626 réponses à ce sujet

[Rawgrim]

You see...blood magic is baaad, mmmk.

[Lord Raijin]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Spirits are interrested in mortals. They just aren't interrested in crossing the veil. Usually anyway.

Why are they interested in morals if they're not interested in crossing the veil? What valid reason must they have to interfere with the affairs of mortals?

[Silfren]

Lord Aesir wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

Frankly, I think the whole seer thing is a dodgy business. Possession is avoided for a reason. I'll reserve judgment until we actually see one in game though.

But Rivain has been practicing it for generations.  That would seem to indicate that they don't have a history of the same problems that makes it "avoided for reason," and indeed they must have a reason for not avoiding it.

It just means they've found ways to get enough out of it to be worth all the trouble in their view.  Doesn't mean there isn't any.  Like I said, I'd have to actually learn a good deal more about how this works before passing judgement.

It can mean that, but I think it's far more likely that they simply don't have the trouble.  Honestly, it's absurd to think that the Rivaini people, including the seers themselves, would somehow just be okay with it, or willing to just cope with the fallout, if they had regular problems with seers turning into abominations.  If Rivain had trouble with abominations due to the high numbers of possessed mages, then we would have heard about it by now, and the locals wouldn't be so unwilling to reject Chantry doctrine. 

[Medhia Nox]

@Silfren: I "keep bringing it up" - because you presumably can't be a "Spirit" Healer without a "Spirit". BUT - the Specialization in no way suggests possession takes place. So she's certainly not possessed because she's a "Spirit" Healer.

Also - while she worries about being possessed, because it implies she might be an abomination - that's just hear own fears.

If the Faith Spirit was watching her from a young age - and the Spirit Healer profession suggests the Spirit offers energy (in the same way blood magic offers energy) to perform extraordinary healing. I would still say she was never an abomination. That she was something ELSE with this Spirit.

That the Faith Spirit resurrects in no way means it's possessing anything. It could simply be hitchhiking. Being a TRUE spirit - instead of a demon that wants to inhabit a mortal form - it may have simply stuck around Wynne offering support and when she sends to it Evangeline - perhaps it simply shares a symbiotic relationship with her as well (since she is likely not "possessed" I imagine).

Anyway - if spirits don't possess (and the Faith spirit does not prove they don't IF it didn't possess Wynne/Evangeline) then the creatures possessing the mages of Rivain were NOT spirits... but demons subverting the mages and deceiving them.

Is it clear why I find it relevant?

Valor and Faith are the only spirits I believe we've encountered. I think there's a strong case that Faith had no interest in actual possession (and Valor was going to kill you).

If the Templars could see clearly - where the duped mages could not - there "might" be a case for the Annulment.

Think of Jim Jones. When he found out the government was coming - he forced his people (the children first) to die. What "if" these Rivani spirit mages forced demons into children mages?

Does my commentary paint it in ANY different light for you? Opening up the "possibility" that the Templars might have had information about a topic that has only received cursory mention in the Dragon Age lore?

Remember - Anders was an abomination - but you would never know it.  Those things Uldred became aren't what abominations always look like evidently.

And the excerpt for the Sloth demons says that demons will wait YEARS to perform their actions - and the populace will never even know they're being subverted.

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 03 octobre 2013 - 02:18 .

[Heimdall]

Silfren wrote...

It can mean that, but I think it's far more likely that they simply don't have the trouble.  Honestly, it's absurd to think that the Rivaini people, including the seers themselves, would somehow just be okay with it, or willing to just cope with the fallout, if they had regular problems with seers turning into abominations.  If Rivain had trouble with abominations due to the high numbers of possessed mages, then we would have heard about it by now, and the locals wouldn't be so unwilling to reject Chantry doctrine. 

I don't mean to say that they had mages turning abomination every which way.  I just find it unlikely that it went off without a hitch every time.  No doubt they take precautions to limit the damage when such things occur, but until we actually know more about the risk and success rate, there isn't much more to say.

[Silfren]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@Silfren: I "keep bringing it up" - because you presumably can't be a "Spirit" Healer without a "Spirit". BUT - the Specialization in no way suggests possession takes place. So she's certainly not possessed because she's a "Spirit" Healer.

But who said she WAS possessed because she's a spirit healer? Nobody that I saw.  She's possessed because a spirit decided to save her life and possessed her.  That's what I'm saying--it's never been claimed that she's possessed because of being a spirit healer.

If the Faith Spirit was watching her from a young age - and the Spirit Healer profession suggests the Spirit offers energy (in the same way blood magic offers energy) to perform extraordinary healing. I would still say she was never an abomination. That she was something ELSE with this Spirit.

That the Faith Spirit resurrects in no way means it's possessing anything. It could simply be hitchhiking. Being a TRUE spirit - instead of a demon that wants to inhabit a mortal form - it may have simply stuck around Wynne offering support and when she sends to it Evangeline - perhaps it simply shares a symbiotic relationship with her as well (since she is likely not "possessed" I imagine).

Anyway - if spirits don't possess (and the Faith spirit does not prove they don't IF it didn't possess Wynne/Evangeline) then the creatures possessing the mages of Rivain were NOT spirits... but demons subverting the mages and deceiving them.

Is it clear why I find it relevant?

Valor and Faith are the only spirits I believe we've encountered. I think there's a strong case that Faith had no interest in actual possession (and Valor was going to kill you).

If the Templars could see clearly - where the duped mages could not - there "might" be a case for the Annulment.

Think of Jim Jones. When he found out the government was coming - he forced his people (the children first) to die. What "if" these Rivani spirit mages forced demons into children mages?

Does my commentary paint it in ANY different light for you? Opening up the "possibility" that the Templars might have had information about a topic that has only received cursory mention in the Dragon Age lore?

Remember - Anders was an abomination - but you would never know it.  Those things Uldred became aren't what abominations always look like evidently.

And the excerpt for the Sloth demons says that demons will wait YEARS to perform their actions - and the populace will never even know they're being subverted.

As to all the rest, Wynne being possessed does not make her an abomination. Yes, I'm aware that the templars and Chantry probably wouldn't make the distinction, but I do make it, and the the question was raised within the game.  Being possessed does NOT automatically make one an abomination: we have Anders, Wynne, Flemeth, and presumably the Rivaini mages to account for this.  

I don't buy the argument that she's not possessed--and by the way, Wynne doesn't FEAR that she's possessed because that might mean she's an abomination...she worries that she is an abomination because she IS possessed.  Both the game and the book Asunder make it pretty clear that she is.  The question isn't whether sh'e was truly possessed or not, but whether the nature of possession inevitably makes one an abomination.

Modifié par Silfren, 03 octobre 2013 - 03:41 .

[cjones91]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@Silfren: I "keep bringing it up" - because you presumably can't be a "Spirit" Healer without a "Spirit". BUT - the Specialization in no way suggests possession takes place. So she's certainly not possessed because she's a "Spirit" Healer.

Also - while she worries about being possessed, because it implies she might be an abomination - that's just hear own fears.

If the Faith Spirit was watching her from a young age - and the Spirit Healer profession suggests the Spirit offers energy (in the same way blood magic offers energy) to perform extraordinary healing. I would still say she was never an abomination. That she was something ELSE with this Spirit.

That the Faith Spirit resurrects in no way means it's possessing anything. It could simply be hitchhiking. Being a TRUE spirit - instead of a demon that wants to inhabit a mortal form - it may have simply stuck around Wynne offering support and when she sends to it Evangeline - perhaps it simply shares a symbiotic relationship with her as well (since she is likely not "possessed" I imagine).

Anyway - if spirits don't possess (and the Faith spirit does not prove they don't IF it didn't possess Wynne/Evangeline) then the creatures possessing the mages of Rivain were NOT spirits... but demons subverting the mages and deceiving them.

Is it clear why I find it relevant?

Valor and Faith are the only spirits I believe we've encountered. I think there's a strong case that Faith had no interest in actual possession (and Valor was going to kill you).

If the Templars could see clearly - where the duped mages could not - there "might" be a case for the Annulment.

Think of Jim Jones. When he found out the government was coming - he forced his people (the children first) to die. What "if" these Rivani spirit mages forced demons into children mages?

Does my commentary paint it in ANY different light for you? Opening up the "possibility" that the Templars might have had information about a topic that has only received cursory mention in the Dragon Age lore?

Remember - Anders was an abomination - but you would never know it.  Those things Uldred became aren't what abominations always look like evidently.

And the excerpt for the Sloth demons says that demons will wait YEARS to perform their actions - and the populace will never even know they're being subverted.

If there were demons posing as spirits(which I doubt) then the Seers would have been able to notice the facade since spirit mediums can sense demons.I know you are trying to find a justification for the ROA in Rivain but you're defending the indefensible.

[dragonflight288]

The Hierophant wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

How were they acting outside the law?

They didn't get authorization for a right of annulment from the Grand Cleric in the area or from the divine, therefore they were acting outside Chantry law.

just noticed - Did the split happen before or after Dairsmund, and do the Seekers even need permission?

Well, the Right of Annulment codex specifically says that for any annulment to occur, it must have the approval of a Grand Cleric.

Seekers may be answerable only to the Divine, according to the Seekers of Truth codex, but that also means that they are accountable before the Divine as well, so I'd assume that a Seeker wouldn't need a Grand Cleric's permission, but instead would need the Divine's. If a Seeker is involved, that means the crap has really hit the fan or a templar is grossly incompetent.

As for the timing, I'm still trying to work it out mysel. For awhile, I thought that there was an incident at the White Spire before Lambert ordered the attack, and Rivain took place between the two events, but letter by the First Enchanter at Rivain says that the events at the White Spire had everyone on edge, and everyone was expecting an attack, or something like that.

If it happened after the templars split, then the templars become a rogue army attacking the mages there for being in contact with their families, and are little more than religious raiders. If this group of templars/seeker haven't split from the Chantry, that means they bypassed the part where they're supposed to get permission from the local Grand Cleric and the Seeker obviously didn't see fit to inform the Divine....

So from where I'm sitting, either way it was an unlawful and unjustifiable act of genocide.

[In Exile]

dragonflight288 wrote...

Well, the Right of Annulment codex specifically says that for any annulment to occur, it must have the approval of a Grand Cleric.  

And even Meredith, who is flat out coo-coo for cocopuffs, respects that. When the craziest person in the room, literally wearing a "Sword of Bat**** Insanity +1" on her back defers to this rule, it's really, really ironclad and not respecting is pretty much inexscuable. 

Seekers may be answerable only to the Divine, according to the Seekers of Truth codex, but that also means that they are accountable before the Divine as well, so I'd assume that a Seeker wouldn't need a Grand Cleric's permission, but instead would need the Divine's. If a Seeker is involved, that means the crap has really hit the fan or a templar is grossly incompetent.  

Well, there are two ways to see it: (i) Seekers are special forces, so whatever they have authority to do, it's basically Spectre-like blanket discretion to get the job done; (ii) Seekers are internal affairs, meaning they have zero authority over mages and the ROA is completely outside their jurisdiction, no matter the situation. 

[dragonflight288]

[quote]In Exile wrote...

[quote]dragonflight288 wrote...

Well, the Right of Annulment codex specifically says that for any annulment to occur, it must have the approval of a Grand Cleric.  [/quote]

And even Meredith, who is flat out coo-coo for cocopuffs, respects that. When the craziest person in the room, literally wearing a "Sword of Bat**** Insanity +1" on her back defers to this rule, it's really, really ironclad and not respecting is pretty much inexscuable. [/quote]

Kerras says she's trying to go over Elthina's authority and appealing directly to the Divine, if he lives through Act 1. And the moment that Elthina was dead, without a search and seizure of evidene, without any tangible proof at the time, Meredith ordered a Right of Annulment, and it was legal only on the most barebone technicalities in that there were no Grand Clerics around. Gaider said it was unjustified.

And when Orsino offered to help search the Gallows, Meredith shut him down immediately and prepared the attack, when the search was what she originally was going to Elthina for in the first place.

So yes, I agree not respecting it is inexcusable...which is exactly what the templars of Rivain did.

[quote]
[quote]Seekers may be answerable only to the Divine, according to the Seekers of Truth codex, but that also means that they are accountable before the Divine as well, so I'd assume that a Seeker wouldn't need a Grand Cleric's permission, but instead would need the Divine's. If a Seeker is involved, that means the crap has really hit the fan or a templar is grossly incompetent.  [/quote]

Well, there are two ways to see it: (i) Seekers are special forces, so whatever they have authority to do, it's basically Spectre-like blanket discretion to get the job done; (ii) Seekers are internal affairs, meaning they have zero authority over mages and the ROA is completely outside their jurisdiction, no matter the situation. 
[/quote][/quote]

To the former, that's simply scary to think about, and the codex entry is vague enough that they just might have that authority, and to the latter, it would mean that really that Seeker had no excuse at all.

[The Hierophant]

dragonflight288 wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

How were they acting outside the law?

They didn't get authorization for a right of annulment from the Grand Cleric in the area or from the divine, therefore they were acting outside Chantry law.

just noticed - Did the split happen before or after Dairsmund, and do the Seekers even need permission?

Well, the Right of Annulment codex specifically says that for any annulment to occur, it must have the approval of a Grand Cleric.

Seekers may be answerable only to the Divine, according to the Seekers of Truth codex, but that also means that they are accountable before the Divine as well, so I'd assume that a Seeker wouldn't need a Grand Cleric's permission, but instead would need the Divine's. If a Seeker is involved, that means the crap has really hit the fan or a templar is grossly incompetent.

As for the timing, I'm still trying to work it out mysel. For awhile, I thought that there was an incident at the White Spire before Lambert ordered the attack, and Rivain took place between the two events, but letter by the First Enchanter at Rivain says that the events at the White Spire had everyone on edge, and everyone was expecting an attack, or something like that.

If it happened after the templars split, then the templars become a rogue army attacking the mages there for being in contact with their families, and are little more than religious raiders. If this group of templars/seeker haven't split from the Chantry, that means they bypassed the part where they're supposed to get permission from the local Grand Cleric and the Seeker obviously didn't see fit to inform the Divine....

So from where I'm sitting, either way it was an unlawful and unjustifiable act of genocide.

IIRC i thought the Seekers are only answerable to the Divine?

I'll have to agree with your last bit if they attacked the Dairsmund's Circle after the spilt, as they would lack the power to do so even though if the circle is full of abominations.

[dragonflight288]

IIRC i thought the Seekers are only answerable to the Divine?

I'll have to agree with your last bit if they attacked the Dairsmund's Circle after the spilt, as they would lack the power to do so even though if the circle is full of abominations.

They are answerable only to the Divine, I stated in that post that I think that means a Seeker has to go to the Divine for permission, instead f the Grand Cleric. Remove the Divine's authority over them, then what remains? Are they protectors or invaders, defenders of truth, or aggressive, paranoid bigots? Only time (and the next game) will tell.

So yeah, it's important that we figure out when this annulment took place. If it happened before the split, then it might be called legal...barely, but if it didn't, then it was a rogue group of religious raiders.

Hmm....I need to do more research on it before making further comments. I want to make sure I know exactly what I'm talking about here so I don't ardently defend an indefensible position, simply because I'm passionate about it.

In the meantime, Cousland playthrough.

[TEWR]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Spirits are interrested in mortals. They just aren't interrested in crossing the veil. Usually anyway.

Spirits aren't interested in mortals. Justice is very clear on this in Awakening. He, and the others, believe society to be well beyond their help and it never occurred to them to take a greater part in society's affairs.

Faith, and similarly benign (but obviously, by no means safe) spirits that do take an interest, are the exception to the rule and not the rule itself.

[EmperorSahlertz]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Spirits are interrested in mortals. They just aren't interrested in crossing the veil. Usually anyway.

Spirits aren't interested in mortals. Justice is very clear on this in Awakening. He, and the others, believe society to be well beyond their help and it never occurred to them to take a greater part in society's affairs.

Faith, and similarly benign (but obviously, by no means safe) spirits that do take an interest, are the exception to the rule and not the rule itself.

They are interrested in mortals as in they watch and imitate. Not in as they want to interfere.

On an unrelated sidenote: When in the name of **** was it established that the Templars annulling Dairismund DIDN'T get permission first?

[Hellion Rex]

dragonflight288 wrote...

IIRC i thought the Seekers are only answerable to the Divine?

I'll have to agree with your last bit if they attacked the Dairsmund's Circle after the spilt, as they would lack the power to do so even though if the circle is full of abominations.

They are answerable only to the Divine, I stated in that post that I think that means a Seeker has to go to the Divine for permission, instead f the Grand Cleric. Remove the Divine's authority over them, then what remains? Are they protectors or invaders, defenders of truth, or aggressive, paranoid bigots? Only time (and the next game) will tell.

So yeah, it's important that we figure out when this annulment took place. If it happened before the split, then it might be called legal...barely, but if it didn't, then it was a rogue group of religious raiders.

Hmm....I need to do more research on it before making further comments. I want to make sure I know exactly what I'm talking about here so I don't ardently defend an indefensible position, simply because I'm passionate about it.

In the meantime, Cousland playthrough.

In the opening sentence of the annulement entry, it refers to the events of White Spire...I wonder if these were Lambert's Seekers or if they Justinia's...

[Hellion Rex]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Spirits are interrested in mortals. They just aren't interrested in crossing the veil. Usually anyway.

Spirits aren't interested in mortals. Justice is very clear on this in Awakening. He, and the others, believe society to be well beyond their help and it never occurred to them to take a greater part in society's affairs.

Faith, and similarly benign (but obviously, by no means safe) spirits that do take an interest, are the exception to the rule and not the rule itself.

They are interrested in mortals as in they watch and imitate. Not in as they want to interfere.

On an unrelated sidenote: When in the name of **** was it established that the Templars annulling Dairismund DIDN'T get permission first?

It doesn't say. It is a vague entry to say the least. We don't know if Lambert ordered it or if Justinia did. Or it might have been on the initiative of some other high up templar. 

And yes, I would agree that spirits are interested in mortals. And sometimes they do interfere, Wynne's Faith spirit being a prime example.

[Silfren]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Spirits are interrested in mortals. They just aren't interrested in crossing the veil. Usually anyway.

Spirits aren't interested in mortals. Justice is very clear on this in Awakening. He, and the others, believe society to be well beyond their help and it never occurred to them to take a greater part in society's affairs.

Faith, and similarly benign (but obviously, by no means safe) spirits that do take an interest, are the exception to the rule and not the rule itself.

They are interrested in mortals as in they watch and imitate. Not in as they want to interfere.

On an unrelated sidenote: When in the name of **** was it established that the Templars annulling Dairismund DIDN'T get permission first?

It's not established clearly one way or the other, but the First Enchanter's letter does make it sound like the Templars invoked the Right on the spot, without taking the time to send for it.  Nothing in that letter makes it sound at all like the Templars were fighting the mages, then stopped, sent word to the Divine or a Grand Cleric, and only then commenced to carry it out.

[TEWR]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

They are interrested in mortals as in they watch and imitate. Not in as they want to interfere.

On an unrelated sidenote: When in the name of **** was it established that the Templars annulling Dairismund DIDN'T get permission first?

Ah, okay. Misunderstood what you meant, then.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Silfren wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Spirits are interrested in mortals. They just aren't interrested in crossing the veil. Usually anyway.

Spirits aren't interested in mortals. Justice is very clear on this in Awakening. He, and the others, believe society to be well beyond their help and it never occurred to them to take a greater part in society's affairs.

Faith, and similarly benign (but obviously, by no means safe) spirits that do take an interest, are the exception to the rule and not the rule itself.

They are interrested in mortals as in they watch and imitate. Not in as they want to interfere.

On an unrelated sidenote: When in the name of **** was it established that the Templars annulling Dairismund DIDN'T get permission first?

It's not established clearly one way or the other, but the First Enchanter's letter does make it sound like the Templars invoked the Right on the spot, without taking the time to send for it.  Nothing in that letter makes it sound at all like the Templars were fighting the mages, then stopped, sent word to the Divine or a Grand Cleric, and only then commenced to carry it out.

Don't put too much into the wording of the letter... It isn't established one way or the other. The letter was written by someone awaiting execution, as an act of diffiance probably, I don't think historical accuracy was high on her priority list.

[Medhia Nox]

@cjones: You are somewhat mistaken. I'm not looking to defend the Rite of Annulment. I'm not a supporter of the Rite.

I "do" recognize the danger of what would amount to "demon breeding grounds" in the form of cults.  And I do believe it's exactly the sort of threat Templars are meant for.

The only reason I speculate on possibilities is to illuminate that both sides are reacting to an event that has so little in world support currently and forming opinions based on the tiny amount of information provided.

Heck - under the Harrowing Codex - they say the Rivani circle turns failed Harrowing mages into pigs and eats them. While the Codex says that it's likely preposterous... it might suggest something seriously deviant in Rivani.

Ignoring tidbits like this - I believe is willful ignorance.

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 03 octobre 2013 - 02:23 .

[dragonflight288]

eluvianix wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

IIRC i thought the Seekers are only answerable to the Divine?

I'll have to agree with your last bit if they attacked the Dairsmund's Circle after the spilt, as they would lack the power to do so even though if the circle is full of abominations.

They are answerable only to the Divine, I stated in that post that I think that means a Seeker has to go to the Divine for permission, instead f the Grand Cleric. Remove the Divine's authority over them, then what remains? Are they protectors or invaders, defenders of truth, or aggressive, paranoid bigots? Only time (and the next game) will tell.

So yeah, it's important that we figure out when this annulment took place. If it happened before the split, then it might be called legal...barely, but if it didn't, then it was a rogue group of religious raiders.

Hmm....I need to do more research on it before making further comments. I want to make sure I know exactly what I'm talking about here so I don't ardently defend an indefensible position, simply because I'm passionate about it.

In the meantime, Cousland playthrough.

In the opening sentence of the annulement entry, it refers to the events of White Spire...I wonder if these were Lambert's Seekers or if they Justinia's...

If they were Lambert's, then they were acting outside any official jurisdiction and are little more than raiders/bandits. If they're Justinia's, then they should've gone to her first, and I don't see her authorizing it, and they can still be held accountable.

[Heimdall]

dragonflight288 wrote...


If it happened after the templars split, then the templars become a rogue army attacking the mages there for being in contact with their families, and are little more than religious raiders. If this group of templars/seeker haven't split from the Chantry, that means they bypassed the part where they're supposed to get permission from the local Grand Cleric and the Seeker obviously didn't see fit to inform the Divine....

I really wish you'd stop propagating this.  The letter makes it clear that the teaching of female mages in the seer practices (Spirit possession) was atleast half the reason.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Lord Aesir wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...


If it happened after the templars split, then the templars become a rogue army attacking the mages there for being in contact with their families, and are little more than religious raiders. If this group of templars/seeker haven't split from the Chantry, that means they bypassed the part where they're supposed to get permission from the local Grand Cleric and the Seeker obviously didn't see fit to inform the Divine....

I really wish you'd stop propagating this.  The letter makes it clear that the teaching of female mages in the seer practices (Spirit possession) was atleast half the reason.

Yea, but that makes the Circle sounds partially to blame for it all, which is a huge no-go.

[Silfren]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...


If it happened after the templars split, then the templars become a rogue army attacking the mages there for being in contact with their families, and are little more than religious raiders. If this group of templars/seeker haven't split from the Chantry, that means they bypassed the part where they're supposed to get permission from the local Grand Cleric and the Seeker obviously didn't see fit to inform the Divine....

I really wish you'd stop propagating this.  The letter makes it clear that the teaching of female mages in the seer practices (Spirit possession) was atleast half the reason.

Yea, but that makes the Circle sounds partially to blame for it all, which is a huge no-go.

I don't think the family contact thing should be completely discounted.  We know for a fact that isolating mages from the outside world, including their families, IS the point of the Circles, and since the mage's letter mentioned BOTH the fact of interacting with families AND the seer possession thing, I have no doubt that it was a major reason--the mages were NOT locking themselves within the Circles to ne'er be seen again.  You have a point, yes, but given the nature of bias, if this Enchanter was actively trying to paint the templars in a bad light, I think she'd have gone about it in something of a different way....she DOES after all mention the willful possession.  I think her letter is accurate enough on the big points.

Two, I don't think the Circle is to blame at all, regardless of the possessing of seers.  Everything...EVERYTHING points to it being a practice that is not dangerous but is in fact well controlled, and the letter does imply that Annulment was invoked on the spot, without going through proper channels.  So sorry, but I think that the Circle wasn't to blame at all here.  The possession of Rivaini seers was something that was well known to the Chantry, so there is no way that it only just occurred to them that it might be a thing within the Circle itself, but it was also pretty clear that for all the unsanctioned magical activity, Rivain was surviving just fine without adhering to Chantry strictures.  

There was no need for the templars to go in and make demands of the Rivaini mages at all, and they were completely outside the law in calling for Annulment.  Someone, whether the Chantry under Justinia (Which I really doubt, personally), or someone else, simply couldn't stand the thought of the Rivaini Circle deigning to do its own thing, and decided to destroy them.  Not unlike a petulant child who can't handle not getting its own way.

Modifié par Silfren, 03 octobre 2013 - 05:39 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

Oh, I have no doubt that the degree of freedom the Dairismund Circle allowed its mages, played a huge part in its annulment. But I am also able to see, that the amges seeing their families, was not the whole reason.
We know from the letter, that the Templars at first simply tried to get the Circle under control. When that failed, they called the annulment.
And I don't neccesarily think the First Enchanter was trying to paint the Templars in a bad light. It doesn't seem like that was the case anyway. However, I don't think she cared much for historical accuracy either at that point. All she did, was retell the series of events from her own point of view. And it actually gives us a rather good look into what happened, but not a terribly detailed one.

And we can't say anything about the practice of the Seer, since we have ZERO data to speculate on. Rivain has always been one of the weakest nations, we could just as easily use that, as proof somehow, that the seer practice is bad, just as some people insist on using the fact that Rivain still stands as fact that it isn't.