891 réponses à ce sujet

[Red Panda]

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

OperatingWookie wrote...

Would a triad of balance work to keep things in check?

Seekers watch Templars. Templars watch Mages. Mages watch Seekers.

For every mage there will be a seeker and a templar. All shall keep the other in check.

Perhaps that may create some balance where there is none.

Oh yeah wait that was current idea how well it worked well just see

I don't actually think that that has actually been tried in a situation that isn't FUBAR like it currently is in the DA universe.

In fact, it was only mages and templars with a one way overseeing of abuses.

[Lord Raijin]

AresKeith wrote...

Lord Raijin wrote...

As a mage supporter I declare holy war against the Qunari for the way they treat their mages!

Except you can't

Why not?

[lil yonce]

OperatingWookie wrote...

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

OperatingWookie wrote...
Would a triad of balance work to keep things in check?
Seekers watch Templars. Templars watch Mages. Mages watch Seekers.
For every mage there will be a seeker and a templar. All shall keep the other in check.
Perhaps that may create some balance where there is none.

Oh yeah wait that was current idea how well it worked well just see

I don't actually think that that has actually been tried in a situation that isn't FUBAR like it currently is in the DA universe.
In fact, it was only mages and templars with a one way overseeing of abuses.

What's to stop mages from corrupting the Seekers, and thus the whole system to magi advantage?

[Red Panda]

Youth4Ever wrote...

OperatingWookie wrote...

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

OperatingWookie wrote...
Would a triad of balance work to keep things in check?
Seekers watch Templars. Templars watch Mages. Mages watch Seekers.
For every mage there will be a seeker and a templar. All shall keep the other in check.
Perhaps that may create some balance where there is none.

Oh yeah wait that was current idea how well it worked well just see

I don't actually think that that has actually been tried in a situation that isn't FUBAR like it currently is in the DA universe.
In fact, it was only mages and templars with a one way overseeing of abuses.

What's to stop mages from corrupting the Seekers, and thus the whole system to magi advantage?

Templars.


They need them too to put the system in their advantage.

[lil yonce]

OperatingWookie wrote...

Youth4Ever wrote...
What's to stop mages from corrupting the Seekers, and thus the whole system to magi advantage?

Templars.
They need them too to put the system in their advantage.

And if the mages convince the Seekers to curb templar oversight?

[TheKomandorShepard]

OperatingWookie wrote...

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

OperatingWookie wrote...

Would a triad of balance work to keep things in check?

Seekers watch Templars. Templars watch Mages. Mages watch Seekers.

For every mage there will be a seeker and a templar. All shall keep the other in check.

Perhaps that may create some balance where there is none.

Oh yeah wait that was current idea how well it worked well just see

I don't actually think that that has actually been tried in a situation that isn't FUBAR like it currently is in the DA universe.

In fact, it was only mages and templars with a one way overseeing of abuses.

technically it should work that way and that was system concept in reality it ended well that what we had before well so it is only repeating that same solution expecting result to be different and well you know what insanity is?

[dragonflight288]

Youth4Ever wrote...

OperatingWookie wrote...

Youth4Ever wrote...
What's to stop mages from corrupting the Seekers, and thus the whole system to magi advantage?

Templars.
They need them too to put the system in their advantage.

And if the mages convince the Seekers to curb templar oversight?

What's to stop the Seekers from corrupting the templars? What's to stop the templars from using mages to corrupt the seekers for their own ends?

This is a circle that can go on and on. We can deal with hypotheticals all day, but ultimately I guess it would depend on the system. Say the Circle can requisition lyrium for their magical rituals, but before the order can be processed, the templars have to get a full report on how much lyrium, what it's being used for, who's using it and so on. If the Templars wanted lyrium for their new recruits, the Seekers would have to approve the order.

Or if a mage wanted to open a clinic in a town, they could let the Seekers know who would go appraise a location, and see if there are templars in the area, and if there are not, the Seeker can also have the power to deny that same mage or see if there are templars willing to be stationed there to keep an eye on the mage but also to help keep the peace in the town.

A system of checks and balances is the best bet. But you won't find a fool-proof method as there never will be one. Any system devised by man, elf or dwarf can be corrupted and abused.

[Toasted Llama]

dragonflight288 wrote...

Thing is, Templars aren't forcibly recruited or chosen from birth. It's a career that many can elect to to to enter. If you were a candidate for the templars, you are equally qualified to be in the army for your King/Queen of whatever country you live in, or a member of the city-guard.

Templars are nothing more than trained soldiers who fight for the Chantry's interests in Exalted Marches and protect the world from rogue mages, blood mages and abominations, or at least they're supposed to. Only difference between them and another soldier is one takes lyrium and works for the Chantry compared to the crown.

This leads to the can of worms that if you forcibly draft working men and women into the templars with no rights whatsoever, you are robbing communities of shop-keepers, farmers, and countries of soldiers.

In that case there should be a seperate order for the templars that keep an eye out on mages.

Well yes, that's true. But what would you rather have? Corrupted templars that oppress mages that rebel or mages running loose? Either is going to be a problem anyway. Especially when these mages become hostile, since regular soldiers can't do sh*t against a mage.

This is exactly the same thing that the Grey Wardens do to fight the blight. Instead of fighting and preventing the darkspawn, these templars will be watching over mages, though they can also be used as an army, combined with the mages, to protect the country. (as I know that Grey Wardens aren't always needed, though their first job is fighting darkspawn)

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

Oh dear this system is so
navie and ultimately ends there where it started on abuses and templars
having absolute power and well on incompetence and many magical
incidents...

Good god you're a big pessimist aren't you?

What
even evil means it is chantry that which dictates morality and they are
fanatics and hypocrites ignoring issues of corruption chantry proved
that they don't care about mages so i don't have to tell how it will end
when power is ultimately in their hands.

I never
said that the Chantry was the one to set up the guidelines about who is
"evil" and who isn't. There should be some sort of contract that mages,
the chantry, political leaders and the regular people all have a say in.
There will have to be compromises. If the Chantry is not willing to
give in and make room for mages, then they have no right at all to
controll mages and they will be let loose. Maleficarum everywhere. I think the Chantry doesn't want that either.

And just like the Grey Warden treaties, everyone is forced to acknowledge this contract.

So
in practice this you have to do what I want you to do and in return you
will get freedom to do what the heck i want you to do.And when i state
that you are "evil" or corrupted (you won't do what i the heck want you
to do) i will take your freedom to do what the heck i want you to do...
it exists already and it is called circle of mages [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/lol.png[/smilie]  

Who
said that there is only one person who says what you do? As I've noted
before, mages have the full right to step up and explain why they do not
think their order is justified.

Now it funny that you
think that templars will be in charge and let mages punish them simple
it will end only as theory like that templars protect mages or seekers
punish templars for abuses...

Never thought it would ever come in handy but... Blood magic. Not even a templar can stop that.

And
now we have that no mage can be proved simple every mage can be easy
victim of demon as we shown that is no problem for demon possess mage so
simple trusted mages will never exist...

You're anti-mage. Get out.

[Red Panda]

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

OperatingWookie wrote...

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

OperatingWookie wrote...

Would a triad of balance work to keep things in check?

Seekers watch Templars. Templars watch Mages. Mages watch Seekers.

For every mage there will be a seeker and a templar. All shall keep the other in check.

Perhaps that may create some balance where there is none.

Oh yeah wait that was current idea how well it worked well just see

I don't actually think that that has actually been tried in a situation that isn't FUBAR like it currently is in the DA universe.

In fact, it was only mages and templars with a one way overseeing of abuses.

technically it should work that way and that was system concept in reality it ended well that what we had before well so it is only repeating that same solution expecting result to be different and well you know what insanity is?

Not in the slightest.

Templars simply overseeing mages is nothing like the rock-paper-scissors system I proposed using seekers, templars, and mages.

Mages would have some authority there.

[TheKomandorShepard]

dragonflight288 wrote...

Youth4Ever wrote...

OperatingWookie wrote...

Youth4Ever wrote...
What's to stop mages from corrupting the Seekers, and thus the whole system to magi advantage?

Templars.
They need them too to put the system in their advantage.

And if the mages convince the Seekers to curb templar oversight?

What's to stop the Seekers from corrupting the templars? What's to stop the templars from using mages to corrupt the seekers for their own ends?

This is a circle that can go on and on. We can deal with hypotheticals all day, but ultimately I guess it would depend on the system. Say the Circle can requisition lyrium for their magical rituals, but before the order can be processed, the templars have to get a full report on how much lyrium, what it's being used for, who's using it and so on. If the Templars wanted lyrium for their new recruits, the Seekers would have to approve the order.

Or if a mage wanted to open a clinic in a town, they could let the Seekers know who would go appraise a location, and see if there are templars in the area, and if there are not, the Seeker can also have the power to deny that same mage or see if there are templars willing to be stationed there to keep an eye on the mage but also to help keep the peace in the town.

A system of checks and balances is the best bet. But you won't find a fool-proof method as there never will be one. Any system devised by man, elf or dwarf can be corrupted and abused.

discussion about circle politics have little sense because because they don't work despite harsh treatment of mages and to attempt to control hardly works as we saw they are walking end of the world and they can't be controled they have very little world to offer and are extremely toxic for world blight , abomnations etc.It is like imprisoning bruce banner like normal prisoner and couting that will stop hulk...

[TK514]

dragonflight288 wrote...

Youth4Ever wrote...

OperatingWookie wrote...

Youth4Ever wrote...
What's to stop mages from corrupting the Seekers, and thus the whole system to magi advantage?

Templars.
They need them too to put the system in their advantage.

And if the mages convince the Seekers to curb templar oversight?

What's to stop the Seekers from corrupting the templars? What's to stop the templars from using mages to corrupt the seekers for their own ends?

This is a circle that can go on and on. We can deal with hypotheticals all day, but ultimately I guess it would depend on the system. Say the Circle can requisition lyrium for their magical rituals, but before the order can be processed, the templars have to get a full report on how much lyrium, what it's being used for, who's using it and so on. If the Templars wanted lyrium for their new recruits, the Seekers would have to approve the order.

Or if a mage wanted to open a clinic in a town, they could let the Seekers know who would go appraise a location, and see if there are templars in the area, and if there are not, the Seeker can also have the power to deny that same mage or see if there are templars willing to be stationed there to keep an eye on the mage but also to help keep the peace in the town.

A system of checks and balances is the best bet. But you won't find a fool-proof method as there never will be one. Any system devised by man, elf or dwarf can be corrupted and abused.

Yeah, but only the mages are capable of actual mind control.

[Red Panda]

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

Youth4Ever wrote...

OperatingWookie wrote...

Youth4Ever wrote...
What's to stop mages from corrupting the Seekers, and thus the whole system to magi advantage?

Templars.
They need them too to put the system in their advantage.

And if the mages convince the Seekers to curb templar oversight?

What's to stop the Seekers from corrupting the templars? What's to stop the templars from using mages to corrupt the seekers for their own ends?

This is a circle that can go on and on. We can deal with hypotheticals all day, but ultimately I guess it would depend on the system. Say the Circle can requisition lyrium for their magical rituals, but before the order can be processed, the templars have to get a full report on how much lyrium, what it's being used for, who's using it and so on. If the Templars wanted lyrium for their new recruits, the Seekers would have to approve the order.

Or if a mage wanted to open a clinic in a town, they could let the Seekers know who would go appraise a location, and see if there are templars in the area, and if there are not, the Seeker can also have the power to deny that same mage or see if there are templars willing to be stationed there to keep an eye on the mage but also to help keep the peace in the town.

A system of checks and balances is the best bet. But you won't find a fool-proof method as there never will be one. Any system devised by man, elf or dwarf can be corrupted and abused.

discussion about circle politics have little sense because because they don't work despite harsh treatment of mages and to attempt to control hardly works as we saw they are walking end of the world and they can't be controled they have very little world to offer and are extremely toxic for world blight , abomnations etc.It is like imprisoning bruce banner like normal prisoner and couting that will stop hulk...

This isn't about circle politics, this is about a checks and balances system where most issues can be kept under control since it's very unlikely that all will abuse power at one time.

[Red Panda]

TK514 wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

Youth4Ever wrote...

OperatingWookie wrote...

Youth4Ever wrote...
What's to stop mages from corrupting the Seekers, and thus the whole system to magi advantage?

Templars.
They need them too to put the system in their advantage.

And if the mages convince the Seekers to curb templar oversight?

What's to stop the Seekers from corrupting the templars? What's to stop the templars from using mages to corrupt the seekers for their own ends?

This is a circle that can go on and on. We can deal with hypotheticals all day, but ultimately I guess it would depend on the system. Say the Circle can requisition lyrium for their magical rituals, but before the order can be processed, the templars have to get a full report on how much lyrium, what it's being used for, who's using it and so on. If the Templars wanted lyrium for their new recruits, the Seekers would have to approve the order.

Or if a mage wanted to open a clinic in a town, they could let the Seekers know who would go appraise a location, and see if there are templars in the area, and if there are not, the Seeker can also have the power to deny that same mage or see if there are templars willing to be stationed there to keep an eye on the mage but also to help keep the peace in the town.

A system of checks and balances is the best bet. But you won't find a fool-proof method as there never will be one. Any system devised by man, elf or dwarf can be corrupted and abused.

Yeah, but only the mages are capable of actual mind control.

Then let all know the litany of adralla. Mind control can be stopped in most cases then.

Even then, it is inevitable that some strong-willed individuals may be able to resist even without it.

[lil yonce]

dragonflight288 wrote...

Youth4Ever wrote...
And if the mages convince the Seekers to curb templar oversight?

What's to stop the Seekers from corrupting the templars? What's to stop the templars from using mages to corrupt the seekers for their own ends?

Mages with abundant power and few, if any true restraints, are a greater danger than templars or Seekers with a similar degree of power. Magic is the kicker.

This is a circle that can go on and on. We can deal with hypotheticals all day, but ultimately I guess it would depend on the system. Say the Circle can requisition lyrium for their magical rituals, but before the order can be processed, the templars have to get a full report on how much lyrium, what it's being used for, who's using it and so on. If the Templars wanted lyrium for their new recruits, the Seekers would have to approve the order.

And why should Seekers or templars have authority over lyrium orders? If for whatever reason there is a project they dislike, they can prevent its happening without contest.

Or if a mage wanted to open a clinic in a town, they could let the Seekers know who would go appraise a location, and see if there are templars in the area, and if there are not, the Seeker can also have the power to deny that same mage or see if there are templars willing to be stationed there to keep an eye on the mage but also to help keep the peace in the town.

And why do Seekers have ultimate authority? Why is there no bilateral channel between templars and mages?

A system of checks and balances is the best bet. But you won't find a fool-proof method as there never will be one. Any system devised by man, elf or dwarf can be corrupted and abused.

I don't imagine this system working. Power is in control. Like before, one faction will have authority the others will resent. There should be a set of regulations, agreed to by all parties, the Circle is to abide by, monitering by a regulating body with a proper appeals process, and templars to guard against abominations, demons, and rogue mages, but their "watching" the circle must come to an end. A successful circle will require adequate self-governance. And mages "watching" Seekers-- its a hop, skip, and jump away from the Tevinter system of mages controlling templars.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 25 décembre 2013 - 09:14 .

[Red Panda]

Youth4Ever wrote...
I don't imagine this system working. Power is in control. Like before, one faction will have authority the others will resent. There should be a set of regulations, agreed to by all parties, the Circle is to abide by, monitering by a regulating body with a proper appeals process, and templars to guard against abominations, demons, and rogue mages, but their "watching" the circle must come to an end. A successful circle will require adequate self-governance. And mages "watching" Seekers-- its a hop, skip, and jump away from the Tevinter system of mages controlling the templars.

The difference here is that mages would have more to go through to control the entire system.


There is certainly some logic in having a central governing body to oversee it, but the initial idea was to create a compromise. You're removing that compromise by favoring mages too much.

[TheKomandorShepard]

Toasted Llama wrote...

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

Oh dear this system is so
navie and ultimately ends there where it started on abuses and templars
having absolute power and well on incompetence and many magical
incidents...

Good god you're a big pessimist aren't you?

What
even evil means it is chantry that which dictates morality and they are
fanatics and hypocrites ignoring issues of corruption chantry proved
that they don't care about mages so i don't have to tell how it will end
when power is ultimately in their hands.

I never
said that the Chantry was the one to set up the guidelines about who is
"evil" and who isn't. There should be some sort of contract that mages,
the chantry, political leaders and the regular people all have a say in.
There will have to be compromises. If the Chantry is not willing to
give in and make room for mages, then they have no right at all to
controll mages and they will be let loose. Maleficarum everywhere. I think the Chantry doesn't want that either.

And just like the Grey Warden treaties, everyone is forced to acknowledge this contract.

So
in practice this you have to do what I want you to do and in return you
will get freedom to do what the heck i want you to do.And when i state
that you are "evil" or corrupted (you won't do what i the heck want you
to do) i will take your freedom to do what the heck i want you to do...
it exists already and it is called circle of mages [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/lol.png[/smilie]  

Who
said that there is only one person who says what you do? As I've noted
before, mages have the full right to step up and explain why they do not
think their order is justified.

Now it funny that you
think that templars will be in charge and let mages punish them simple
it will end only as theory like that templars protect mages or seekers
punish templars for abuses...

Never thought it would ever come in handy but... Blood magic. Not even a templar can stop that.

And
now we have that no mage can be proved simple every mage can be easy
victim of demon as we shown that is no problem for demon possess mage so
simple trusted mages will never exist...

You're anti-mage. Get out.

1.No simple not naive you ignored pretty much many rules of reality when you were thinking about solution and ignored how things worked to this point.

2.Chantry is in charge and will be in that relationship in charge simple because peoples don't give crap about mages and they trust chantry (well most is indoctrinated by that church into blind obedience) so in that front they have unlimited power.And well you naively that compromise always is good.So simple any rules will be forced upon mages and chantry as top dog will break them as they can avoide consequences as that was to that point only peoples who care about mages are mages and that will be always in case.And well chantry are
blind fanatics and well that they don't want blood mages is clear but are too stupid to solve problem and well blood mages everywhere pretty much what we have now so i see you are blinded idealist.

3.Because ultimately it is always one person that is in charge and in circle it is cleary knight commander and then grand cleric technically there is also first enchanter but in charge is knight commander and chantry was always pro-templar.Haha how naive i see that
Mage-i won't do that isn't right
Templar-in the name of maker i order you to listen to me or i will kill you for maker mercy
mage-no
Templar-For the chantry! Kills him.
Pretty much how that worked to this point  

4.Yes so mage will just pull of ass blood magic or turn into abomnation when templars will try to kill them wait didn't we saw that before?

5.So what that im anti-mage why i shouldn't when they are ticking bombs that are danger for my character and world there is very little that mages can do for me and many things that they can to harm me (pretty that same for the world).Ultimately we reciver person what can heal (in very restriced way) , isn't very useful in combat (they lost 95 % their fights) they are heated by most of thedas (siding with them will cause many enemies) and they are ticking bombs that can doom world rather wise would be elimination that provide so little benefit and takes so many things.

OperatingWookie wrote...

Not in the slightest.

Templars simply overseeing mages is nothing like the rock-paper-scissors system I proposed using seekers, templars, and mages.

Mages would have some authority there.

IT is your system is only theory that same what was system before and turned in practice that what we had and failed.

Some is good world they had some authority in circle but ultimately that was crushed by templars absolute power.

OperatingWookie wrote...



This isn't about circle
politics, this is about a checks and balances system where most issues
can be kept under control since it's very unlikely that all will abuse
power at one time.

System don't work mages can't be controled and this is proved many times
"it's very unlikely that all will abuse
power at one time."
Idealistic blind talk...

Modifié par TheKomandorShepard, 25 décembre 2013 - 09:10 .

[lil yonce]

OperatingWookie wrote...

Youth4Ever wrote...
I don't imagine this system working. Power is in control. Like before, one faction will have authority the others will resent. There should be a set of regulations, agreed to by all parties, the Circle is to abide by, monitering by a regulating body with a proper appeals process, and templars to guard against abominations, demons, and rogue mages, but their "watching" the circle must come to an end. A successful circle will require adequate self-governance. And mages "watching" Seekers-- its a hop, skip, and jump away from the Tevinter system of mages controlling the templars.

The difference here is that mages would have more to go through to control the entire system. There is certainly some logic in having a central governing body to oversee it, but the initial idea was to create a compromise. You're removing that compromise by favoring mages too much.

I don't see how subverting the system would be more difficult, and the templars were never meant to be anything other than mage police. They've greatly overstepped their bounds, many of their current powers are arbitrary, their word and will prevail on contested matters, and the air of suspicion they promote as watchmen is unhealthy. Absolutely, the mages should govern their own circles. Templars should patrol circles, circle grounds, have compounds and outposts everywhere, have proper training to fight abominations, demons, renegade mages, etc., but their presence in circles must be limited. Their overbearing presence and authority in circles is the core issue of the current system's ills.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 25 décembre 2013 - 09:23 .

[Red Panda]

Youth4Ever wrote...

OperatingWookie wrote...

Youth4Ever wrote...
I don't imagine this system working. Power is in control. Like before, one faction will have authority the others will resent. There should be a set of regulations, agreed to by all parties, the Circle is to abide by, monitering by a regulating body with a proper appeals process, and templars to guard against abominations, demons, and rogue mages, but their "watching" the circle must come to an end. A successful circle will require adequate self-governance. And mages "watching" Seekers-- its a hop, skip, and jump away from the Tevinter system of mages controlling the templars.

The difference here is that mages would have more to go through to control the entire system. There is certainly some logic in having a central governing body to oversee it, but the initial idea was to create a compromise. You're removing that compromise by favoring mages too much.

The templars were never meant to be anything other than mage police. They've greatly overstepped their bounds, many of their current powers are arbitrary, their word and will prevail on contested matters, and the air of suspicion they promote as watchmen is unhealthy. Absolutely, the mages should govern their own circles. Templars should patrol circles, circle grounds, have compounds and outposts everywhere, have proper training to prevent fight abominations, demons, renegade mages, etc., but their presence in circles must be limited. Their overbearing presence in circles is the core issue of the current system's ills.

You know, that could easily be adapted to fight into a checks and balances system. Mages can have their own circles and places under their power. Templars can check things out, with permission of course, and make sure demons haven't posessed everyone. Seekers can be the agency that ensures the templars don't go all meredith on them. Mages can of course, request seekers to check on templars. The chantry can deal with lyrium distribution, or each entity can make outside deals to acquire their own lyrium if they want to.

I honestly can't disagree with what you said, so I agree.

Modifié par OperatingWookie, 25 décembre 2013 - 09:16 .

[Red Panda]

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

Toasted Llama wrote...

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

Oh dear this system is so
navie and ultimately ends there where it started on abuses and templars
having absolute power and well on incompetence and many magical
incidents...

Good god you're a big pessimist aren't you?

What
even evil means it is chantry that which dictates morality and they are
fanatics and hypocrites ignoring issues of corruption chantry proved
that they don't care about mages so i don't have to tell how it will end
when power is ultimately in their hands.

I never
said that the Chantry was the one to set up the guidelines about who is
"evil" and who isn't. There should be some sort of contract that mages,
the chantry, political leaders and the regular people all have a say in.
There will have to be compromises. If the Chantry is not willing to
give in and make room for mages, then they have no right at all to
controll mages and they will be let loose. Maleficarum everywhere. I think the Chantry doesn't want that either.

And just like the Grey Warden treaties, everyone is forced to acknowledge this contract.

So
in practice this you have to do what I want you to do and in return you
will get freedom to do what the heck i want you to do.And when i state
that you are "evil" or corrupted (you won't do what i the heck want you
to do) i will take your freedom to do what the heck i want you to do...
it exists already and it is called circle of mages [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/lol.png[/smilie]  

Who
said that there is only one person who says what you do? As I've noted
before, mages have the full right to step up and explain why they do not
think their order is justified.

Now it funny that you
think that templars will be in charge and let mages punish them simple
it will end only as theory like that templars protect mages or seekers
punish templars for abuses...

Never thought it would ever come in handy but... Blood magic. Not even a templar can stop that.

And
now we have that no mage can be proved simple every mage can be easy
victim of demon as we shown that is no problem for demon possess mage so
simple trusted mages will never exist...

You're anti-mage. Get out.

1.No simple not naive you ignored pretty much many rules of reality when you were thinking about solution and ignored how things worked to this point.

2.Chantry is in charge and will be in that relationship in charge simple because peoples don't give crap about mages and they trust chantry (well most is indoctrinated by that church into blind obedience) so in that front they have unlimited power.And well you naively that compromise always is good.So simple any rules will be forced upon mages and chantry as top dog will break them as they can avoide consequences as that was to that point only peoples who care about mages are mages and that will be always in case.And well chantry are
blind fanatics and well that they don't want blood mages is clear but are too stupid to solve problem and well blood mages everywhere pretty much what we have now so i see you are blinded idealist.

3.Because ultimately it is always one person that is in charge and in circle it is cleary knight commander and then grand cleric technically there is also first enchanter but in charge is knight commander and chantry was always pro-templar.Haha how naive i see that
Mage-i won't do that isn't right
Templar-in the name of maker i order you to listen to me or i will kill you for maker mercy
mage-no
Templar-For the chantry! Kills him.
Pretty much how that worked to this point  

4.Yes so mage will just pull of ass blood magic or turn into abomnation when templars will try to kill them wait didn't we saw that before?

5.So what that im anti-mage why i shouldn't when they are ticking bombs that are danger for my character and world there is very little that mages can do for me and many things that they can to harm me (pretty that same for the world).Ultimately we reciver person what can heal (in very restriced way) , isn't very useful in combat (they lost 95 % their fights) they are heated by most of thedas (siding with them will cause many enemies) and they are ticking bombs that can doom world rather wise would be elimination that provide so little benefit and takes so many things.

OperatingWookie wrote...

Not in the slightest.

Templars simply overseeing mages is nothing like the rock-paper-scissors system I proposed using seekers, templars, and mages.

Mages would have some authority there.

IT is your system is only theory that same what was system before and turned in practice that what we had and failed.

Some is good world they had some authority in circle but ultimately that was crushed by templars absolute power.

OperatingWookie wrote...



This isn't about circle
politics, this is about a checks and balances system where most issues
can be kept under control since it's very unlikely that all will abuse
power at one time.

System don't work mages can't be controled and this is proved many times
"it's very unlikely that all will abuse
power at one time."
Idealistic blind talk...

First, off your bias and hatred of mages is rather obvious.

Second off, you have fabricated a ridiculous situation with which you hope to validate your outrageous claims, which of course hurt my brain just reading due to their lack of syntax.

Third off, a system with more equality in power is not a dictatorship like the previous system, it is a collaboration meant to reach compromise.

Fourth off, it is unlikely that a perfect system can be made that accomodates all parties. Asking what if questions that are ridiculous do not invalidate the possibility of said system.

[TheKomandorShepard]

OperatingWookie wrote...


First, off your bias and hatred of mages is rather obvious.

Second off, you have fabricated a ridiculous situation with which you hope to validate your outrageous claims, which of course hurt my brain just reading due to their lack of syntax.

Third off, a system with more equality in power is not a dictatorship like the previous system, it is a collaboration meant to reach compromise.

Fourth off, it is unlikely that a perfect system can be made that accomodates all parties. Asking what if questions that are ridiculous do not invalidate the possibility of said system.

1.hatred? It is nothing personal i just give them treatment as any other danger for me on that scale if you do feel better i plan for templars and chantry smiliar fate;). 

2.? more specifically

3.There is not such thing as more equality and your system don't deliver equality and yet another person that word compromise is best thing ever and is always best solution.And it is naive thinking that it will end otherwise than it ended before you see only idea but you can see reality crushing that idea...

4.Yeah you can create a system (well do that what templars were doing for 1000 years and thinking that this time will be different) it simple will fail and colapse and common system bringing that same destruction as it was for 1000 years.

So all it is naive talking about peace ,understanding  giving up hatred ala Elthina. 

[lil yonce]

OperatingWookie wrote...
You know, that could easily be adapted to fight into a checks and balances system. Mages can have their own circles and places under their power. Templars can check things out, with permission of course, and make sure demons haven't posessed everyone. Seekers can be the agency that ensures the templars don't go all meredith on them. Mages can of course, request seekers to check on templars. The chantry can deal with lyrium distribution, or each entity can make outside deals to acquire their own lyrium if they want to. I honestly can't disagree with what you said, so I agree.

Not by permission, but by regulation agreed to in treaty, the templars should have powers to patrol circles and check projects and research, and checks on the templar order should also be regulated. And the Circle must also be transparent about what they're doing at all times-- that should be a requirement. The chantry should have control over the lyrium supply, but the circle should be able to buy it for use as needed from the chantry. If ever the circle oversteps its bounds, the chantry can squeeze the lyrium supply and all Circle operations come to a standstill. It shouldn't happen often IMO because, if the mages are smart, they'll broker greater freedoms in a peace deal and embed themselves in businesses and national economies, making them and the lyrium they'll require indispensible, thus rendering the control I proposed, an "extreme-measures-only" solution as its meant to be.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 25 décembre 2013 - 10:20 .

[Lord Raijin]

dragonflight288 wrote...

Youth4Ever wrote...

OperatingWookie wrote...

Youth4Ever wrote...
What's to stop mages from corrupting the Seekers, and thus the whole system to magi advantage?

Templars.
They need them too to put the system in their advantage.

And if the mages convince the Seekers to curb templar oversight?

What's to stop the Seekers from corrupting the templars? What's to stop the templars from using mages to corrupt the seekers for their own ends?

This is a circle that can go on and on. We can deal with hypotheticals all day, but ultimately I guess it would depend on the system. Say the Circle can requisition lyrium for their magical rituals, but before the order can be processed, the templars have to get a full report on how much lyrium, what it's being used for, who's using it and so on. If the Templars wanted lyrium for their new recruits, the Seekers would have to approve the order.

Or if a mage wanted to open a clinic in a town, they could let the Seekers know who would go appraise a location, and see if there are templars in the area, and if there are not, the Seeker can also have the power to deny that same mage or see if there are templars willing to be stationed there to keep an eye on the mage but also to help keep the peace in the town.

A system of checks and balances is the best bet. But you won't find a fool-proof method as there never will be one. Any system devised by man, elf or dwarf can be corrupted and abused.

Seekers already corrupted the Templar's. It was Lord Seeker who corrupted 15 Knight-Commanders by convicing them that they should depart from the Chantry, and they did exactly that. Templar's and Seekers already painted the mages as being currupted, by delcaring holy war against them after the decision was made by the Divine for letting them have their freedom. R.O.A are being delcared throughout the Circles, and Mages are now rebelling.

Modifié par Lord Raijin, 25 décembre 2013 - 10:28 .

[Afro_Explosion]

The problem with having seekers watch the templars,is that seekers are picked from templars giving them biases and influences within the order is a bad thing

[AresKeith]

mx_keep13 wrote...

The problem with having seekers watch the templars,is that seekers are picked from templars giving them biases and influences within the order is a bad thing

There really isn't anything wrong with having a Templar get promoted to the Seekers, they just shouldn't be in high positions in the Seekers imo

[Toasted Llama]

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

1.No simple not naive you ignored pretty much many rules of reality when you were thinking about solution and ignored how things worked to this point.

2.Chantry is in charge and will be in that relationship in charge simple because peoples don't give crap about mages and they trust chantry (well most is indoctrinated by that church into blind obedience) so in that front they have unlimited power.And well you naively that compromise always is good.So simple any rules will be forced upon mages and chantry as top dog will break them as they can avoide consequences as that was to that point only peoples who care about mages are mages and that will be always in case.And well chantry are
blind fanatics and well that they don't want blood mages is clear but are too stupid to solve problem and well blood mages everywhere pretty much what we have now so i see you are blinded idealist.

3.Because ultimately it is always one person that is in charge and in circle it is cleary knight commander and then grand cleric technically there is also first enchanter but in charge is knight commander and chantry was always pro-templar.Haha how naive i see that
Mage-i won't do that isn't right
Templar-in the name of maker i order you to listen to me or i will kill you for maker mercy
mage-no
Templar-For the chantry! Kills him.
Pretty much how that worked to this point  

4.Yes so mage will just pull of ass blood magic or turn into abomnation when templars will try to kill them wait didn't we saw that before?

5.So what that im anti-mage why i shouldn't when they are ticking bombs that are danger for my character and world there is very little that mages can do for me and many things that they can to harm me (pretty that same for the world).Ultimately we reciver person what can heal (in very restriced way) , isn't very useful in combat (they lost 95 % their fights) they are heated by most of thedas (siding with them will cause many enemies) and they are ticking bombs that can doom world rather wise would be elimination that provide so little benefit and takes so many things.

You know what? I'm not even going to consider talking about your ridiculous points. They have no footing to stand on as they assume that the Chantry rules over everything and cannot be toppled, which is easily can. The Chantry sh*ts their pants in 20 colours when it comes to blood mages and if it is required for blood magic and demons to topple the Chantry's hold on mages then that is necessary.

"Indoctrination" by the Chantry can easily be battled with education, as has been proven in our own history as well. (Christianity was toppled as soon as things such as humanism came to existance)

You are extremely biased and this thread was brought up in existence to talk about ideas to get a proper, non-oppressive system that functions for both mages as well as templars. Considering you use ridiculous "what if" situations and throw the power of the Chantry (that is build on lies, I might add. And a foundation made of lies is not very strong) to support your anti-mage ideology you basically have no reason to be here. You hate mages because you think they are ticking time-bombs and a danger to your character as well as to the world, yet is this very magic that has helped shape the Dragon Age universe to what it is and magic is not just a curse, it is also a gift. I applaud Bioware for being able to convince people like you with biased Codex entries that magic is inherently evil.

Cheers.

PS. I like how you think the Chantry is evil and corrupted, yet at the very same time you completely accept and embrace their concept that magic is inherently evil, which is a lie that is obviously established to prevent mages from power as their offense has, as of yet, no counter measure. Fear is a great weapon to rule and you are caught in it.