1238 réponses à ce sujet

[The Elder King]

@Xilizhra: If you mean that all the players will be forced to support one faction in the mage rebellion, I disagree. I want the choice to decide which one I want to support, and to determine in which direction the revolution will go.
Though with different factions I didn't mean subversive ones. Again, I doubt that all the mages that want to defeat the templars will have the same opinion of what to do after the war, or on other topics important for the mages.

Modifié par hhh89, 13 novembre 2013 - 02:44 .

[TheKomandorShepard]

SgtSteel91 wrote...

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

I support extermination why because circles are not even half effective in protecing that my solution but also are very abusive and tyrannical so why just make mages pathetic lifes worse when we can just stop their suffering and gaining safety and save money that go for circle and templars pure profit.

I can't see that as very feasible because mages will always be born. Templars are going to kick down the doors of every family in Tedas with a newly born child and see if the kid is a mage or not? And there could be some families who are going to hide their mage children and fight the Templars to not have their children killed. Not to mention the potential for corruption. For example, Bill hates Ted so Bill tells the Templars that Ted's kid is a mage. Templars go to kill Ted's kid and Ted doesn't want that so he fights back. Templars arrest or even kill Ted because he's resisting. Now Bill can take Ted's property.

So what they can be always killed.Well we can always enforce law to kill mage and punish for those who protect them and even go one step more teach that mages are evil ,demons or other filth and most peoples follow society so i don't see that as problem see qunari for example peoples didn't had problems with burning someone at the stake because someone was "witch" .And that bill tells that ted have kid who is a mage is very good even if he did that because he hate ted one mage is going down.      

SgtSteel91 wrote...

I still think killing all Mages is barbaric and asking for a Mage Revolt that will be aimed at killing all non-mages.

How they go rebel when they are dead?

Modifié par TheKomandorShepard, 13 novembre 2013 - 02:52 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

Xilizhra wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
Too late. The traitors lost the vote and the Aequitarians have already united with the Libertarians.

Technically the traitors won the vote.....

The Chantry lost any kind of mandate to govern the Circle long ago.

You might like to think that, but again technically, no they didn't.

[SgtSteel91]

Killing all mages, to me, is also a creatively sterile move when you are axing a defining trait of Medieval Fantasy. I mean can you name any mainstream Medieval Fantasy setting, that most people would know, where Mages do not exist and magic is scarce? Without magic you'd probably get just Medieval Fiction, just a setting in not-Europe during the Medieval period. That doesn't seem that interesting to me.

Modifié par SgtSteel91, 13 novembre 2013 - 03:11 .

[TheKomandorShepard]

SgtSteel91 wrote...

Killing all mages, to me, is also a creatively sterile move when you are axing a defining trait of Medieval Fantasy. I mean can you name any mainstream Medieval Fantasy setting, that most people would know, where Mages do not exist and magic is scarce? Without magic you'd probably get just Medieval Fiction, just a setting in not-Europe during the Medieval period. That doesn't seem that interesting to me.

Well no one forces you into my route you can free mages and doom everyone or do anything what you want to do with them but best solution ans most practical is killing mages.

[MisterJB]

SgtSteel91 wrote...

Killing all mages, to me, is also a creatively sterile move when you are axing a defining trait of Medieval Fantasy. I mean can you name any mainstream Medieval Fantasy setting, that most people would know, where Mages do not exist and magic is scarce? Without magic you'd probably get just Medieval Fiction, just a setting in not-Europe during the Medieval period. That doesn't seem that interesting to me.

A Song of Ice and Fire. And it has received praise exactly because there isn't a wizard throwing a fireball at someone within the first pages.

Modifié par MisterJB, 13 novembre 2013 - 03:15 .

[The Elder King]

I agree on MisterJB's opinion (and example). Magic isn't necessary for making a good medieval fantasy book or game.
Though I doubt that Bioware is going towards the killing all mages/destroy magic route, as well as the opposite, making all people mages.

[Xilizhra]

hhh89 wrote...

@Xilizhra: If you mean that all the players will be forced to support one faction in the mage rebellion, I disagree. I want the choice to decide which one I want to support, and to determine in which direction the revolution will go.
Though with different factions I didn't mean subversive ones. Again, I doubt that all the mages that want to defeat the templars will have the same opinion of what to do after the war, or on other topics important for the mages.

Those, I think, will not come to actual fruition in terms of deciding what to do in-game, so I doubt any fighting will be necessary.

[dragonflight288]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

So what is the point of even having the Harrowing then, if it does not guarantee that you can always fight off possession? Just because you can do it once does not mean you will always be so lucky.

What is the point of having a final test for a driver's license? It is not the test that teaches you, it is the whole process up to the test that is important.

What do you think the mages learn during all those years they are in the Circle prior to their Harrowing? They of course learn to handle their magic. The Harrowing is simply a final test, used to prove that they have actually learned something. It is in itself not supposed to teach anyhting, or make the mage immune. It is supposed to be proof to the world, that the amge can handle himself, and that he has learned during his stay in the Circle.

So is the initiation ritual. In Kingdoms of Amalur, initiates have to train for years before they are even considered ready for the initiation test, but they go in there fully prepared and trained, but since it makes you face an aspect of your own potential, the circumstances and exact nature of the test are fluid and change from person to person, so in order to survive that test, you have to prove adaptable, skilled, show they can think on the fly, all the while facing some aspect of themselves.

I know such a test or a variant thereof does not exist in the DA universe, but it's an idea on what could be done if such a test could be devised. If you master those skills, you are just as, probably even more prepared as a mage than what the Harrowing does.

I recognize that the rules and risks of magic are very different compared to the two franchises, but I feel that the Harrowing, a test meant to put you face to face with a demon, is inherently flawed as a test for a few reasons.

One, they keep it secret from all apprentices up until they are dragged out of bed and taken to the Harrowing chamber, where they'll either die, be made tranquil or advance past apprenticeship.

Two, if mages were truly in as much danger of being possessed as the chantry and the templar claim, why haven't we seen all the apprentices become abominations in their sleep? They aren't fully trained, they haven't faced demons before, and yet they go to the Fade every single night when they dream. A somniari is different, but the average mage hasn't been shown to be at any more risk than non-mages until the Harrowing itself.

Three, all the Harrowing truly does is show that a mage has the capacity to resist a demon. It does nothing to guarantee the character, integrity or emotional health of the mages in question. The mage is told right from the beginning that if they fail, they'll die. They may already be planning on becoming maleficar or communing with demons like Tahrone, nor does it do anything to show mages aren't training to become blood mages like DuPuis, Quentin or debatedly Orsino, and I say debated because it isn't confirmed if he was an academic blood mage who never practiced or a practicing blood mage before the Annulment in Kirkwall. And since they're told from the beginning, all they have to do is resist once, as they know there's a sword poised to strike the moment they fail. Once the Harrowing is done, the sword is removed, or at least given greater distance between you and the templar wielding it, and the motivation to succeed no longer feels like a life-or-death struggle.

In the end, we have seen just as many, if not more abominations in two games from Harrowed mages than unharrowed ones, so the Harrowing is inefficient as a measure of ability for mages. Which is why I suggested another system that is also potentially lethal, as a possible alternative should such a means be developed. It doesn't exist now, but if it can be developed, then I think it would be better than the Harrowing.

[Br3admax]

Killing all mages is the absolute dumbest way to solve this. Not only is it virtually impossible, it only makes the mages angrier and they will have a reason to blow people up. Let's think about the consequences.

[The Elder King]

Xilizhra wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

@Xilizhra: If you mean that all the players will be forced to support one faction in the mage rebellion, I disagree. I want the choice to decide which one I want to support, and to determine in which direction the revolution will go.
Though with different factions I didn't mean subversive ones. Again, I doubt that all the mages that want to defeat the templars will have the same opinion of what to do after the war, or on other topics important for the mages.

Those, I think, will not come to actual fruition in terms of deciding what to do in-game, so I doubt any fighting will be necessary.

I doubt that  we'll be able choose which faction support, but I'd like to. Though since I don't think the conflict will end in this game, is possible we'll be able to in next game.
If your point is that by supporting the mages we'll have to defeat the possible factions that want the defeat of the mages rebellion, I agree.

[Xilizhra]

hhh89 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

@Xilizhra: If you mean that all the players will be forced to support one faction in the mage rebellion, I disagree. I want the choice to decide which one I want to support, and to determine in which direction the revolution will go.
Though with different factions I didn't mean subversive ones. Again, I doubt that all the mages that want to defeat the templars will have the same opinion of what to do after the war, or on other topics important for the mages.

Those, I think, will not come to actual fruition in terms of deciding what to do in-game, so I doubt any fighting will be necessary.

I doubt that  we'll be able choose which faction support, but I'd like to. Though since I don't think the conflict will end in this game, is possible we'll be able to in next game.
If your point is that by supporting the mages we'll have to defeat the possible factions that want the defeat of the mages rebellion, I agree.

What I'm hoping is that we'll need their help for the Veil tears and will thus have to defeat all of their foes as well.

[TheKomandorShepard]

Br3ad wrote...

Killing all mages is the absolute dumbest way to solve this. Not only is it virtually impossible, it only makes the mages angrier and they will have a reason to blow people up. Let's think about the consequences.

yes yes because elimination of danger or defusing a bomb is dumb solution we should just let it be .And what mages will do they already are proven only lose their fights and already are beaten it is only a matter of time.And now thanks to not killing mages we have situation that we have today.  

hhh89 wrote...

I agree on MisterJB's opinion (and example). Magic isn't necessary for making a good medieval fantasy book or game.
Though
I doubt that Bioware is going towards the killing all mages/destroy
magic route, as well as the opposite, making all people mages.

To be honest i rly hope for that route everything is better than supporting insane ticking bombs or sadist and fanatics that can't even do their job.

[MisterJB]

Icy Magebane wrote...
The Chantry teaches that mages are almost always at risk.  If the purpose of Circles is to minimize the threat posed by abominations, how is it beneficial to withhold knowledge of the Harrowing?  Wouldn't preparing them in advance be more useful?  The way it works now, a large percentage are guaranteed to either fail or will be too frightened to even attempt it.

The logic employed is that a demon is not going to give you a two weeks notice before trying to take over your mind. Therefore, in order to simulate this, the Templars awake you in the middle of the night in what was, for all intents, a perfectly normal day. If you are capable of defending yourself in these circunstaces, then that increases the possibility of you being able to defend your mind in the future which minimizes the threat posed by abominations.
If you are incapable and die, then you will also not be possessed in the future which minimizes the threat posed by abominations.
If you are too scared and would rather be made tranquil, then the demons will lose interest in possessing you which also minimizes the threat posed by abominations.

[Br3admax]

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

Killing all mages is the absolute dumbest way to solve this. Not only is it virtually impossible, it only makes the mages angrier and they will have a reason to blow people up. Let's think about the consequences.

yes yes because elimination of danger or defusing a bomb is dumb solution we should just let it be .And what mages will do they already are proven only lose their fights and already are beaten it is only a matter of time.And now thanks to not killing mages we have situation that we have today.  

You can't eliminate mages. More mages will always be born. Two, yes oppression does often make people angry. The difference between a mage and a bomb is that one is actually alive and is animate. Finally, what the f*ck does the end of this mean? Really, it doesn't make any sense at all. This is just you making things up at this point. Finally, the killing mages is why were are where we are, not the sparing of them. 

[The Elder King]

@Xilizhra: I don't think the players will be forced to make an alliance with the mages and help them. This regardless of the templars' role in DAI.

[TheKomandorShepard]

Br3ad wrote...

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

Killing all mages is the absolute dumbest way to solve this. Not only is it virtually impossible, it only makes the mages angrier and they will have a reason to blow people up. Let's think about the consequences.

yes yes because elimination of danger or defusing a bomb is dumb solution we should just let it be .And what mages will do they already are proven only lose their fights and already are beaten it is only a matter of time.And now thanks to not killing mages we have situation that we have today.  

You can't eliminate mages. More mages will always be born. Two, yes oppression does often make people angry. The difference between a mage and a bomb is that one is actually alive and is animate. Finally, what the f*ck does the end of this mean? Really, it doesn't make any sense at all. This is just you making things up at this point. Finally, the killing mages is why were are where we are, not the sparing of them. 

But of course that i can elimnate them. They are minority and when they will always born no one said that we can't kill them after they are born peoples destroy even themselves and most don't even think that mages are humans so i don't see here problem outside few individualists and mages won't survive long enough to complain. No we have situation today because templars and chantry spared mages bull****ing about mercy (yeah delivering fate worse than death) and then they are bull****ing about safety imprisoning  mages if they would decide to kill them instead play with them (when you destroy someone life make sure that you will kill them because they may back for revenge )   now we wouldn't have such problems with rebellion.  

Modifié par TheKomandorShepard, 13 novembre 2013 - 04:23 .

[Xilizhra]

hhh89 wrote...

@Xilizhra: I don't think the players will be forced to make an alliance with the mages and help them. This regardless of the templars' role in DAI.

Maybe, maybe not. But I continue to hope.

[Mikoto8472]

Its interesting.

One of the deal breakers for me regarding the current Circle system, besides that which has already been mentioned in this thread is the Chantry's way of quite literally stealing the newborn babies of female Circle Mages who happen to get pregnant. That alone is just about enough to convince me the Circles badly need a reform or to be dissolved entirely.

[Br3admax]

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

Killing all mages is the absolute dumbest way to solve this. Not only is it virtually impossible, it only makes the mages angrier and they will have a reason to blow people up. Let's think about the consequences.

yes yes because elimination of danger or defusing a bomb is dumb solution we should just let it be .And what mages will do they already are proven only lose their fights and already are beaten it is only a matter of time.And now thanks to not killing mages we have situation that we have today.  

You can't eliminate mages. More mages will always be born. Two, yes oppression does often make people angry. The difference between a mage and a bomb is that one is actually alive and is animate. Finally, what the f*ck does the end of this mean? Really, it doesn't make any sense at all. This is just you making things up at this point. Finally, the killing mages is why were are where we are, not the sparing of them. 

But of course that i can elimnate them. They are minority and when they will always born no one said that we can't kill them after they are born peoples destroy even themselves and most don't even think that mages are humans so i don't see here problem outside few individualists and mages won't survive long enough to complain. No we have situation today because templars and chantry spared mages bull****ing about mercy (yeah delivering fate worse than death) and then they are bull****ing about safety imprisoning  mages if they would decide to kill them instead play with them (when you destroy someone life make sure that you will kill them because they may back for revenge )   now we wouldn't have such problems with rebellion.  

I've never read anything more disturbing then this. 

[Br3admax]

Xilizhra wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

@Xilizhra: I don't think the players will be forced to make an alliance with the mages and help them. This regardless of the templars' role in DAI.

Maybe, maybe not. But I continue to hope.

This isn't one sided, no mater how much you want it to be Xil. 

[TheButterflyEffect]

 The Jews mages have my support.

Modifié par TheButterflyEffect, 13 novembre 2013 - 04:29 .

[TheKomandorShepard]

Xilizhra wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

@Xilizhra: I don't think the players will be forced to make an alliance with the mages and help them. This regardless of the templars' role in DAI.

Maybe, maybe not. But I continue to hope.

Wait wait you hope that we will be forced into supporting mages or i just wrong readed that because if first just...

[The Elder King]

Xilizhra wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

@Xilizhra: I don't think the players will be forced to make an alliance with the mages and help them. This regardless of the templars' role in DAI.

Maybe, maybe not. But I continue to hope.

I understand why you'd want that, but I'm against it. People should be free to choose which side support.
Would you still want that the game forces the players to support mages if there isn't a resolution to the mage-templar war?

[Xilizhra]

hhh89 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

@Xilizhra: I don't think the players will be forced to make an alliance with the mages and help them. This regardless of the templars' role in DAI.

Maybe, maybe not. But I continue to hope.

I understand why you'd want that, but I'm against it. People should be free to choose which side support.
Would you still want that the game forces the players to support mages if there isn't a resolution to the mage-templar war?

Yes, because it still makes for a much easier-to-make coherent storyline.