1858 réponses à ce sujet

[dragonflight288]

eluvianix wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

Yeah. Why are we debating this exactly. This debate somehow got a little circular.

I think it got started when I responded to Emperor's statement when he said "using blood magic just once makes you a blood mage" and I responded with a cheeky "if templars use phylacteries, they are using blood magic, so does that make them blood mages too?" sort of deal.

I think that's how we got started.

And there is an obvious difference between casting blood magic, and using a magical item crafted through blood magic (Even though phylacteries aren't crafted through blood magic, and it is the mere inclusion of blood in the process that labels it as such).

Ok, and who remotely casts spells on the rogue mage through the phylactery? The templar?

I don't think this has ever been made really clear.

Lord help us if the templar is the one who can do it. There are times when the lore boundaries begin to blur, and my head just starts to hurt.

Technically, it may be possible for the templar to do it without using magic. The tranquil at Ostagar talks about how lyrium-runes can make any spell viable with enchantment and any spell can be given permanency with enough knowledge of enchanting and runes.

If a templar had such knowledge of runes, and they already take lyrium regularly, would it not be possible for the templar to use the lyrium in their veins and a few runes (or wards like on the Victim's Door in the mage origin) to use those runes to cast spells on the mage through the phylactery without needing a mages help in the first place? (strictly a theory on my part.)

[dragonflight288]

eluvianix wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

And before this conversation inevitably turns to Tevinter, I'm just as skeptical of Black Chantry and the Magisters...heck, I'm just skeptical of anyone who has a great deal of power for long periods of time.

No man. Come to the dark side. Join your maleficar brethren.

I'm happy being an apostate living life and proving the chantry is wrong about mages inevitably turning to blood magic for the sake of turning to blood magic or demons. Nah, I'd rather learn how to shape-shift and practice flying. Maybe as a falcon so I can do super fast dives.

Bah, shape shifting is nothing next to the power of blood.

Maybe, but even if the templars had my phylactery, they would be able to track, but how would they find me if I'm a mole burrowing under their feet, or flying in a flock of birds? We know from Emerick in DA2 that if the templars follow a phylactery and find nothing, they'll call it a lost cause and abandon their search....or at least they did in Kirkwall where no one had accountability to their responsibilities.

[EmperorSahlertz]

The thing is that the spell from the phylactery is targeted at a specific mage. It is useless against other mages. So I would imagine that if it were indeed a spell the Templars could use, it would help against all mages, and not just the specifically tied to the phylactery.

[Hellion Rex]

dragonflight288 wrote...

Technically, it may be possible for the templar to do it without using magic. The tranquil at Ostagar talks about how lyrium-runes can make any spell viable with enchantment and any spell can be given permanency with enough knowledge of enchanting and runes.

If a templar had such knowledge of runes, and they already take lyrium regularly, would it not be possible for the templar to use the lyrium in their veins and a few runes (or wards like on the Victim's Door in the mage origin) to use those runes to cast spells on the mage through the phylactery without needing a mages help in the first place? (strictly a theory on my part.)

Well, Pharamond managed to create a binding circle with runes strong enough to contain a pride demon, and he had lost all magical capabilties. Stands to reason that a Templar with lyrium roaring through his veins could possibly power some runes.

[dragonflight288]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The thing is that the spell from the phylactery is targeted at a specific mage. It is useless against other mages. So I would imagine that if it were indeed a spell the Templars could use, it would help against all mages, and not just the specifically tied to the phylactery.

So the templars are using magic of their own volition without the aid of mages? 

[dragonflight288]

eluvianix wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

Technically, it may be possible for the templar to do it without using magic. The tranquil at Ostagar talks about how lyrium-runes can make any spell viable with enchantment and any spell can be given permanency with enough knowledge of enchanting and runes.

If a templar had such knowledge of runes, and they already take lyrium regularly, would it not be possible for the templar to use the lyrium in their veins and a few runes (or wards like on the Victim's Door in the mage origin) to use those runes to cast spells on the mage through the phylactery without needing a mages help in the first place? (strictly a theory on my part.)

Well, Pharamond managed to create a binding circle with runes strong enough to contain a pride demon, and he had lost all magical capabilties. Stands to reason that a Templar with lyrium roaring through his veins could possibly power some runes.

This theory allows us to see templars using magic themselves without being mages, and it doesn't break the lore already established.

[Hellion Rex]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The thing is that the spell from the phylactery is targeted at a specific mage. It is useless against other mages. So I would imagine that if it were indeed a spell the Templars could use, it would help against all mages, and not just the specifically tied to the phylactery.

Fair point. So again, it boils down to the blood of the target.

[dragonflight288]

eluvianix wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The thing is that the spell from the phylactery is targeted at a specific mage. It is useless against other mages. So I would imagine that if it were indeed a spell the Templars could use, it would help against all mages, and not just the specifically tied to the phylactery.

Fair point. So again, it boils down to the blood of the target.

And thereby is sanctioned blood magic....bloody hypocrites and pun is intended.

[Hellion Rex]

dragonflight288 wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The thing is that the spell from the phylactery is targeted at a specific mage. It is useless against other mages. So I would imagine that if it were indeed a spell the Templars could use, it would help against all mages, and not just the specifically tied to the phylactery.

Fair point. So again, it boils down to the blood of the target.

And thereby is sanctioned blood magic....bloody hypocrites and pun is intended.

Yes. We know its a form of blood magic, yes.

[dragonflight288]

I just wanted to make the pun. 

[EmperorSahlertz]

dragonflight288 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The thing is that the spell from the phylactery is targeted at a specific mage. It is useless against other mages. So I would imagine that if it were indeed a spell the Templars could use, it would help against all mages, and not just the specifically tied to the phylactery.

So the templars are using magic of their own volition without the aid of mages? 

Has it ever been in question that Templars use magic of their own?

[Hellion Rex]

dragonflight288 wrote...

I just wanted to make the pun. 

[Hellion Rex]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The thing is that the spell from the phylactery is targeted at a specific mage. It is useless against other mages. So I would imagine that if it were indeed a spell the Templars could use, it would help against all mages, and not just the specifically tied to the phylactery.

So the templars are using magic of their own volition without the aid of mages? 

Has it ever been in question that Templars use magic of their own?

. At last, they have seen the light! Hallelujah!

Modifié par eluvianix, 11 décembre 2013 - 07:38 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

Honestly, has it ever? We know they use lyrium, which is magic in its material form, to gain their abilities, which are magical in nature. So how can it ever be questioned that Templar abilities are magical in nature?

[Hellion Rex]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Honestly, has it ever? We know they use lyrium, which is magic in its material form, to gain their abilities, which are magical in nature. So how can it ever be questioned that Templar abilities are magical in nature?

Wow. Epic fail on my part. I was totally joking man.

Modifié par eluvianix, 11 décembre 2013 - 07:48 .

[dragonflight288]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Honestly, has it ever? We know they use lyrium, which is magic in its material form, to gain their abilities, which are magical in nature. So how can it ever be questioned that Templar abilities are magical in nature?

It has been in doubt, both by in-game characters as alluded to by Alistair when talking about templar abilities, and by people outside the game as well.

Some people think that using magic instantly means mage and/or possible possession by a demon that they can't conceive or consider the notion that templars use a form of magic as well. Normally I found this in my 12-14 year old siblings and some immature gamers at college, but I have also seen this to a limited degree in the debates here in the forums. Not from you or br3d or eluvianix, but some of the more hard-care pro-templars.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Honestly, has it ever? We know they use lyrium, which is magic in its material form, to gain their abilities, which are magical in nature. So how can it ever be questioned that Templar abilities are magical in nature?

I think it's explicitly stated in the packaged-in-the-box content of the very first game that Templars use magic, so no. I'd have to say it isn't in question.

Edit: Or maybe it is, from the look of dragonflight's post. 

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 11 décembre 2013 - 07:51 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

Well, delussion of the fanatics disregarded, since Templar abilities derive from Lyrium which is MAGIC, I think it safe for us to conclude that Templars indeed use magic, and then let the lunatics rave on in the night.

[Cainhurst Crow]

Difference between templar magic and mage magic is that templars can't be possessed from their dreams because of their powers. They go through a different set of consequences for their powers, but possession isn't one of them.

[Vulpe]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Honestly, has it ever? We know they use lyrium, which is magic in its material form, to gain their abilities, which are magical in nature. So how can it ever be questioned that Templar abilities are magical in nature?

Read the first paragraph from this comment  and point 2 from this commnet . This is my personal interpretation of how things go regarding magic energy, lyrium, templars, dwarves and I think there is a little more there.

[Lotion Soronarr]

dragonflight288 wrote...
That still does nothing to change the Chantry's, and the world at large's definition of what blood magic is. "Blood used in empowering or enhancing another spell, or blood/pain/death used as the source of power for the spell."

The phylactery may or may not require a mage to help make, but by using blood it becomes blood magic.

I disagreee.

Is the blood the source of power for a phylactery? Not that we know of.
As far as we know, blood is used a sample - like how one could give a dog a smell sample to track a fugitive. By the same logic, a vial of mages blood is used to track a mage.

I don't recall DG ever clearly stating that a phylactery is blood magic - only that it may be considered (by some) to be blood magic.

[Hellion Rex]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...
That still does nothing to change the Chantry's, and the world at large's definition of what blood magic is. "Blood used in empowering or enhancing another spell, or blood/pain/death used as the source of power for the spell."

The phylactery may or may not require a mage to help make, but by using blood it becomes blood magic.

I disagreee.

Is the blood the source of power for a phylactery? Not that we know of.
As far as we know, blood is used a sample - like how one could give a dog a smell sample to track a fugitive. By the same logic, a vial of mages blood is used to track a mage.

I don't recall DG ever clearly stating that a phylactery is blood magic - only that it may be considered (by some) to be blood magic.

If it were only us on the forums claiming it could be blood magic, that would be one thing, but we have actual templars in the games and novels connecting the dots as well.

Modifié par eluvianix, 11 décembre 2013 - 08:28 .

[Vulpe]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...
That still does nothing to change the Chantry's, and the world at large's definition of what blood magic is. "Blood used in empowering or enhancing another spell, or blood/pain/death used as the source of power for the spell."

The phylactery may or may not require a mage to help make, but by using blood it becomes blood magic.

I disagreee.

Is the blood the source of power for a phylactery? Not that we know of.
As far as we know, blood is used a sample - like how one could give a dog a smell sample to track a fugitive. By the same logic, a vial of mages blood is used to track a mage.

I don't recall DG ever clearly stating that a phylactery is blood magic - only that it may be considered (by some) to be blood magic.

Even the current Divine admits that it is blood magic. She says something like " Its something we tell ourselves to better sleep at night" when it's brought up that phylacteries are not blood magic.

[Hellion Rex]

JulianWellpit wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...
That still does nothing to change the Chantry's, and the world at large's definition of what blood magic is. "Blood used in empowering or enhancing another spell, or blood/pain/death used as the source of power for the spell."

The phylactery may or may not require a mage to help make, but by using blood it becomes blood magic.

I disagreee.

Is the blood the source of power for a phylactery? Not that we know of.
As far as we know, blood is used a sample - like how one could give a dog a smell sample to track a fugitive. By the same logic, a vial of mages blood is used to track a mage.

I don't recall DG ever clearly stating that a phylactery is blood magic - only that it may be considered (by some) to be blood magic.

Even the current Divine admits that it is blood magic. She says something like " Its something we tell ourselves to better sleep at night" when it's brought up that phylacteries are not blood magic.

Actually no. That line was given to contrast Lambert's defense of Tranquility, not phylacteries.

[Vulpe]

Ups, my bad.