne that a demon doens't have to show his true face, he can wear the person he possesed like a puppet for years, appearing compeltely normal and friendly.

People can talk all they want how there was no danger and the communtiy wasn't harmed....but where is the proof?
I'm sorry but "Rivain didn't implode" is not proof.

Did the Rivain Seers start going on violent rampages?No they did'nt and I still find the massacre of the Rivain Circle one of the many reasons I dislike the Tempars and anyone who tried to justify it.

I completely agree.

[cjones91]

MisterJB wrote...

Silfren wrote...
Nevertheless, when the law is used as an excuse for bloodshed even though the community is not being harmed, then that law is corrupt and excessive. 

Even if you believe that, you have to admit that, by the standards of the rest of Thedas, that Circle was an abomination which would have prompted to violence even the most reasonable Templar in the world.
After what Anders pulled, I wouldn't blame anyone for not buying the "These spirits possessing are 100% harmless, honest." Never mind the whole going against the very words of Andraste "Magic exists to serve man and never to rule over him."  

I see the Rivaini seers as acknowledging and accepting that possession is dangerous, always carrying with it a potential for destruction.  But since they do it anyway, and we do not hear of any reports of Rivaini imploding under the weight of demons and blood magic, it does rather stand to reason that the danger is not so overwhelmingly great.  Since the community was apparently intact, there was no call for the templars to come in, guns a'blazing. 

A country doesn't need to be on the brink of collapse in order to justify some sort of security measures. News from Rivain are scarce and not only can't we really expect the First Enchanter to admit to wrongdoing in the very same letter she wishes to accuse the Templars of excesses; given the rivaini attitude to ignore Seer accidents as "natural disasters", she might not even be capable of recognizing a Seer going Abomination on the countryside as a failure caused by their traditions because "natures does what nature wills".  

Seers are not born possessed, they do need to be possessed in order to be alive or feels emotions. There's absolutely no reason Seers should be possessed at any point in time. If we can't even ask mages not to be possessed without them complaining because "cultural sensitives", what kind of measures can we put in place?

By the way, I love how you talk about the Templars giving the Rivaini one chance to cease and desist, as if that is so totally reasonable, when you then admit that you interpreted that "one chance" as killing a few mages in an attempt to terrorize the other mages into acquiescing.

I was actually using that as evidence that the Templars were not Annulling the Circle as a preemptive strike; I wasn't claiming that it was evidence they being reasonable.
Altough, given the fact the entire female population of the Circle was possessed, I do think offering to accept their surrender would be exceedingly merciful. Only a spirit of Mercy would even come close to exhibiting the same behavior.

The official lore reason for the Rivaini Circle being annuled was that the Seers and mages were allowed contact with their families and a Seeker caught word of this and reported it to the Chantry.Killing hundreds of innocent men,women,and children because they wanted to see their families...nothing you or any other Pro Templar that tries to defend this says will convince me that was reasonable.

[Hellion Rex]

cjones91 wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

Silfren wrote...
Nevertheless, when the law is used as an excuse for bloodshed even though the community is not being harmed, then that law is corrupt and excessive. 

Even if you believe that, you have to admit that, by the standards of the rest of Thedas, that Circle was an abomination which would have prompted to violence even the most reasonable Templar in the world.
After what Anders pulled, I wouldn't blame anyone for not buying the "These spirits possessing are 100% harmless, honest." Never mind the whole going against the very words of Andraste "Magic exists to serve man and never to rule over him."  

I see the Rivaini seers as acknowledging and accepting that possession is dangerous, always carrying with it a potential for destruction.  But since they do it anyway, and we do not hear of any reports of Rivaini imploding under the weight of demons and blood magic, it does rather stand to reason that the danger is not so overwhelmingly great.  Since the community was apparently intact, there was no call for the templars to come in, guns a'blazing. 

A country doesn't need to be on the brink of collapse in order to justify some sort of security measures. News from Rivain are scarce and not only can't we really expect the First Enchanter to admit to wrongdoing in the very same letter she wishes to accuse the Templars of excesses; given the rivaini attitude to ignore Seer accidents as "natural disasters", she might not even be capable of recognizing a Seer going Abomination on the countryside as a failure caused by their traditions because "natures does what nature wills".  

Seers are not born possessed, they do need to be possessed in order to be alive or feels emotions. There's absolutely no reason Seers should be possessed at any point in time. If we can't even ask mages not to be possessed without them complaining because "cultural sensitives", what kind of measures can we put in place?

By the way, I love how you talk about the Templars giving the Rivaini one chance to cease and desist, as if that is so totally reasonable, when you then admit that you interpreted that "one chance" as killing a few mages in an attempt to terrorize the other mages into acquiescing.

I was actually using that as evidence that the Templars were not Annulling the Circle as a preemptive strike; I wasn't claiming that it was evidence they being reasonable.
Altough, given the fact the entire female population of the Circle was possessed, I do think offering to accept their surrender would be exceedingly merciful. Only a spirit of Mercy would even come close to exhibiting the same behavior.

The official lore reason for the Rivaini Circle being annuled was that the Seers and mages were allowed contact with their families and a Seeker caught word of this and reported it to the Chantry.Killing hundreds of innocent men,women,and children because they wanted to see their families...nothing you or any other Pro Templar that tries to defend this says will convince me that was reasonable.

http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Rivain
Scroll to the section called Annulment at Dairsmuid.
I think you need to check your facts about that Annulment, although the reality of what happened is hardly better than what you advocated.

Modifié par eluvianix, 01 octobre 2013 - 11:05 .

[Medhia Nox]

@cjones: The problem is that... Finn, was it? From Witch Hunt... also had contact with his family. It makes a point of saying how unique it was... BUT, it sounded like it was unique because he chose to have contact.

"Unlike most mages who have no contact with their families, Finn actually has a very close relationship with his parents."

This, in NO way, excuses any atrocities committed by the Templars of Rivain. But, while rare - it must be taken into account when exploring how Templars really do treat mages. Just like Owain must be taken into account when discussing Tranquility.

The problem with some of the information we go off of... we might not be getting the entire story. It's like people on here who state they know what magic is - when the mages of Thedas don't even know. Or they know that the elf history is valid - but the Chantry history is a lie. Or they know what a Qunari would do. There's literally no way of knowing ANY of this as Bioware has written a rather convoluted history with all questions and no answers (some applaud this, I do not).

Maybe it really was an unlawful massacre - or maybe there was a truly insidious reason to commit to annulment.

@Lotion: I believe the story you were referencing was a Sloth Demon.

" A community afflicted by a demon of sloth could soon become a dilapidated pit where injustices are allowed to pass without comment, and none of the residents could be aware that such a change has even taken place. The sloth demon weakens, tires, tears at the edges of consciousness and would much rather render its victim helpless than engage in a true conflict. Such creatures are best faced only with a great deal of will, and only with an eye to piercing their many disguises. "

@cjones: Is there ANY reason you could think of that might validate an annulment?

I think the best conversation could be had if we try to think of reasons we "might" side with the thing we oppose.

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 01 octobre 2013 - 11:08 .

[Hellion Rex]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@cjones: The problem is that... Finn, was it? From Witch Hunt... also had contact with his family. It makes a point of saying how unique it was... BUT, it sounded like it was unique because he chose to have contact.

"Unlike most mages who have no contact with their families, Finn actually has a very close relationship with his parents."

This, in NO way, excuses any atrocities committed by the Templars of Rivain. But, while rare - it must be taken into account when exploring how Templars really do treat mages.

The problem with some of the information we go off of... we might not be getting the entire story. It's like people on here who state they know what magic is - when the mages of Thedas don't even know. Or they know that the elf history is valid - but the Chantry history is a lie. Or they know what a Qunari would do. There's literally no way of knowing ANY of this as Bioware has written a rather convoluted history with all questions and no answers (some applaud this, I do not).

Maybe it really was an unlawful massacre - or maybe there was a truly insidious reason to commit to annulment.

@Lotion: I believe the story you were referencing was a Sloth Demon.

" A community afflicted by a demon of sloth could soon become a dilapidated pit where injustices are allowed to pass without comment, and none of the residents could be aware that such a change has even taken place. The sloth demon weakens, tires, tears at the edges of consciousness and would much rather render its victim helpless than engage in a true conflict. Such creatures are best faced only with a great deal of will, and only with an eye to piercing their many disguises. "

@cjones: Is there ANY reason you could think of that might validate an annulment?

I think the best conversation could be had if we try to think of reasons we "might" side with the thing we oppose.

Does anyone actually remember what the circumstances of that story were? I thought it had to deal with a Pride Demon possessing a leader of a city or something along those lines.

[Silfren]

eluvianix wrote...

cjones91 wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

Silfren wrote...
Nevertheless, when the law is used as an excuse for bloodshed even though the community is not being harmed, then that law is corrupt and excessive. 

Even if you believe that, you have to admit that, by the standards of the rest of Thedas, that Circle was an abomination which would have prompted to violence even the most reasonable Templar in the world.
After what Anders pulled, I wouldn't blame anyone for not buying the "These spirits possessing are 100% harmless, honest." Never mind the whole going against the very words of Andraste "Magic exists to serve man and never to rule over him."  

I see the Rivaini seers as acknowledging and accepting that possession is dangerous, always carrying with it a potential for destruction.  But since they do it anyway, and we do not hear of any reports of Rivaini imploding under the weight of demons and blood magic, it does rather stand to reason that the danger is not so overwhelmingly great.  Since the community was apparently intact, there was no call for the templars to come in, guns a'blazing. 

A country doesn't need to be on the brink of collapse in order to justify some sort of security measures. News from Rivain are scarce and not only can't we really expect the First Enchanter to admit to wrongdoing in the very same letter she wishes to accuse the Templars of excesses; given the rivaini attitude to ignore Seer accidents as "natural disasters", she might not even be capable of recognizing a Seer going Abomination on the countryside as a failure caused by their traditions because "natures does what nature wills".  

Seers are not born possessed, they do need to be possessed in order to be alive or feels emotions. There's absolutely no reason Seers should be possessed at any point in time. If we can't even ask mages not to be possessed without them complaining because "cultural sensitives", what kind of measures can we put in place?

By the way, I love how you talk about the Templars giving the Rivaini one chance to cease and desist, as if that is so totally reasonable, when you then admit that you interpreted that "one chance" as killing a few mages in an attempt to terrorize the other mages into acquiescing.

I was actually using that as evidence that the Templars were not Annulling the Circle as a preemptive strike; I wasn't claiming that it was evidence they being reasonable.
Altough, given the fact the entire female population of the Circle was possessed, I do think offering to accept their surrender would be exceedingly merciful. Only a spirit of Mercy would even come close to exhibiting the same behavior.

The official lore reason for the Rivaini Circle being annuled was that the Seers and mages were allowed contact with their families and a Seeker caught word of this and reported it to the Chantry.Killing hundreds of innocent men,women,and children because they wanted to see their families...nothing you or any other Pro Templar that tries to defend this says will convince me that was reasonable.

http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Rivain
Scroll to the section called Annulment at Dairsmuid.
I think you need to check your facts about that Annulment, although the reality of what happened is hardly better than what you advocated.

I fail to see how the section you reference is any different frmm what cjones reports.  It only confirms it.

I think some other folks need to read the info at that link, though, and take note of the fact that it points out that Rivain is not an Andrastian nation and that one of the key reasons for this is that the Rivaini people have no interest in the Chantry stamping out its cultural traditions of seers.  Clearly, the seers were not causing widespread harm, or else the people would've felt differently.  But quite beyond that, if Rivain wasn't a Chantry nation, the Chantry had no business invading the country.

Modifié par Silfren, 01 octobre 2013 - 11:56 .

[Silfren]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@cjones: The problem is that... Finn, was it? From Witch Hunt... also had contact with his family. It makes a point of saying how unique it was... BUT, it sounded like it was unique because he chose to have contact.

"Unlike most mages who have no contact with their families, Finn actually has a very close relationship with his parents."

This, in NO way, excuses any atrocities committed by the Templars of Rivain. But, while rare - it must be taken into account when exploring how Templars really do treat mages. Just like Owain must be taken into account when discussing Tranquility.

The problem with some of the information we go off of... we might not be getting the entire story. It's like people on here who state they know what magic is - when the mages of Thedas don't even know. Or they know that the elf history is valid - but the Chantry history is a lie. Or they know what a Qunari would do. There's literally no way of knowing ANY of this as Bioware has written a rather convoluted history with all questions and no answers (some applaud this, I do not).

Maybe it really was an unlawful massacre - or maybe there was a truly insidious reason to commit to annulment.

@Lotion: I believe the story you were referencing was a Sloth Demon.

" A community afflicted by a demon of sloth could soon become a dilapidated pit where injustices are allowed to pass without comment, and none of the residents could be aware that such a change has even taken place. The sloth demon weakens, tires, tears at the edges of consciousness and would much rather render its victim helpless than engage in a true conflict. Such creatures are best faced only with a great deal of will, and only with an eye to piercing their many disguises. "

@cjones: Is there ANY reason you could think of that might validate an annulment?

I think the best conversation could be had if we try to think of reasons we "might" side with the thing we oppose.

I'll start.  I simply cannot think of any reason to validate an annulment.  I'm aware of the stated dangers, and the situation of Ferelden comes to mind as being the only example I've seen where I could almost see it as acceptable.  However, at the end of the day, it still involves the merciless slaughter of innocent people, including very young children, and since the Broken Circle quests shows that in fact, there WERE mages within the Tower who were still alive and had not in fact fallen prey to demons, I just can't go there.  I could never condone the act of slaughtering innocent people "just in case."

Modifié par Silfren, 02 octobre 2013 - 12:00 .

[Hellion Rex]

Silfren wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

cjones91 wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

Silfren wrote...
Nevertheless, when the law is used as an excuse for bloodshed even though the community is not being harmed, then that law is corrupt and excessive. 

Even if you believe that, you have to admit that, by the standards of the rest of Thedas, that Circle was an abomination which would have prompted to violence even the most reasonable Templar in the world.
After what Anders pulled, I wouldn't blame anyone for not buying the "These spirits possessing are 100% harmless, honest." Never mind the whole going against the very words of Andraste "Magic exists to serve man and never to rule over him."  

I see the Rivaini seers as acknowledging and accepting that possession is dangerous, always carrying with it a potential for destruction.  But since they do it anyway, and we do not hear of any reports of Rivaini imploding under the weight of demons and blood magic, it does rather stand to reason that the danger is not so overwhelmingly great.  Since the community was apparently intact, there was no call for the templars to come in, guns a'blazing. 

A country doesn't need to be on the brink of collapse in order to justify some sort of security measures. News from Rivain are scarce and not only can't we really expect the First Enchanter to admit to wrongdoing in the very same letter she wishes to accuse the Templars of excesses; given the rivaini attitude to ignore Seer accidents as "natural disasters", she might not even be capable of recognizing a Seer going Abomination on the countryside as a failure caused by their traditions because "natures does what nature wills".  

Seers are not born possessed, they do need to be possessed in order to be alive or feels emotions. There's absolutely no reason Seers should be possessed at any point in time. If we can't even ask mages not to be possessed without them complaining because "cultural sensitives", what kind of measures can we put in place?

By the way, I love how you talk about the Templars giving the Rivaini one chance to cease and desist, as if that is so totally reasonable, when you then admit that you interpreted that "one chance" as killing a few mages in an attempt to terrorize the other mages into acquiescing.

I was actually using that as evidence that the Templars were not Annulling the Circle as a preemptive strike; I wasn't claiming that it was evidence they being reasonable.
Altough, given the fact the entire female population of the Circle was possessed, I do think offering to accept their surrender would be exceedingly merciful. Only a spirit of Mercy would even come close to exhibiting the same behavior.

The official lore reason for the Rivaini Circle being annuled was that the Seers and mages were allowed contact with their families and a Seeker caught word of this and reported it to the Chantry.Killing hundreds of innocent men,women,and children because they wanted to see their families...nothing you or any other Pro Templar that tries to defend this says will convince me that was reasonable.

http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Rivain
Scroll to the section called Annulment at Dairsmuid.
I think you need to check your facts about that Annulment, although the reality of what happened is hardly better than what you advocated.

I fail to see how the section you reference is any different frmm what cjones reports.  It only confirms it.

I think some other folks need to read the info at that link, though, and take note of the fact that it points out that Rivain is not an Andrastian nation and that one of the key reasons for this is that the Rivaini people have no interest in the Chantry stamping out its cultural traditions of seers.  Clearly, the seers were not causing widespread harm, or else the people would've felt differently.  But quite beyond that, if Rivain wasn't a Chantry nation, the Chantry had no business invading the country.

Where does it say in the Annulment section that "Seers and mages were allowed contact with their families and a Seeker caught word of this and reported it to the Chantry."?  That was what I was referring to in my last post. Did I honestly miss that info somewhere in the Annulment section?

[Hellion Rex]

Silfren wrote...

Medhia Nox wrote...

@cjones: The problem is that... Finn, was it? From Witch Hunt... also had contact with his family. It makes a point of saying how unique it was... BUT, it sounded like it was unique because he chose to have contact.

"Unlike most mages who have no contact with their families, Finn actually has a very close relationship with his parents."

This, in NO way, excuses any atrocities committed by the Templars of Rivain. But, while rare - it must be taken into account when exploring how Templars really do treat mages. Just like Owain must be taken into account when discussing Tranquility.

The problem with some of the information we go off of... we might not be getting the entire story. It's like people on here who state they know what magic is - when the mages of Thedas don't even know. Or they know that the elf history is valid - but the Chantry history is a lie. Or they know what a Qunari would do. There's literally no way of knowing ANY of this as Bioware has written a rather convoluted history with all questions and no answers (some applaud this, I do not).

Maybe it really was an unlawful massacre - or maybe there was a truly insidious reason to commit to annulment.

@Lotion: I believe the story you were referencing was a Sloth Demon.

" A community afflicted by a demon of sloth could soon become a dilapidated pit where injustices are allowed to pass without comment, and none of the residents could be aware that such a change has even taken place. The sloth demon weakens, tires, tears at the edges of consciousness and would much rather render its victim helpless than engage in a true conflict. Such creatures are best faced only with a great deal of will, and only with an eye to piercing their many disguises. "

@cjones: Is there ANY reason you could think of that might validate an annulment?

I think the best conversation could be had if we try to think of reasons we "might" side with the thing we oppose.

I'll start.  I simply cannot think of any reason to validate an annulment.  I'm aware of the stated dangers, and the situation of Ferelden comes to mind as being the only example I've seen where I could almost see it as acceptable.  However, at the end of the day, it still involves the merciless slaughter of innocent people, including very young children, and since the Broken Circle quests shows that in fact, there WERE mages within the Tower who were still alive and had not in fact fallen prey to demons, I just can't go there.  I could never condone the act of slaughtering innocent people "just in case."

I agree with this statement so much. I can understand why Templars are so scared, and their fears are somewhat justified. But I could never condemn an entire group to death, just on what MIGHT be.

[Silfren]

[quote]eluvianix wrote...

[quote]Silfren wrote...

[quote]eluvianix wrote...

[quote]cjones91 wrote...

[quote]MisterJB wrote...

[quote]Silfren wrote...
Nevertheless, when the law is used as an excuse for bloodshed even though the community is not being harmed, then that law is corrupt and excessive. [/quote]
Even if you believe that, you have to admit that, by the standards of the rest of Thedas, that Circle was an abomination which would have prompted to violence even the most reasonable Templar in the world.
After what Anders pulled, I wouldn't blame anyone for not buying the "These spirits possessing are 100% harmless, honest." Never mind the whole going against the very words of Andraste "Magic exists to serve man and never to rule over him."  


[quote]I see the Rivaini seers as acknowledging and accepting that possession is dangerous, always carrying with it a potential for destruction.  But since they do it anyway, and we do not hear of any reports of Rivaini imploding under the weight of demons and blood magic, it does rather stand to reason that the danger is not so overwhelmingly great.  Since the community was apparently intact, there was no call for the templars to come in, guns a'blazing. [/quote]
A country doesn't need to be on the brink of collapse in order to justify some sort of security measures. News from Rivain are scarce and not only can't we really expect the First Enchanter to admit to wrongdoing in the very same letter she wishes to accuse the Templars of excesses; given the rivaini attitude to ignore Seer accidents as "natural disasters", she might not even be capable of recognizing a Seer going Abomination on the countryside as a failure caused by their traditions because "natures does what nature wills".  

Seers are not born possessed, they do need to be possessed in order to be alive or feels emotions. There's absolutely no reason Seers should be possessed at any point in time. If we can't even ask mages not to be possessed without them complaining because "cultural sensitives", what kind of measures can we put in place?

[quote]By the way, I love how you talk about the Templars giving the Rivaini one chance to cease and desist, as if that is so totally reasonable, when you then admit that you interpreted that "one chance" as killing a few mages in an attempt to terrorize the other mages into acquiescing.
[/quote]
I was actually using that as evidence that the Templars were not Annulling the Circle as a preemptive strike; I wasn't claiming that it was evidence they being reasonable.
Altough, given the fact the entire female population of the Circle was possessed, I do think offering to accept their surrender would be exceedingly merciful. Only a spirit of Mercy would even come close to exhibiting the same behavior.[/quote]
The official lore reason for the Rivaini Circle being annuled was that the Seers and mages were allowed contact with their families and a Seeker caught word of this and reported it to the Chantry.Killing hundreds of innocent men,women,and children because they wanted to see their families...nothing you or any other Pro Templar that tries to defend this says will convince me that was reasonable.[/quote]

http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Rivain
Scroll to the section called Annulment at Dairsmuid.
I think you need to check your facts about that Annulment, although the reality of what happened is hardly better than what you advocated.[/quote]

I fail to see how the section you reference is any different frmm what cjones reports.  It only confirms it.

I think some other folks need to read the info at that link, though, and take note of the fact that it points out that Rivain is not an Andrastian nation and that one of the key reasons for this is that the Rivaini people have no interest in the Chantry stamping out its cultural traditions of seers.  Clearly, the seers were not causing widespread harm, or else the people would've felt differently.  But quite beyond that, if Rivain wasn't a Chantry nation, the Chantry had no business invading the country.

[/quote]
Where does it say in the Annulment section that "Seers and mages were allowed contact with their families and a Seeker caught word of this and reported it to the Chantry."?  That was what I was referring to in my last post. Did I honestly miss that info somewhere in the Annulment section?[/quote]

From that section: When the other Circle rose up, the Chantry sent Seekers across the bay from Ayesleigh to investigate. They found us mixing freely with our families, training female mages in the traditions of the seers, and
denounced us as apostates. Perhaps they thought we were spineless robes who could be intimidated with a little bloodshed. Before I was First Enchanter, I was the daughter of Captain Revaud, of the Felicisima Armada. I know how to plan a battle.
[/quote]

Modifié par Silfren, 02 octobre 2013 - 12:08 .

[Hellion Rex]

@Silfren: My god I am blind. Thank you for pointing that out to me. Sorry bout that.

Modifié par eluvianix, 02 octobre 2013 - 12:12 .

[The Hierophant]

Silfren wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

cjones91 wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

Silfren wrote...
Nevertheless, when the law is used as an excuse for bloodshed even though the community is not being harmed, then that law is corrupt and excessive. 

Even if you believe that, you have to admit that, by the standards of the rest of Thedas, that Circle was an abomination which would have prompted to violence even the most reasonable Templar in the world.
After what Anders pulled, I wouldn't blame anyone for not buying the "These spirits possessing are 100% harmless, honest." Never mind the whole going against the very words of Andraste "Magic exists to serve man and never to rule over him."  

I see the Rivaini seers as acknowledging and accepting that possession is dangerous, always carrying with it a potential for destruction.  But since they do it anyway, and we do not hear of any reports of Rivaini imploding under the weight of demons and blood magic, it does rather stand to reason that the danger is not so overwhelmingly great.  Since the community was apparently intact, there was no call for the templars to come in, guns a'blazing. 

A country doesn't need to be on the brink of collapse in order to justify some sort of security measures. News from Rivain are scarce and not only can't we really expect the First Enchanter to admit to wrongdoing in the very same letter she wishes to accuse the Templars of excesses; given the rivaini attitude to ignore Seer accidents as "natural disasters", she might not even be capable of recognizing a Seer going Abomination on the countryside as a failure caused by their traditions because "natures does what nature wills".  

Seers are not born possessed, they do need to be possessed in order to be alive or feels emotions. There's absolutely no reason Seers should be possessed at any point in time. If we can't even ask mages not to be possessed without them complaining because "cultural sensitives", what kind of measures can we put in place?

By the way, I love how you talk about the Templars giving the Rivaini one chance to cease and desist, as if that is so totally reasonable, when you then admit that you interpreted that "one chance" as killing a few mages in an attempt to terrorize the other mages into acquiescing.

I was actually using that as evidence that the Templars were not Annulling the Circle as a preemptive strike; I wasn't claiming that it was evidence they being reasonable.
Altough, given the fact the entire female population of the Circle was possessed, I do think offering to accept their surrender would be exceedingly merciful. Only a spirit of Mercy would even come close to exhibiting the same behavior.

The official lore reason for the Rivaini Circle being annuled was that the Seers and mages were allowed contact with their families and a Seeker caught word of this and reported it to the Chantry.Killing hundreds of innocent men,women,and children because they wanted to see their families...nothing you or any other Pro Templar that tries to defend this says will convince me that was reasonable.

http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Rivain
Scroll to the section called Annulment at Dairsmuid.
I think you need to check your facts about that Annulment, although the reality of what happened is hardly better than what you advocated.

I fail to see how the section you reference is any different frmm what cjones reports.  It only confirms it.

I think some other folks need to read the info at that link, though, and take note of the fact that it points out that Rivain is not an Andrastian nation and that one of the key reasons for this is that the Rivaini people have no interest in the Chantry stamping out its cultural traditions of seers. Clearly, the seers were not causing widespread harm, or else the people would've felt differently.  But quite beyond that, if Rivain wasn't a Chantry nation, the Chantry had no business invading the country.

This makes no sense as it was stated that the Rivaini hold Andrastian beliefs while it's nationalists/traditionalists partnered up with the Chantry to kill off a large segment of their population who refused to denounce the Qun.

It's worth noting, however, that the Kingdom of Rivain immediately violated the treaty. Twice. Once, when the humans of northern Rivain—nearly all practitioners of the Qun and therefore by definition, "Qunari"—refused to leave their homes and go in exile to the islands. And again, when the Rivain Chantry and nationalist forces, unable to convert its people back to the worship of the Maker, tried a purge by the sword, slaughtering countless unarmed people and burying them in mass graves. It's a fortunate mystery that the leaders in Kont-aar did not alert their allies in the Northern Passage, or we'd still be fighting the giants now.

—From The Exalted Marches: An Examination of Chantry Warfare, by Sister Petrine, Chantry scholar

[dragonflight288]

This makes no sense as it was stated that the Rivaini hold Andrastian beliefs while it's nationalists/traditionalists partnered up with the Chantry to kill off a large segment of their population who refused to denounce the Qun.

It's worth noting, however, that the Kingdom of Rivain immediately violated the treaty. Twice. Once, when the humans of northern Rivain—nearly all practitioners of the Qun and therefore by definition, "Qunari"—refused to leave their homes and go in exile to the islands. And again, when the Rivain Chantry and nationalist forces, unable to convert its people back to the worship of the Maker, tried a purge by the sword, slaughtering countless unarmed people and burying them in mass graves. It's a fortunate mystery that the leaders in Kont-aar did not alert their allies in the Northern Passage, or we'd still be fighting the giants now.

—From The Exalted Marches: An Examination of Chantry Warfare, by Sister Petrine, Chantry scholar

So the Qunari born in Rivain violated the treaty and refused to leave. The Chantry in Rivain violated the treaty the second time, and slaughtered the Qunari in an Exalted March.

World of Thedas tells us that that exalted march was so violent that the veil was sundered. Then the Chantry denied attacking.

Deportation would've been acceptable. Mass slaughter to the point the veil is sundered, is not.

I personally think the Chantry simply had a stick up its butt about Rivain because it never truly converted.

[Hellion Rex]

dragonflight288 wrote...

This makes no sense as it was stated that the Rivaini hold Andrastian beliefs while it's nationalists/traditionalists partnered up with the Chantry to kill off a large segment of their population who refused to denounce the Qun.

It's worth noting, however, that the Kingdom of Rivain immediately violated the treaty. Twice. Once, when the humans of northern Rivain—nearly all practitioners of the Qun and therefore by definition, "Qunari"—refused to leave their homes and go in exile to the islands. And again, when the Rivain Chantry and nationalist forces, unable to convert its people back to the worship of the Maker, tried a purge by the sword, slaughtering countless unarmed people and burying them in mass graves. It's a fortunate mystery that the leaders in Kont-aar did not alert their allies in the Northern Passage, or we'd still be fighting the giants now.

—From The Exalted Marches: An Examination of Chantry Warfare, by Sister Petrine, Chantry scholar

So the Qunari born in Rivain violated the treaty and refused to leave. The Chantry in Rivain violated the treaty the second time, and slaughtered the Qunari in an Exalted March.

World of Thedas tells us that that exalted march was so violent that the veil was sundered. Then the Chantry denied attacking.

Deportation would've been acceptable. Mass slaughter to the point the veil is sundered, is not.

I personally think the Chantry simply had a stick up its butt about Rivain because it never truly converted.

Yup. I could totally seeing the Chantry having that mindset. Especially them trying to cover up the truth behind the violation since they screwed it all up.

[The Hierophant]

dragonflight288 wrote...

This makes no sense as it was stated that the Rivaini hold Andrastian beliefs while it's nationalists/traditionalists partnered up with the Chantry to kill off a large segment of their population who refused to denounce the Qun.

It's worth noting, however, that the Kingdom of Rivain immediately violated the treaty. Twice. Once, when the humans of northern Rivain—nearly all practitioners of the Qun and therefore by definition, "Qunari"—refused to leave their homes and go in exile to the islands. And again, when the Rivain Chantry and nationalist forces, unable to convert its people back to the worship of the Maker, tried a purge by the sword, slaughtering countless unarmed people and burying them in mass graves. It's a fortunate mystery that the leaders in Kont-aar did not alert their allies in the Northern Passage, or we'd still be fighting the giants now.

—From The Exalted Marches: An Examination of Chantry Warfare, by Sister Petrine, Chantry scholar

So the Qunari born in Rivain violated the treaty and refused to leave. The Chantry in Rivain violated the treaty the second time, and slaughtered the Qunari in an Exalted March.

World of Thedas tells us that that exalted march was so violent that the veil was sundered. Then the Chantry denied attacking.

Deportation would've been acceptable. Mass slaughter to the point the veil is sundered, is not.

I personally think the Chantry simply had a stick up its butt about Rivain because it never truly converted.

The codex only states that it was perpetrated by the Rivaini branch of the Chantry, and the nationalist forces. After reading the above the irony of the Dairsmund Annulment is fantastical.

[Hellion Rex]

The Hierophant wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

This makes no sense as it was stated that the Rivaini hold Andrastian beliefs while it's nationalists/traditionalists partnered up with the Chantry to kill off a large segment of their population who refused to denounce the Qun.

It's worth noting, however, that the Kingdom of Rivain immediately violated the treaty. Twice. Once, when the humans of northern Rivain—nearly all practitioners of the Qun and therefore by definition, "Qunari"—refused to leave their homes and go in exile to the islands. And again, when the Rivain Chantry and nationalist forces, unable to convert its people back to the worship of the Maker, tried a purge by the sword, slaughtering countless unarmed people and burying them in mass graves. It's a fortunate mystery that the leaders in Kont-aar did not alert their allies in the Northern Passage, or we'd still be fighting the giants now.

—From The Exalted Marches: An Examination of Chantry Warfare, by Sister Petrine, Chantry scholar

So the Qunari born in Rivain violated the treaty and refused to leave. The Chantry in Rivain violated the treaty the second time, and slaughtered the Qunari in an Exalted March.

World of Thedas tells us that that exalted march was so violent that the veil was sundered. Then the Chantry denied attacking.

Deportation would've been acceptable. Mass slaughter to the point the veil is sundered, is not.

I personally think the Chantry simply had a stick up its butt about Rivain because it never truly converted.

The codex only states that it was perpetrated by the Rivaini branch of the Chantry, and the nationalist forces. After reading the above the irony of the Dairsmund Annulment is fantastical.

Which codex entry are you referring to? I just want to see it for myself.

[The Hierophant]

eluvianix wrote...

Which codex entry are you referring to? I just want to see it for myself.

http://dragonage.wik...omerryn_Accords

[dragonflight288]

The Hierophant wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

Which codex entry are you referring to? I just want to see it for myself.

http://dragonage.wik...omerryn_Accords

And World of Thedas says it was Chantry forces, that were nationalized, but it was still an exalted march. Only a localized one.

[The Hierophant]

dragonflight288 wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

Which codex entry are you referring to? I just want to see it for myself.

http://dragonage.wik...omerryn_Accords

And World of Thedas says it was Chantry forces, that were nationalized, but it was still an exalted march. Only a localized one.

And? You still have the Rivaini nationals using the banner of the Chantry, and nationalism to slaughter the Rivaini converts. It's even stated by a Chantry scholar that the Rivaini branch's actions were also in violation of the LLomeryn Accord. Going by the posts you'd think that the whole organization was in on the Rivaini Chantry's and nationalists's genocide. 

Modifié par The Hierophant, 02 octobre 2013 - 03:08 .

[InvincibleHero]

I think BW already presents blood magic as unclean but cannot penalize player characters overmuch because the game has to be "fun" or people will not buy it. People wanted blood mage options so they gave them to you but if it ended in a game over like reality in Thedas for most blood mages would most likely tend to occur then people would be why you troll us Bioware ?

Blood magic is not something any of my pcs dabbled in. I've played evil options and enjoyed the experience in every game but didn't feel a need to go there. It boiled down to a new powerset and a way to play as a mage and that's about it.

[Chaos Hammer]

Blood magic, is by nature dark. Some will argue it is just a tool. To me, its like a nuclear bomb, its a power with no equal, and can cause untold devastation. Mage die-hards will tell me I'm just a Templar sympathizer. Nothing could be farther from the truth, that said, the ends do not justify the means. We're tempered by the example of a willing participant in DA:O with the Redcliff dilemma. But in Tevinter... this is usually not the case. I'm not going to claim all blood mages are evil, but like the atom bomb..... the road to Hell is paved with good intentions, and if Logain taught us anything, it is that even the mightiest and most devout can lose their way, their conviction, and in the end, themself

Modifié par Chaos Hammer, 02 octobre 2013 - 04:08 .

[Snowflake_in_Hel]

Blood magic leads to evil, that is what Lilly said when she rejected Jowan. But what if it is a tool that leads to the greater good?

You must decide for yourself if the risk is worth it.

Wassail.
Snjarulfr.
werwulf.