626 réponses à ce sujet

[Hellion Rex]

dragonflight288 wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Again... The Chantry knew about Seers. It didn't know that it was the Circle itself that kept the practice of these Seers going.

Even if they hadn't known, that still justifies instant attempts at Annulment?

...apprantely practicing local customs that the entire country was fine with and visiting family is worth genocide.

Again though, I am still kind of flabbergasted at the thought that the Chantry's organization would be so ignorant of the Rivaini's circles so as to have the Seekers be surprised at seeing the seers. No way would they not keep an extremely close eye on Rivain, even so far as to keep spies and such in the area.

[MisterJB]

dragonflight288 wrote...
And the only real reason ever stated in the lore was because some of the mages were in contact with their families.

"The Annulment at Dairsmuid

When we heard of the injustices against our fellow mages at the White Spire, the Circle of Magi in Val Royeaux, I feared what was to come. Our Circle at Dairsmuid is small and isolated. It exists largely as a façade to appease the Chantry.

When the other Circles 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 rubes 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.

They brought with them a small army of templars. We fought. And we might have won. But they invoked the Right of Annulment with all the unrelenting brutality that allowed. It is their right to put screaming apprentices to the sword, burn our “tainted” libraries, crash irreplaceable artifacts under their heels, tear down the very walls of our home. No mage has the right to disagree.

We of the Dairsmuid Circle wait now, behind barricades. I have sent word to our brother and sister mages of this outrage. When they break through, we will not die alone.
"

Kindly point out where, in all of that, is stated that the Circle was Annuled specifically and solely because the mages were mixing with their families.

[Heimdall]

dragonflight288 wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Again... The Chantry knew about Seers. It didn't know that it was the Circle itself that kept the practice of these Seers going.

Even if they hadn't known, that still justifies instant attempts at Annulment?

What about; assuming it was possible; killing only those who willingly became possessed?

The thing is, we have no conclusive evidence that the mages who had been possessed as seers were given a chance to give themselves up. All we know is that at the end of the day, the circle has been annuled. 

And the only real reason ever stated in the lore was because some of the mages were in contact with their families.

Considering the source of that lore was a letter from the First Enchanter of that Circle, it has every interest in making the Templars look as carelessly violent as possible.  It's not unbiased.  And as mentioned above, it mentions the possessions as a reason also.

Modifié par Lord Aesir, 02 octobre 2013 - 10:27 .

[MisterJB]

eluvianix wrote...
The thing is, we have no conclusive evidence that the mages who had been possessed as seers were given a chance to give themselves up. All we know is that at the end of the day, the circle has been annuled. 

I'm not saying we have. I'm saying that I would have killed any and all Seers who willingly became possessed due to the fact spirits are corruptible and that this was their choice and would have spared the men and girls too young to have become Seers.
Is that more palatable?

Modifié par MisterJB, 02 octobre 2013 - 10:28 .

[Silfren]

The Hierophant wrote...

cjones91 wrote...

The Chantry knew about the possessions for years.I'm willing to believe the Enchanter who was there when the massacre happened than the people who did the killing to begin with.

The letter indicates that the Seekers were ignorant of what was going on at Dairsmund's CoM, while it's been stated in the Rivain codex that the practice of Seers have been prohibited.

Which makes no sense.  We first learn about this Rivaini practice from the writings of a Chantry scholar, so obviously it wasn't a secret.  The Chantry did indeed know about it long before.

[Hellion Rex]

Lord Aesir wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Again... The Chantry knew about Seers. It didn't know that it was the Circle itself that kept the practice of these Seers going.

Even if they hadn't known, that still justifies instant attempts at Annulment?

What about; assuming it was possible; killing only those who willingly became possessed?

The thing is, we have no conclusive evidence that the mages who had been possessed as seers were given a chance to give themselves up. All we know is that at the end of the day, the circle has been annuled. 

And the only real reason ever stated in the lore was because some of the mages were in contact with their families.

Considering the source of that lore was a letter from the First Enchanter of that Circle, it has every interest in making the Templars look as carelessly violent as possible.  It's not unbiased.  And as mentioned above, it mentions the possessions as a reason also.

I agree. Our source is biased, but unfortunately, at the moment, it is all we have.

[dragonflight288]

eluvianix wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Again... The Chantry knew about Seers. It didn't know that it was the Circle itself that kept the practice of these Seers going.

Even if they hadn't known, that still justifies instant attempts at Annulment?

What about; assuming it was possible; killing only those who willingly became possessed?

The thing is, we have no conclusive evidence that the mages who had been possessed as seers were given a chance to give themselves up. All we know is that at the end of the day, the circle has been annuled. 

And the only real reason ever stated in the lore was because some of the mages were in contact with their families.

Considering the source of that lore was a letter from the First Enchanter of that Circle, it has every interest in making the Templars look as carelessly violent as possible.  It's not unbiased.  And as mentioned above, it mentions the possessions as a reason also.

I agree. Our source is biased, but unfortunately, at the moment, it is all we have.

It is all we have, and officially, the Seekers and Chantry have not really given any other justification.

[Hellion Rex]

MisterJB wrote...

eluvianix wrote...
The thing is, we have no conclusive evidence that the mages who had been possessed as seers were given a chance to give themselves up. All we know is that at the end of the day, the circle has been annuled. 

I'm not saying we have. I'm saying that I would have killed any and all Seers who willingly became possessed due to the fact spirits are corruptible and that this was their choice and would have spared the men and girls too young to have become Seers.
Is that more palatable?

I get what you are saying. It would be nice to get a more unbiased opinion of the events though.

[dragonflight288]

eluvianix wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

eluvianix wrote...
The thing is, we have no conclusive evidence that the mages who had been possessed as seers were given a chance to give themselves up. All we know is that at the end of the day, the circle has been annuled. 

I'm not saying we have. I'm saying that I would have killed any and all Seers who willingly became possessed due to the fact spirits are corruptible and that this was their choice and would have spared the men and girls too young to have become Seers.
Is that more palatable?

I get what you are saying. It would be nice to get a more unbiased opinion of the events though.

I actually agree, but until we get another source, I have to use the lore that exists.

[addiction21]

eluvianix wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Again... The Chantry knew about Seers. It didn't know that it was the Circle itself that kept the practice of these Seers going.

Even if they hadn't known, that still justifies instant attempts at Annulment?

They accepted the chantry law. That being justified or not comes down to ones own ethics but they knew the laws by those that got the power.

Going against it at that point is playing with fire.

[Heimdall]

Silfren wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

cjones91 wrote...

The Chantry knew about the possessions for years.I'm willing to believe the Enchanter who was there when the massacre happened than the people who did the killing to begin with.

The letter indicates that the Seekers were ignorant of what was going on at Dairsmund's CoM, while it's been stated in the Rivain codex that the practice of Seers have been prohibited.

Which makes no sense.  We first learn about this Rivaini practice from the writings of a Chantry scholar, so obviously it wasn't a secret.  The Chantry did indeed know about it long before.

They knew it was a practice amongst hedge mages in Rivain.  They might not have known the Rivaini branch of the Circle was allowing such practices to be taught to the mages there.  The local chantry might have been willing to bend the rules, but a seeker straight from Orlais in the wake of the White Spire?  Probably not.

Modifié par Lord Aesir, 02 octobre 2013 - 10:35 .

[Treacherous J Slither]

MisterJB wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...
And the only real reason ever stated in the lore was because some of the mages were in contact with their families.

"The Annulment at Dairsmuid

When we heard of the injustices against our fellow mages at the White Spire, the Circle of Magi in Val Royeaux, I feared what was to come. Our Circle at Dairsmuid is small and isolated. It exists largely as a façade to appease the Chantry.

When the other Circles 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 rubes 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.

They brought with them a small army of templars. We fought. And we might have won. But they invoked the Right of Annulment with all the unrelenting brutality that allowed. It is their right to put screaming apprentices to the sword, burn our “tainted” libraries, crash irreplaceable artifacts under their heels, tear down the very walls of our home. No mage has the right to disagree.

We of the Dairsmuid Circle wait now, behind barricades. I have sent word to our brother and sister mages of this outrage. When they break through, we will not die alone.
"

Kindly point out where, in all of that, is stated that the Circle was Annuled specifically and solely because the mages were mixing with their families.

^ I don't understand something here. The Templars show up with a small force. The mages fight and have the upper hand. The Templars call for the Rite Of Annulment. How did the mages even allow that to happen? As soon as the first sword was drawn every Templar should have died. They shouldn't have been able to send for anything.

Now the mages are holed up somewhere while the surviving Templars await reinforcements. Why don't the mages attack now when the Templars are vulnerable? Put them all to sleep, hit them with the vulnerability hex, then that critical hit hex, then horror. If they're still alive i'm sure they won't be in any condition to fight. Then it'll be time for some real fun >:]

[Hellion Rex]

dragonflight288 wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Again... The Chantry knew about Seers. It didn't know that it was the Circle itself that kept the practice of these Seers going.

Even if they hadn't known, that still justifies instant attempts at Annulment?

What about; assuming it was possible; killing only those who willingly became possessed?

The thing is, we have no conclusive evidence that the mages who had been possessed as seers were given a chance to give themselves up. All we know is that at the end of the day, the circle has been annuled. 

And the only real reason ever stated in the lore was because some of the mages were in contact with their families.

Considering the source of that lore was a letter from the First Enchanter of that Circle, it has every interest in making the Templars look as carelessly violent as possible.  It's not unbiased.  And as mentioned above, it mentions the possessions as a reason also.

I agree. Our source is biased, but unfortunately, at the moment, it is all we have.

It is all we have, and officially, the Seekers and Chantry have not really given any other justification.

To be honest though, do they need more? We have no other idea how "bad" the situation was in Dairsmuid, other than the First Enchanter's words, although I am more inclined to give the Circle the benefit of the doubt. The Chantry must have known what was going on all along. But in the wake of the White Spire, I can certainly understand how everyone would have been itching for a fight.

[EmperorSahlertz]

eluvianix wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Again... The Chantry knew about Seers. It didn't know that it was the Circle itself that kept the practice of these Seers going.

Even if they hadn't known, that still justifies instant attempts at Annulment?

What about; assuming it was possible; killing only those who willingly became possessed?

The thing is, we have no conclusive evidence that the mages who had been possessed as seers were given a chance to give themselves up. All we know is that at the end of the day, the circle has been annuled. 

Actually. We do know that the Templars at first simply tried to get the Circle back on track, and udner normal Circle standards, but then the mages fought back. And when it seemed the Templars couldn't win, then and only then, did they call for the Annulment.

[Hellion Rex]

Lord Aesir wrote...

Silfren wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

cjones91 wrote...

The Chantry knew about the possessions for years.I'm willing to believe the Enchanter who was there when the massacre happened than the people who did the killing to begin with.

The letter indicates that the Seekers were ignorant of what was going on at Dairsmund's CoM, while it's been stated in the Rivain codex that the practice of Seers have been prohibited.

Which makes no sense.  We first learn about this Rivaini practice from the writings of a Chantry scholar, so obviously it wasn't a secret.  The Chantry did indeed know about it long before.

They knew it was a practice amongst hedge mages in Rivain.  They might not have known the Rivaini branch of the Circle was allowing such practices to be taught to the mages there.  The local chantry might have been willing to bend the rules, but a seeker straight from Orlais?  Probably not.

I doubt that to be honest. The Chantry was well aware of Rivain's seers. How could they not keep a special eye on the situation? But again, since this happened after White Spire, what happened may have less to do with the seers, and more about putting down any possible rebellions.

[Hellion Rex]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Again... The Chantry knew about Seers. It didn't know that it was the Circle itself that kept the practice of these Seers going.

Even if they hadn't known, that still justifies instant attempts at Annulment?

What about; assuming it was possible; killing only those who willingly became possessed?

The thing is, we have no conclusive evidence that the mages who had been possessed as seers were given a chance to give themselves up. All we know is that at the end of the day, the circle has been annuled. 

Actually. We do know that the Templars at first simply tried to get the Circle back on track, and udner normal Circle standards, but then the mages fought back. And when it seemed the Templars couldn't win, then and only then, did they call for the Annulment.

Um, that is not in the Annulment entry. When did they attempt to give the Circle one more chance?

[dragonflight288]

To be honest though, do they need more? We have no other idea how "bad" the situation was in Dairsmuid, other than the First Enchanter's words, although I am more inclined to give the Circle the benefit of the doubt. The Chantry must have known what was going on all along. But in the wake of the White Spire, I can certainly understand how everyone would have been itching for a fight.

Rivain happened before the events at the White Spire.

[Silfren]

Lord Aesir wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Again... The Chantry knew about Seers. It didn't know that it was the Circle itself that kept the practice of these Seers going.

Even if they hadn't known, that still justifies instant attempts at Annulment?

What about; assuming it was possible; killing only those who willingly became possessed?

The thing is, we have no conclusive evidence that the mages who had been possessed as seers were given a chance to give themselves up. All we know is that at the end of the day, the circle has been annuled. 

And the only real reason ever stated in the lore was because some of the mages were in contact with their families.

Considering the source of that lore was a letter from the First Enchanter of that Circle, it has every interest in making the Templars look as carelessly violent as possible.  It's not unbiased.  And as mentioned above, it mentions the possessions as a reason also.

Getting aside from what their reasons were for invoking it, what about the fact that the templars do not have the legal right to call down an Annulment?  They are required by law to get approval from a Grand Cleric or the Divine herself.  They can't just declare it of their own accord.

[Silfren]

MisterJB wrote...

eluvianix wrote...
The thing is, we have no conclusive evidence that the mages who had been possessed as seers were given a chance to give themselves up. All we know is that at the end of the day, the circle has been annuled. 

I'm not saying we have. I'm saying that I would have killed any and all Seers who willingly became possessed due to the fact spirits are corruptible and that this was their choice and would have spared the men and girls too young to have become Seers.
Is that more palatable?

And you think those men and young girls would have THANKED you? 

[MisterJB]

I do hope we'll be able to call a Right of Annulment, it would be so awesome.

"As First Inquisitor, I hereby invoke the Right of Annulment!"

[The Hierophant]

dragonflight288 wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Again... The Chantry knew about Seers. It didn't know that it was the Circle itself that kept the practice of these Seers going.

Even if they hadn't known, that still justifies instant attempts at Annulment?

What about; assuming it was possible; killing only those who willingly became possessed?

The thing is, we have no conclusive evidence that the mages who had been possessed as seers were given a chance to give themselves up. All we know is that at the end of the day, the circle has been annuled. 

And the only real reason ever stated in the lore was because some of the mages were in contact with their families.

The only lore that mentions the situation in Dairsmund was the FE's letter that also states that mages were being trained as Seers in the same sentence about their families. Combine the Chantry's policy on abominations with the practice of the Seers being prohibited in Rivain and your post seems fallacious.

Plus i don't agree with the Seekers annulling the entire circle since the female abominations were the clear perpetrators, as the children and men are not made into them due to their tradition.

Modifié par The Hierophant, 02 octobre 2013 - 10:46 .

[Hellion Rex]

dragonflight288 wrote...

To be honest though, do they need more? We have no other idea how "bad" the situation was in Dairsmuid, other than the First Enchanter's words, although I am more inclined to give the Circle the benefit of the doubt. The Chantry must have known what was going on all along. But in the wake of the White Spire, I can certainly understand how everyone would have been itching for a fight.

Rivain happened before the events at the White Spire.

Nope. First sentence of the entry, "When we heard of the injustices against our fellow mages at the White Spire, the Circle of Magi in Val Royeux, I feared what was to come."

[Hellion Rex]

MisterJB wrote...

I do hope we'll be able to call a Right of Annulment, it would be so awesome.

"As First Inquisitor, I hereby invoke the Right of Annulment!"

Only if we get to call for a Right of Annihilation of Templars.

[Heimdall]

eluvianix wrote...


Um, that is not in the Annulment entry. When did they attempt to give the Circle one more chance?

I think he is referring to the portion of the letter that says the Templars only called for Annulment after the mages violently resisted them.

[Silfren]

Lord Aesir wrote...

Silfren wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

cjones91 wrote...

The Chantry knew about the possessions for years.I'm willing to believe the Enchanter who was there when the massacre happened than the people who did the killing to begin with.

The letter indicates that the Seekers were ignorant of what was going on at Dairsmund's CoM, while it's been stated in the Rivain codex that the practice of Seers have been prohibited.

Which makes no sense.  We first learn about this Rivaini practice from the writings of a Chantry scholar, so obviously it wasn't a secret.  The Chantry did indeed know about it long before.

They knew it was a practice amongst hedge mages in Rivain.  They might not have known the Rivaini branch of the Circle was allowing such practices to be taught to the mages there.  The local chantry might have been willing to bend the rules, but a seeker straight from Orlais in the wake of the White Spire?  Probably not.

Yeah, I don't believe that, sorry.  Not when a scholar from the Chantry details the fact that the Chantry doesn't have much of a foothold.  I don't believe that the Chantry hasn't kept close tabs on that nation in its ongoing attempts to spread its own influence.