1238 réponses à ce sujet

[TK514]

edit:  Eh, tired.  Will write up something more substantial and less snappish later.

Modifié par TK514, 15 novembre 2013 - 02:45 .

[Hellion Rex]

TK514 wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

JulianWellpit wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

The Chant condems only the Maleficar..

Which in the context of its official Tevinter translation (one who is depraved) the Chantry interpretation of what a maleficar is happens to be only partially correct. A blood mage that's malevolent in their use is certainly a maleficar, but not all blood mages would qualify as maleficar.

Just as Ser Alrik would be a maleficar because of his depraved personality.

A maleficar is a mage ( normal or blood mage ) that uses his power to do harm. Here's the passage:

Magic exists to serve man, and never to rule over him. 
Foul and corrupt are they
Who have taken His gift
And turned it against His children.
They shall be named Maleficar, accursed ones.
They shall find no rest in this world
Or beyond.

Ah, but you could make the argument that  "His gift" can be interpreted as one's authority or abilities in general. Not necessarily magic.

Not in the context of that passage, you couldn't.

I was just saying that it is a possible argument on the passage, that's all.

[TEWR]

JulianWellpit wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

Ah, but you could make the argument that  "His gift" can be interpreted as one's authority or abilities in general. Not necessarily magic.

 Here's the entire passage :

These truths the Maker has revealed to me:
As there is but one world
One life, one death, there is
But one god, and He is our Maker.
They are sinners, who have given their love
To false gods.

Magic exists to serve man, and never to rule over him.
Foul and corrupt are they
Who have taken His gift
And turned it against His children.
They shall be named Maleficar, accursed ones.
They shall find no rest in this world
Or beyond.

All men are the Work of our Maker's Hands,
From the lowest slaves
To the highest kings.
Those who bring harm
Without provocation to the least of His children
Are hated and accursed by the Maker.

Those who bear false witness
And work to deceive others, know this:
There is but one Truth.
All things are known to our Maker
And He shall judge their lies.

All things in this world are finite.
What one man gains, another has lost.
Those who steal from their brothers and sisters
Do harm to their livelihood and to their peace of mind.
Our Maker sees this with a heavy heart.

--Transfigurations1:1-5

If you chose to see "His gift" as the gift of life, then yes, it's possible. They do seem to use the term "accursed" in a more general way.

Yup, seeing the entire thing makes me think my interpretation's right on the money.

[TK514]

eluvianix wrote...

TK514 wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

JulianWellpit wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

The Chant condems only the Maleficar..

Which in the context of its official Tevinter translation (one who is depraved) the Chantry interpretation of what a maleficar is happens to be only partially correct. A blood mage that's malevolent in their use is certainly a maleficar, but not all blood mages would qualify as maleficar.

Just as Ser Alrik would be a maleficar because of his depraved personality.

A maleficar is a mage ( normal or blood mage ) that uses his power to do harm. Here's the passage:

Magic exists to serve man, and never to rule over him. 
Foul and corrupt are they
Who have taken His gift
And turned it against His children.
They shall be named Maleficar, accursed ones.
They shall find no rest in this world
Or beyond.

Ah, but you could make the argument that  "His gift" can be interpreted as one's authority or abilities in general. Not necessarily magic.

Not in the context of that passage, you couldn't.

I was just saying that it is a possible argument on the passage, that's all.

Yeah, see my edit.

[Hellion Rex]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

JulianWellpit wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

Ah, but you could make the argument that  "His gift" can be interpreted as one's authority or abilities in general. Not necessarily magic.

 Here's the entire passage :

These truths the Maker has revealed to me:
As there is but one world
One life, one death, there is
But one god, and He is our Maker.
They are sinners, who have given their love
To false gods.

Magic exists to serve man, and never to rule over him.
Foul and corrupt are they
Who have taken His gift
And turned it against His children.
They shall be named Maleficar, accursed ones.
They shall find no rest in this world
Or beyond.

All men are the Work of our Maker's Hands,
From the lowest slaves
To the highest kings.
Those who bring harm
Without provocation to the least of His children
Are hated and accursed by the Maker.

Those who bear false witness
And work to deceive others, know this:
There is but one Truth.
All things are known to our Maker
And He shall judge their lies.

All things in this world are finite.
What one man gains, another has lost.
Those who steal from their brothers and sisters
Do harm to their livelihood and to their peace of mind.
Our Maker sees this with a heavy heart.

--Transfigurations1:1-5

If you chose to see "His gift" as the gift of life, then yes, it's possible. They do seem to use the term "accursed" in a more general way.

Yup, seeing the entire thing makes me think my interpretation's right on the money.

At the end of the day, it comes down to what you personally make of the passage.

[Hellion Rex]

TK514 wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

TK514 wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

JulianWellpit wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

The Chant condems only the Maleficar..

Which in the context of its official Tevinter translation (one who is depraved) the Chantry interpretation of what a maleficar is happens to be only partially correct. A blood mage that's malevolent in their use is certainly a maleficar, but not all blood mages would qualify as maleficar.

Just as Ser Alrik would be a maleficar because of his depraved personality.

A maleficar is a mage ( normal or blood mage ) that uses his power to do harm. Here's the passage:

Magic exists to serve man, and never to rule over him. 
Foul and corrupt are they
Who have taken His gift
And turned it against His children.
They shall be named Maleficar, accursed ones.
They shall find no rest in this world
Or beyond.

Ah, but you could make the argument that  "His gift" can be interpreted as one's authority or abilities in general. Not necessarily magic.

Not in the context of that passage, you couldn't.

I was just saying that it is a possible argument on the passage, that's all.

Yeah, see my edit.

Tis quite alright.

[Vulpe]

As I said in my edit, the second strophe seems to refer only to magic. Still the wiki states this:

"The word is derived (incorrectly) from the book Malleus Malificarum, written in 1484 by Heinrich Kramer, which means "Hammer of Witches". The word maleficus or malificus means "evil-doing, evil-doer", where malifica is the feminine form, so "an evil-doing woman". The ending -arum signifies the feminine genitive plural, so "of evil-doing women", i.e. of witches. The nominative plural of malifica is malificae. The correct word to be used in the game would have been malificus, "evil-doer, male witch", where -us is the masculine ending. The plural of malificus is malifici."

So in the end all comes to personal preferences.

[dragonflight288]

EDIT: deleted.

Modifié par dragonflight288, 15 novembre 2013 - 02:58 .

[TheKomandorShepard]

Icy Magebane wrote...

TheKomandorShepard wrote...
And what stops you from killing new born mages?

Magical abilities don't manifest until later in life.  There's no way of knowing if a newborn is a mage or not.

And still we have circles there mages are taken to circle so instead doing that we can kill them mage power is usually discovered in young age and there are methods to discover who is mage or not as we are shown unless in incompetent cases.

Bardox9 wrote...

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

Bardox9 wrote...

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

They can't just kill all mages, that would be literally impossible; instead, they pull this off to keep them leashed.

Why they can't i often hear that argument from pro-mages when it is possible

But well at least few points are rights so im surprised

Killing
all mages is not possible. Any human/elf child has the potential to be a
mage. A mages parents may have no history of magic in their family and
still have a mage child. You can't kill all mages any more than you can
kill all bigots.

And what stops you from killing new born mages?

Other
than a lack of willingness to kill newborns, nothing I suppose. But
even if you could tell at that age it will still not get rid of mages.
More will be born tomorrow and the day after that and the day after
that. How many babies would you have the Templars kill exactly? They
have trouble with their image already without the sudden appearance
of statues of a templar impaling an infant.

Reputation counts only when you want be nice ruler and folks don't approve your actions and folks will follow what person in charge will tell that was always in case see orlais.As many babies will born mages and not templars (well not chantry templars) humans did worse things in real life and that was fine until they lost.   

[dragonflight288]

Reputation counts only when you want be nice ruler and folks don't approve your actions and folks will follow what person in charge will tell that was always in case see orlais.As many babies will born mages and not templars (well not chantry templars) humans did worse things in real life and that was fine until they lost.

Or if you want the masses to follow you. If you are seen slaughtering children, that will hurt your image. And what would you do if the families see you coming and refuse to let you in at all? Would you slaughter the whole family to get to the kid?

[TheKomandorShepard]

dragonflight288 wrote...

Reputation counts only when you want be nice ruler and folks don't approve your actions and folks will follow what person in charge will tell that was always in case see orlais.As many babies will born mages and not templars (well not chantry templars) humans did worse things in real life and that was fine until they lost.

Or if you want the masses to follow you. If you are seen slaughtering children, that will hurt your image. And what would you do if the families see you coming and refuse to let you in at all? Would you slaughter the whole family to get to the kid?

Well folks didn't had problems with slaughter in alienage and i don't think that hurted guards reputation and arl howe until he stoped pay workers so you see too much in that and naive is thinking that peoples will care.How much families will have problem with that many of them gladly want just remove mage children from their lifes some will have problems with that sure then for trying be smartass will be heavy punishments and start teaching that mages are "evil" will only help in doing that. 

[Inprea]

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

Reputation counts only when you want be nice ruler and folks don't approve your actions and folks will follow what person in charge will tell that was always in case see orlais.As many babies will born mages and not templars (well not chantry templars) humans did worse things in real life and that was fine until they lost.

Or if you want the masses to follow you. If you are seen slaughtering children, that will hurt your image. And what would you do if the families see you coming and refuse to let you in at all? Would you slaughter the whole family to get to the kid?

Well folks didn't had problems with slaughter in alienage and i don't think that hurted guards reputation and arl howe until he stoped pay workers so you see too much in that and naive is thinking that peoples will care.How much families will have problem with that many of them gladly want just remove mage children from their lifes some will have problems with that sure then for trying be smartass will be heavy punishments and start teaching that mages are "evil" will only help in doing that. 

The templars have enough trouble with their image as is, mages aren't only born to lower class families and even now the templars can't find all the mages. Despite the risk they are families that hide their children despite the fear of mages the culture encourages. A family knowing that their child would be murdered would be even less likely to give up their child.

Given that to our knowledge mages will never stop being born they would outlast such a system. It could come to a very abrubt indeed when trying to murder the child of the wrong person.

Such a methedology would also be a huge problem whenever it came to repar rips in the veil and the next blight.

Modifié par Inprea, 15 novembre 2013 - 03:30 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Xilizhra wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I'd support the circle if they accept being supervised by states, as opposed to the Chantry.

Would this help? Orlais is pretty much the same thing except more militaristic, Antiva would be an utter nightmare (you'd probably have the Crows de facto running the Circle), none of the other nations seem terribly nice themselves, and the system would lend itself to having far more mages enter ordinary and unimportant wars.

There is such a risk, but international agreements can be made to limit the use of magic in warfare, as once happened with the banning of the crossbow.

Of course like everything else, there are pros and cons. And I'm certainly not including "failed states" like Antiva. By "states", I mean modernized ones, which I believe is what Celene is trying to do and what Anora can do. Perhaps even Nevarra. States with strong institutions and rule of law. It is I believe the only practical way for mages to become accepted members of the community, by participating in the political and economic system of their countries. 
 

[TheKomandorShepard]

Inprea wrote...

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

Reputation counts only when you want be nice ruler and folks don't approve your actions and folks will follow what person in charge will tell that was always in case see orlais.As many babies will born mages and not templars (well not chantry templars) humans did worse things in real life and that was fine until they lost.

Or if you want the masses to follow you. If you are seen slaughtering children, that will hurt your image. And what would you do if the families see you coming and refuse to let you in at all? Would you slaughter the whole family to get to the kid?

Well folks didn't had problems with slaughter in alienage and i don't think that hurted guards reputation and arl howe until he stoped pay workers so you see too much in that and naive is thinking that peoples will care.How much families will have problem with that many of them gladly want just remove mage children from their lifes some will have problems with that sure then for trying be smartass will be heavy punishments and start teaching that mages are "evil" will only help in doing that. 

The templars have enough trouble with their image as is, mages aren't only born to lower class families and even now the templars can't find all the mages. Despite the risk they are families that hide their children despite the fear of mages the culture encourages. A family knowing that their child would be murdered would be even less likely to give up their child.

Given that to our knowledge mages will never stop being born they would outlast such a system. It could come to a very abrubt indeed when trying to murder the child of the wrong person.

Such a methedology would also be a huge problem whenever it came to repar rips in the veil and the next blight.

I didn't saw templars trouble with their image and most society saw them as holly heroes (what is bull but still shows how society is blind and will close eyes just for convenience) only problem was meredith who affected on normal peoples life and they didn't liked that.See arl eamon and i don't think that noble or not would do much if society hates mage and openly teach that mages are evil (what i want to do). And familes that hide mage children is minority and with my teachings even more peoples would gladly sold mage and already most peoples would do that.And then i don't want chantry templars only new organization i need soldiers not religious fanatics.

About veil and grey wardens few mages are sufficient to prepare joining and fix veil problems in future so i can spare few but only that number of mages.    

[Xilizhra]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I'd support the circle if they accept being supervised by states, as opposed to the Chantry.

Would this help? Orlais is pretty much the same thing except more militaristic, Antiva would be an utter nightmare (you'd probably have the Crows de facto running the Circle), none of the other nations seem terribly nice themselves, and the system would lend itself to having far more mages enter ordinary and unimportant wars.

There is such a risk, but international agreements can be made to limit the use of magic in warfare, as once happened with the banning of the crossbow.

Of course like everything else, there are pros and cons. And I'm certainly not including "failed states" like Antiva. By "states", I mean modernized ones, which I believe is what Celene is trying to do and what Anora can do. Perhaps even Nevarra. States with strong institutions and rule of law. It is I believe the only practical way for mages to become accepted members of the community, by participating in the political and economic system of their countries. 
 

So... what happens with Antiva's Circle? Will the Chantry still run it? What'll you do about Antivans pissed off that they've been singled out to not be able to manage their own mages, especially when many of them are expert assassins (expert enough, apparently, to deter actual military invasions)? How do you intend to talk the Chantry out of it, and the mages into it? How will lyrium trade be handled if every nation now has to do their own? What happens if Orzammar forms an alliance with one surface nation that's good enough to start squeezing others out of their lyrium?

It's not insurmountable, but it should all be considered.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Xilizhra wrote...
So... what happens with Antiva's Circle? Will the Chantry still run it? What'll you do about Antivans pissed off that they've been singled out to not be able to manage their own mages, especially when many of them are expert assassins (expert enough, apparently, to deter actual military invasions)? How do you intend to talk the Chantry out of it, and the mages into it? How will lyrium trade be handled if every nation now has to do their own? What happens if Orzammar forms an alliance with one surface nation that's good enough to start squeezing others out of their lyrium?

It's not insurmountable, but it should all be considered.

Yea I considered all this back when I headcannoned my Arcturus Cousland and his plans. He of course only thought in terms of Ferelden interests, so that should answer your question about Orzammar forming an alliance with one nation to squeeze the rest when Ferelden is strong enough. 

I'm not that invested in DA again for me to write long enthusiastic reponses, but these are good questions and obstacles that need to be addressed for sure. 

[Xilizhra]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
So... what happens with Antiva's Circle? Will the Chantry still run it? What'll you do about Antivans pissed off that they've been singled out to not be able to manage their own mages, especially when many of them are expert assassins (expert enough, apparently, to deter actual military invasions)? How do you intend to talk the Chantry out of it, and the mages into it? How will lyrium trade be handled if every nation now has to do their own? What happens if Orzammar forms an alliance with one surface nation that's good enough to start squeezing others out of their lyrium?

It's not insurmountable, but it should all be considered.

Yea I considered all this back when I headcannoned my Arcturus Cousland and his plans. He of course only thought in terms of Ferelden interests, so that should answer your question about Orzammar forming an alliance with one nation to squeeze the rest when Ferelden is strong enough. 

I'm not that invested in DA again for me to write long enthusiastic reponses, but these are good questions and obstacles that need to be addressed for sure. 

Well, perhaps DAI will do so for you. I enjoyed having you when your protagonists weren't being horrible.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 15 novembre 2013 - 04:04 .

[dragonflight288]

Well folks didn't had problems with slaughter in alienage and i
don't think that hurted guards reputation and arl howe until he stoped
pay workers so you see too much in that and naive is thinking that
peoples will care.How much families will have problem with that many of
them gladly want just remove mage children from their lifes some will
have problems with that sure then for trying be smartass will be heavy
punishments and start teaching that mages are "evil" will only help in
doing that. 

But most folks see elves as less than humans. It isn't the same when you're slaughtering human kids and families. And what if you have to kill the son of a powrerful arl or bann, or even the King's heir? 

You will swiftly get on the bad side of the rulers, so unless you plan a military coup of a country, chances are you'll make some very powerful enemies...and even if you did do the coup, you'd still make powerful enemies.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Xilizhra wrote...
I enjoyed having you when your protagonists weren't being horrible.

[TheKomandorShepard]

dragonflight288 wrote...

Well folks didn't had problems with slaughter in alienage and i
don't think that hurted guards reputation and arl howe until he stoped
pay workers so you see too much in that and naive is thinking that
peoples will care.How much families will have problem with that many of
them gladly want just remove mage children from their lifes some will
have problems with that sure then for trying be smartass will be heavy
punishments and start teaching that mages are "evil" will only help in
doing that. 

But most folks see elves as less than humans. It isn't the same when you're slaughtering human kids and families. And what if you have to kill the son of a powrerful arl or bann, or even the King's heir? 

You will swiftly get on the bad side of the rulers, so unless you plan a military coup of a country, chances are you'll make some very powerful enemies...and even if you did do the coup, you'd still make powerful enemies.

First folks see mages as less than humans as well , they see them as monsters and insult for maker why do you think that they want remove mage children after seeing that child is a mage? Well asuming that they care about their children (what i doubt that most will do that) still majority of nobles will hate mages and will be on my side even just for convenience because i have power and they fear me or just don't want walking abomnations around.And for more "bold" nobles i will have army to destroy them.   

[EmperorSahlertz]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

The Chant condems only the Maleficar..

Which in the context of its official Tevinter translation (one who is depraved) the Chantry interpretation of what a maleficar is happens to be only partially correct. A blood mage that's malevolent in their use is certainly a maleficar, but not all blood mages would qualify as maleficar.

Just as Ser Alrik would be a maleficar because of his depraved personality.

If you are going by the literal translation, then why use the foreign word at all? Just say that you will hunt all kinds of depravity, which of course I'd hope you want to do anyway.

Maleficar has since its original conception in the Tevene language mutated and have come to hold a new meaning. And that is the meaning of a mage who uses illegal magic (not necessarily blood magic). I doubt you will find anyone outside of Tevinter (and I even doubt any in Tevinter itself) who will be using the word in its original meaning anywhere.

[TK514]

I think the word you'd want to use for Ser Alrik is 'criminal'.

Edit:  and probably 'heretic'.

Modifié par TK514, 15 novembre 2013 - 05:34 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

TK514 wrote...

I think the word you'd want to use for Ser Alrik is 'criminal'.

Well.. He was a depraved criminal. Forcing the Rite of Tranquility on someone, and then using them as a sexdoll, is not exactly something a paragon of morality would do.

[TK514]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

TK514 wrote...

I think the word you'd want to use for Ser Alrik is 'criminal'.

Well.. He was a depraved criminal. Forcing the Rite of Tranquility on someone, and then using them as a sexdoll, is not exactly something a paragon of morality would do.

I don't really know what secular law has to say on the subject of tranquility, but Chantry law is pretty clear, and he undeniably broke that.  Which makes him a heretic, at the least.  Certainly grounds for removal from his position, possibly grounds for excommunication.  We don't have any information about the legality of his other actions, but I would hope they are illegal from a secular viewpoint, which means imprisonment at the least, or possibly execution.

Regardless, he's dead now, and I think he got off lightly.

Modifié par TK514, 15 novembre 2013 - 05:47 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

TK514 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

TK514 wrote...

I think the word you'd want to use for Ser Alrik is 'criminal'.

Well.. He was a depraved criminal. Forcing the Rite of Tranquility on someone, and then using them as a sexdoll, is not exactly something a paragon of morality would do.

I don't really know what secular law has to say on the subject of tranquility, but Chantry law is pretty clear, and he undeniably broke that.  Which makes him a heretic, at the least.  Certainly grounds for removal from his position, possibly grounds for excommunication.  We don't have any information about the legality of his other actions, but I would hope they are illegal from a secular viewpoint, which means imprisonment at the least, or possibly execution.

Regardless, he's dead now, and I think he got off lightly.

Chantry law is not the same as chantry doctrine. Alrik was not a heretic since he still adhered to the dogma of the Chantry. He was a criminal because he broke the laws the Chantry had put in place. But these laws are not of a divine nature.