626 réponses à ce sujet

[Fetunche]

Blood magic needs to be more powerful in game to make the fears about it more justified.

[DarthLaxian]

Nefla wrote...

I find it bad. It's taught by demons, it dominates the minds of others, it is purely destructive. If you actually want to protect people with magic, there are much better schools.

not if some of your enemies are templars - you don't stand much of a chance against them, if they sever your connection to the fade (and therefore: your mana!) and not if you want to be able to do real damage, without running out of mana (for a non-healing mage, it is the best tool available - use it when mana runs low, templars are near you or if you need one of it's abilities!)

so, no it is a TOOL - pure and simple.

guns are not evil either, even if the purpose of guns is to shoot things (people included!)

i depends on the user (friendly naive "merril-type" mage or slaving abomination - see the difference?) and weather he is corruptible (as i agree that there is temptation)

as for the - stupid! - arguments that it is taught by demons:

we don't know if it originated from them - it was just that origins gave us the specialization by making a deal with a demon (as other sources were blocked - say books (there's bloodmages that learned from books - or even accidentially cutting themselves!!!))

or that it draws demons to you more then other magic:

on the contrary: bloodmagic works without a fade connection (well you need to be a mage, but while you use it, you don't need the fade!) - so normal magic is much more dangerous in that regard!

so those two arguments are total bollocks!

and blood-magic is still a tool - one that can even be used for good, say the grey-warden-joining, phylacteries (if you like mages being controlled - i don't but it's an example of "benevolent" blood-magic), the seals in DA2: Legacy (that contained corypheus) etc.

yes, it is a very powerfull tool and it should probably not be given to anyone, but it should not be outlawed IMHO (just because of chantry propaganda)

greetings LAX

[Navasha]

I believe its really a question of individual morality. Blood Magic is taught by demons and usually in exchange for some really horrible things, like the soul of a child(connor). Even if a mage learns blood magic from someone else, that knowledge still came from some despicable act somewhere down the line. That initial act is pretty undeniably bad. So the question is similar to events that have been raised in the real world.

Do you believe we should use the scientific data that Germany collected on people during WWII? Some say yes, others no.

Blood magic also derives its power from life, pain, and suffering. So again its very use is questionable even if it could be used for good. We see this question come up in the real world too all the time.

Do you believe it is okay to torture people for information, if that information might save thousands of lives?

So I see blood magic as coming down to individual morality and can't easily be answered definitively. Its kind of up to each person how they view it. In a world like Thedas where most people are taught to view any magic, even the normal lyrium based kind, as an evil curse, I don't think you will find many people that will believe that blood magic is ever a 'good' thing.

[Xilizhra]

Do you believe we should use the scientific data that Germany collected on people during WWII? Some say yes, others no.

Well, we did, we do, and I'm fairly sure it's led to the greater good. And while I'm slightly uncertain about using Germany's data, we definitely used Japan's data and even let some Japanese war criminals off the hook if they'd work for us.

Blood magic also derives its power from life, pain, and suffering. So again its very use is questionable even if it could be used for good. We see this question come up in the real world too all the time.

Do you believe it is okay to torture people for information, if that information might save thousands of lives?

Irrelevant if you're only harming yourself (and because healing magic exists, that won't last).

[Ziggeh]

DarthLaxian wrote...


yes, it is a very powerfull tool and it should probably not be given to anyone, but it should not be outlawed IMHO (just because of chantry propaganda)

Who decides?

The fundimental problem with the "only a tool" argument is that you don't want crazy people running around with assualt rifles.

You wouldn't go on a spree because you're a responsible person, but the law has to encompass both you and Mr Shooty McLooney. 

You could regulate, but how would that work in this case given the ease of access and the very nature of the problem - mind control - making judgement itself fallible?

Modifié par Ziggeh, 23 septembre 2013 - 01:10 .

[Ophir147]

Fetunche wrote...

Blood magic needs to be more powerful in game to make the fears about it more justified.

Powerful? Maybe. More dangerous? Definitely.

I think it would be an acceptable trade off for a Blood Mage inquisitor to have access to more powerful spells at the risk of them backfiring and dealing critical damage to their own health pool, or even better cause them to frenzy (Think Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines) and attack anything around indiscriminately, allies and enemies alike.

[Xilizhra]

Ophir147 wrote...

Fetunche wrote...

Blood magic needs to be more powerful in game to make the fears about it more justified.

Powerful? Maybe. More dangerous? Definitely.

I think it would be an acceptable trade off for a Blood Mage inquisitor to have access to more powerful spells at the risk of them backfiring and dealing critical damage to their own health pool, or even better cause them to frenzy (Think Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines) and attack anything around indiscriminately, allies and enemies alike.

When has either one ever been referred to in lore?

[Laughing_Man]

Ziggeh wrote...

DarthLaxian wrote...


yes, it is a very powerfull tool and it should probably not be given to anyone, but it should not be outlawed IMHO (just because of chantry propaganda)

Who decides?

The fundimental problem with the "only a tool" argument is that you don't want crazy people running around with assualt rifles.

You wouldn't go on a spree because you're a responsible person, but the law has to encompass both you and Mr Shooty McLooney. 

You could regulate, but how would that work in this case given the ease of access and the very nature of the problem - mind control - making judgement itself fallible?

Very simple really.

The exitance of the templars proves that non-mages are able to cast dispel magics from the spirit-school at least to some degree with enough training.
Build a police force, composed of capable soldiers and investigators trained in the use of dispel magics, recruit some law abiding mages to help them too, and enforce the freaking law.

If you catch a criminal-mage, depends on what he did, give him a slap on his wrist, send him to prison, or take his head off.

People should be considered innocent until proven guilty. (or at least until they did something suspicious)

[Ophir147]

Xilizhra wrote...

Ophir147 wrote...

Fetunche wrote...

Blood magic needs to be more powerful in game to make the fears about it more justified.

Powerful? Maybe. More dangerous? Definitely.

I think it would be an acceptable trade off for a Blood Mage inquisitor to have access to more powerful spells at the risk of them backfiring and dealing critical damage to their own health pool, or even better cause them to frenzy (Think Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines) and attack anything around indiscriminately, allies and enemies alike.

When has either one ever been referred to in lore?

It's an abstraction used to show the dangers of blood magic, like 75% of the actual combat in game is an abstraction for one thing or another. 

The first is not as hard to understand, seeing as how blood magic has usually been depicted as requiring self-harm or a blood sacrifice to activate. Perhaps when activating that fireball spell the inquisitor accidentally cuts too deep and nicks some important stuff, or drew blood from a more vulnerable part of their body to fuel the spell.

And the second thing is called becoming an abomination; it has been shown that there are plenty of blood mages (Avernus, Flemeth) who are abominations or even non-maleficar mage abominations (Anders and Wynne) who are able to maintain a semblance of control over their actions. Its safe to assume that one does not have to be a misshapen monstrosity to be overwhelmed by the influence of a demon.

However, as abstractions there would be more clear ways of making blood magic dangerous... would you prefer getting a game over screen in the middle of a battle because of demonic possession?

[Xilizhra]

The first is not as hard to understand, seeing as how blood magic has usually been depicted as requiring self-harm or a blood sacrifice to activate. Perhaps when activating that fireball spell the inquisitor accidentally cuts too deep and nicks some important stuff, or drew blood from a more vulnerable part of their body to fuel the spell.

All you need is blood from anywhere; it's really not hard to use it in a nondamaging way.

And the second thing is called becoming an abomination; it has been shown that there are plenty of blood mages (Avernus, Flemeth) who are abominations or even non-maleficar mage abominations (Anders and Wynne) who are able to maintain a semblance of control over their actions. Its safe to assume that one does not have to be a misshapen monstrosity to be overwhelmed by the influence of a demon.

Neither Avernus nor Flemeth are abominations. Avernus, I have no idea where you even got that from; Flemeth is specifically stated by Morrigan to be something more in Witch Hunt, and not at all human. Wynne and Anders were not possessed involuntarily, nor were they possessed through blood magic, so it's not really relevant.

However, as abstractions there would be more clear ways of making blood magic dangerous... would you prefer getting a game over screen in the middle of a battle because of demonic possession?

The only time anyone's ever been possessed by a demon because of their own magic is when they're trying to summon a bunch and badly screw the spell up, like Uldred. So just don't do that and you'll be fine.

[billy the squid]

TheRedVipress wrote...

Ziggeh wrote...

DarthLaxian wrote...


yes, it is a very powerfull tool and it should probably not be given to anyone, but it should not be outlawed IMHO (just because of chantry propaganda)

Who decides?

The fundimental problem with the "only a tool" argument is that you don't want crazy people running around with assualt rifles.

You wouldn't go on a spree because you're a responsible person, but the law has to encompass both you and Mr Shooty McLooney. 

You could regulate, but how would that work in this case given the ease of access and the very nature of the problem - mind control - making judgement itself fallible?

Very simple really.

The exitance of the templars proves that non-mages are able to cast dispel magics from the spirit-school at least to some degree with enough training.
Build a police force, composed of capable soldiers and investigators trained in the use of dispel magics, recruit some law abiding mages to help them too, and enforce the freaking law.

If you catch a criminal-mage, depends on what he did, give him a slap on his wrist, send him to prison, or take his head off.

People should be considered innocent until proven guilty. (or at least until they did something suspicious)

Yeah, we'll just ignore the logistical problems of keeping track of every mage because the Circle is imprisonment, using a phalactery is oppressive, so well just wait for a body count when one mage decides to go nuts, or his reach exceeds his grasp and he's possessed or opens a veil tear. 

Hey, maybe we shouldn't worry about the aspect of blood magic mind control and the temptation to use it for personal gain. Because mages are a noble and opressed minority, and as such would never fall victim to such temptations. 

None of that's a concern and they're all being paranoid, right? Right guys?

[Ziggeh]

TheRedVipress wrote...

People should be considered innocent until proven guilty. (or at least until they did something suspicious)

I'm not clear how that applies. The regulation of dangerous substances and behaviours is seperate from criminal law. 

It is legally presumed I am not a murderer, but I'm not allowed to purchase weaponised anthrax because it's recognised socially that the consequences of misuse are too extreme to allow.

[Ziggeh]

billy the squid wrote...

None of that's a concern and they're all being paranoid, right? Right guys?

How would you know if that was truly your opinion or one that had been imposed by blood magic?

[Uccio]

Blood magic. Neutral, user decides which way to use it for, bad or good.

[Ophir147]

All you need is blood from anywhere; it's really not hard to use it in a nondamaging way.

I'll give you that one on a technicality.

Avernus nor Flemeth are abominations. Avernus, I have no idea where you even got that from; Flemeth is specifically stated by Morrigan to be something more in Witch Hunt, and not at all human. Wynne and Anders were not possessed involuntarily, nor were they possessed through blood magic, so it's not really relevant.

Avernus is probably a stretch (I haven't slept and it's 9 AM est), Flemeth is by any reasonable stretch of the imagination definitely an abomination. You can't pick and choose things out of the information that Morrigan has provided about Flemeth, it is highly likely that she has ulterior motives of her own to fulfill. Also I fail to see how Wynne and Anders are irrelevant in a conversation about how much influence demons/spirits have on their hosts. If you're going to get hung up on my list, consider Uldred and Connor as well, who were demonstrably possessed and even show an ability to change back into their demonic form upon confrontation (shapeshifting is a pretty common theme with abominations).

The only time anyone's ever been possessed by a demon because of their own magic is when they're trying to summon a bunch and badly screw the spell up, like Uldred. So just don't do that and you'll be fine.

It's funny that you mention that because that is the type of power I was talking about. One of a blood mage's most powerful tools is the ability to summon and bind a demon, something that is constantly referred to in-game but never used in any playable form.

In any case, I know how these arguments go with you Xilizhra. I'm not so interested in attempting the impossible so early in the morning 

[RobRam10]

Blood Magic is the path to glory and ascension.

[Xilizhra]

Avernus is probably a stretch (I haven't slept and it's 9 AM est), Flemeth is by any reasonable stretch of the imagination definitely an abomination. You can't pick and choose things out of the information that Morrigan has provided about Flemeth, it is highly likely that she has ulterior motives of her own to fulfill. Also I fail to see how Wynne and Anders are irrelevant in a conversation about how much influence demons/spirits have on their hosts. If you're going to get hung up on my list, consider Uldred and Connor as well, who were demonstrably possessed and even show an ability to change back into their demonic form upon confrontation (shapeshifting is a pretty common theme with abominations).

Flemeth's not an abomination, she's some kind of god, or possibly a unique dragon. As for the rest, it's irrelevant because there's no logical reason a blood mage who wasn't an idiot would be possessed anyway.

It's funny that you mention that because that is the type of power I was talking about. One of a blood mage's most powerful tools is the ability to summon and bind a demon, something that is constantly referred to in-game but never used in any playable form.

Because it's almost always a bad idea. Which is why just not having it would solve the problem of needing to deal with it in-game.

[Ryzaki]

Dislike it. Too much potential for abuse and I don't trust anyone with the ability to control minds no matter how altruistic they appear to be.

[Jaison1986]

It's for the weaklings. A real mage doesn't need to become an demon's ***** in order to become powerful. Morrigan and Bethany are living proofs. Other then that it annoys me how it's often shown as powrful lore/cutscene wise, but during gameplay is one of the weakest specializations.

[TheKomandorShepard]

Jaison1986 wrote...

It's for the weaklings. A real mage doesn't need to become an demon's ***** in order to become powerful. Morrigan and Bethany are living proofs. Other then that it annoys me how it's often shown as powrful lore/cutscene wise, but during gameplay is one of the weakest specializations.

i would argue about that for hours
"Other then that it annoys me how it's often shown as powrful lore/cutscene wise"
i just add here that they aren't so powerful as well mages and well cutscenes and that they are kicked by everyone is best prove that mages sucks.

[Cainhurst Crow]

Can animal blood be used for blood magic? Because I don't think it'd be hard to have a ready supply of blood from, say, the butcher shop or a local farm.

[billy the squid]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

Can animal blood be used for blood magic? Because I don't think it'd be hard to have a ready supply of blood from, say, the butcher shop or a local farm.

I doubt it, there's no indication that it can be. And if it could, then why the use of slaves and human or elvish sacrifice for hundreds s of years in Tevinter.

[frankf43]

Fetunche wrote...

Blood magic needs to be more powerful in game to make the fears about it more justified.

It needs to be more powerful in books also or the Mage Templar war would have been over the minute it started.

Blood mages are supposed to be the most powerful characters in the world able to bring down entire cities on their own, but twenty or thirty Blood mages hide cowering from four or five Templars.

In both the books and the games the Templars are real power house to be feared not magic. They enslave, torture, rape, terrorise and turn on anybody or anything that opposes them.  They even disobey and break away from the Chantry they proclaim to serve.

[Eterna]

eluvianix wrote...

Ieolus wrote...

sandalisthemaker wrote...

Technically, Avernus is corrupt.
Not possessed, per say, but he is quite corrupt due to years of prolific blood magic use.

Many magisters are also depicted as corrupt, such as in the comics.
Full on possession is probably rare, but there is always the risk.

Ok, now you have to define what corrupt means.

I would call Avernus pragmatic to an extreme, but not necessarily "corrupt".

He killed his fellow Grey Wardens to extend his own life and experiment. I'd call that pretty damn corrupt.