8640 réponses à ce sujet

[Mistic]

MisterJB, Dean, that was an amazing debate to read. It pains me that DA2 never reached its potential as a poweful narrative device to discuss important matters such as freedom, security, law and justice (ok, not that "Justice").

 

Still thinking that the Inquisition will be critical in building the new status quo for mages and their caretakers. I'm a supporter of the professionalization of the Circles and Templars, with pragmatism and social viability over religious dogma. An international, non-affiliated organization like the Inquisition could serve that purpose, although maybe it's wishful thinking. I still can't forget that promotional image with the rings: Circle, Templars, Seekers and that glowing fourth one.

[Xilizhra]

Not as all immediate changes, no, but as potential long-term reforms they would be doable.

 

Part of the professionalization of the Templars would be to distance them from the Chantry somewhat. Less religious education (mages and sin), more practical (mages and danger of abominations). Secularization would be institutional rather than personal for some time, but the biggest issue will be the ties to the Chantry. The Chantry is the only international institution with the legitimacy for a Circle system, and the Circles and Templars both need that- and the Templars do have a secondary role as the Chantry's guardians, which is how they interact with the world. Remove that and the Chantry will fund/supply another force, which would likely mean less support and less legitimacy for the Templars. This causes more problems, especially if the Templars become dependent on mages for financing. For the foreseeable future,  Templars and Chantry will likely be tied together, though 'Templar, Watcher of Mages' and 'Templar, Warriors of the Chantry', may distinguish themselves.

 

 

Abolition of the Tranquility ritual strikes me as redundant since it can already only be legally done against consent by with sanction by mage authorities as well. With the creation of the cure, it makes even less sense, and will likely be replaced by execution regardless. Mages who can't pass their

 

Of course, a long term goal I'd encourage would be the actual non-tranquil stripping of magic (or, yes, giving everyone magic), which would render tranquility moot as well.

 

The Annullment is another thing that is a bit redundant: it's a reflection of the incompatibility or effective revolt of a Circle which other measures have failed. I am certainly for more restrictions on its usage, and more use of alternatives, but saying you'll ban its usage is effectively saying you'll tolerate rebellion and an inability to enforce order.  A Circle won't be allowed to free itself from the system, and in contexts like DAO where there actually is rampant abomination the alternative to going out and clearing a towerful of demons is... well, not doing so, and the demons breaking free. That's nice for the demons, but not much else. Annullment is, in effect, an invasion of a Circle you've already been ejected from, and banning that is saying you'll accept it.

 

I would rule that Annullments should spare those who surrender unconditionally (like the ones Cullen accepts in DA2), but there would be other restrictions and losses of rights on such people. The prospect of agitators, blood mages, or hidden abominations would just be handled akin to a police state, rather than by an execution squad: being a survivor of an Annuled circle is not a ticket back to normal Circle society. At least not until hidden abominations can be reliably found, and blood magic identified.

 

 

I would allow Mages access into the Chantry institution (it doesn't really have anything to govern)... but only as part of a compromise deal in which non-Chantry mundanes enter the Circle's governance as well (actual governance, not Templar oversight), the mages have restrictions in how much placement they can claim, and the Templars watch them both for signs of blood magic influence. Don't get me wrong, I would give mages inclusion- but the dangers of claiming control of the oversight would also mean restrictions of that inclusion. Mages would never be allowed to rise in ranks of the Templars, the Seekers, or any who commanded them (which includes the top).

 

 

 

However, the keys to all of these things you would like could be enabled by future discoveries and developments, which I would promote. Being able to identify demonic possession that's remaining hidden, or identify blood magic use with ease, would be game-changing factors in the security precautions against them..

Intriguing, in a way, but not entirely acceptable.

 

I believe that the templars should be chopped out of the Circle role completely. I also don't think that the Chantry should have its own military force, but I'm keeping it there as a possible compromise to end the war until they can be phased out later. The new guards (I currently call them sentinels) will have a hierarchy ideally linked directly to the Circle and only indirectly to the Chantry, being a relatively independent body still supplied with lyrium by the Chantry, but legally in a certain balance of power with the Enchanter hierarchy.

 

Some mage authorities themselves are corrupt, and sometimes templars can force the issue (as happened in Kirkwall), so banning the Rite altogether and preferably removing any means of actually performing it would be ideal. Unless it's regulated to be strictly temporary, and even then I have doubts, as it seems highly cruel and unusual.
 

Annulment itself is a redundant concept, as there's no real problem with killing demons. If demons pop up, kill away. After that, you can temporarily isolate the remaining mages and examine them for signs of demonic possession, but the ones who are clean can be released. And if a rebellion arises for some reason... go in and defeat the rebellion itself, don't just kill everyone in the vicinity.

 

I could, in theory, concede your restrictions on mage membership in the Chantry... but only with the caveat that, in this case, the relationship will be strictly temporary: this bargain will be made solely to mollify the masses if necessary, and to use the Chantry's money for reconstruction and investment. Once the Circles have their own financial lifeline set up, and with the sentinels more invested in the future of the Circles than the Chantry, the Circles will leave again, this time for good, and with the Chantry no longer having an army to do anything about it.

Unless all of what's necessary for mage freedom gets taken care of in DAI, of course, in which case, happy days.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Mind you, that's the middle case scenario. Worst case is that the revolutionists attempt a rebellion against the martial law and intrusive investigations, which sparks its own Annulment. Which is bad, but happens under a different context and so might not lead to a wider war if the narrative goes from 'the Templars Annuled a Circle for the crimes of an Apostate' to 'the Templars Annuled a Circle that resisted investigation after mage terrorism.' Which still might help avoid the immediate Chantry civil war.

 

 

Just FYI - even Annuling the circle might not lead to war. Wouldn't that depends on what news spreads to the other Circles?

 

Who would now the Circle wasn't involved?

Only a handful of people were present during Anderses admission (assuming one even believes him), most of whom die by the end. As far as the populace - and other Circles - know, it is a mage plot.

[renfrees]

*snip*

Unfortunately, the mages in DA setting cannot go uncontrolled, stop treating them like some kind of oppressed ethnical group in our world, they are not, they don't simply have a different skin or form of nose. The way battle encounters show us abominations is very underwhelming, if we compare it to historical evidences. Even in the game, when we don't actually have to confront them, we can witness a boy wiping out whole town singlehandily, or Meredith telling of her sister killing above 70 people, before being brought down. If Warden/Hawke's band could deal with them easily, it doesn't mean abominations aren't a major threat to simple citizens.

 

The mages in Thedas should be not only taught, but monitored in some kind of way as well, as none of them ever free of temptations.

[Star fury]

Annulment itself is a redundant concept, as there's no real problem with killing demons. If demons pop up, kill away. After that, you can temporarily isolate the remaining mages and examine them for signs of demonic possession, but the ones who are clean can be released. And if a rebellion arises for some reason... go in and defeat the rebellion itself, don't just kill everyone in the vicinity.

 

Problem is that Thedas is medieval world and what you propose is impossible. Knowing how powerful and dangerous abominations can be, templars just can't afford to be merciful and patient. Not even touching issue of an open rebellion, in that case Annulment is the only choice. Just imagine yourself in templar's place during an outbreak of demon incursion or mage rebellion. They gonna just slaughter all mages up to children.

[Lotion Soronarr]

by Dean_The_Young

Meredith takes a good system and turns it into a bad one: one which reform could not be pursued (Meredith's paranoia), and could not be survived in by following the rules (the Annulment). When systems go bad, they tend to stay bad, and I place a very high weight on opposing such systems for the systematic effects they will have later on. Likely initial failure with immediate cost is not in and of itself a reason not to resist a bad system. I have never blamed the Kirkwall mages for fighting back against the Annullment: the way they do, sometimes, but not for resisting a bad system in the face of certain death. Just because deathtolls would be less if they didn't resist doesn't mean I feel they should. Resisting a bad system has its own merit despite the costs in any repeating game, which is what society and history is. How you handle failure can matter as much as your failure.

 

I have disagree here.

 

Meredith was already on thin ice, with constant complaints about her that reached the Divine.

DG said that while her annulment is technicly legal, she would face a LOT of flak from it.

 

In other words, the main element leading to the corruption of the system - Meredith - is only temporary, and she would have been removed (sooner, rather than later).

 

Further, Divine Justinias invitation for mages to propose changes to the Circle offered a lot of hope for positive change.

 

So, there was no indication that nothing will change and the system would remain bad unless Hawke fights against Meredith. In fact, it seems Merediths downfall was inevitable, and thus a new KC that will restore proper order was a definite possibility.

 

In light of that, prolonging the fight and increasing the death toll seems ...unnecessary.

 

Never mind that lofty moral goals seem irrelevant when bodies start dropping. What use if fighting for a "better" system if that fight will produce more casualties than the system itself will?

[EmissaryofLies]

You're right, she's only temporary. But how long before another Meredith comes up through the ranks? With their recruiting practices it's a guarantee. Not to mention that this new officer friendly would actually have to be responsible for the people under his/her command, unlike the Meredith. With the damage done to Kirkwall's circle physically and systematically, I'm not even sure it's worth recovering. At least not on that hellmouth. 

 

The only way to make this work would be to have the seekers do their damned job. Otherwise the system is always going to be wide open and ripe for abuse. 

[Xilizhra]

Unfortunately, the mages in DA setting cannot go uncontrolled, stop treating them like some kind of oppressed ethnical group in our world, they are not, they don't simply have a different skin or form of nose. The way battle encounters show us abominations is very underwhelming, if we compare it to historical evidences. Even in the game, when we don't actually have to confront them, we can witness a boy wiping out whole town singlehandily, or Meredith telling of her sister killing above 70 people, before being brought down. If Warden/Hawke's band could deal with them easily, it doesn't mean abominations aren't a major threat to simple citizens.

 

The mages in Thedas should be not only taught, but monitored in some kind of way as well, as none of them ever free of temptations.

It depends on the abomination. You can get those that are powerful enough to go on city-destroying rampages... but they're fairly rare.

 

 

Problem is that Thedas is medieval world and what you propose is impossible. Knowing how powerful and dangerous abominations can be, templars just can't afford to be merciful and patient. Not even touching issue of an open rebellion, in that case Annulment is the only choice. Just imagine yourself in templar's place during an outbreak of demon incursion or mage rebellion. They gonna just slaughter all mages up to children.

And that is why the Order should no longer be allowed to control the Circles.

[Dean_the_Young]

I have disagree here.

 

Meredith was already on thin ice, with constant complaints about her that reached the Divine.

DG said that while her annulment is technicly legal, she would face a LOT of flak from it.

 

In other words, the main element leading to the corruption of the system - Meredith - is only temporary, and she would have been removed (sooner, rather than later).

 

Further, Divine Justinias invitation for mages to propose changes to the Circle offered a lot of hope for positive change.

 

So, there was no indication that nothing will change and the system would remain bad unless Hawke fights against Meredith. In fact, it seems Merediths downfall was inevitable, and thus a new KC that will restore proper order was a definite possibility.

 

In light of that, prolonging the fight and increasing the death toll seems ...unnecessary.

 

Never mind that lofty moral goals seem irrelevant when bodies start dropping. What use if fighting for a "better" system if that fight will produce more casualties than the system itself will?

 

These area all valid points, but there's a catch: I either didn't know them at the time (meta-knowledge about future events such as Justina's reform attempts), or didn't perceive/feel them at the time (Meredith on thin ice). I can't base a position on what I didn't know (including, at the time, how Anders did his crime- as I had booted Anders from the party in Act 2, I never did the complicity quest, and so was even more surprised by what happened.

 

Meredith's inevitable downfall in particular is one I am nowhere near as comfortable in asserting as you are- a significant aspect of the situation in Kirkwall is Meredith and the Templars own rise in power, to the point that the Chantry can't simply assert authority. Meredith, not even the Grand Cleric, is the most powerful person in the city, and with her insanity of purpose I could easily see her putting her heels in and refusing to be dismissed... and many of her Templars following her in that. She might go eventually, but not easily and not without leaving a bad precedent on multiple levels. Meredith is representative of how the Templars are able to break free from the Chantry.

 

And, really, the precedent of Annulment on the basis of public blood frenzy rather than actual crime or risk is what I'm concerned about. That's lowering the bar unacceptably low, and the difficulties Meredith will present retroactively won't make it any better.

 

 

 

 

As for your final point- I am of the view that a Circle system without mage buy in will ultimately result in far more loss of life and suffering than the Kirkwall incident alone.

[renfrees]

The Circles

 

It depends on the abomination. You can get those that are powerful enough to go on city-destroying rampages... but they're fairly rare.

 

 

And that is why the Order should no longer be allowed to control the Circles.

I haven't gotten that impression. As i said - just because your protagonist is dealing with them doesn't mean they are easy. 

 

To me, Circles should be controlled by totally independent organization like Gray Wardens, which is not involved in political or religious struggles. Which is unlikely in Thedas.

[Dean_the_Young]

The biggest issue for desires to secularize the Templars and separating them from the Chantry is finding another institution with the public support, reach, and legitimacy to do it. That's not something you can create out of thin air from good intentions and progressive ambitions- institutions require actual support from pre-existing actors with means of rewarding and pressuring for compliance. Secular!Templars without the backing of the Chantry would be far more prone to being influenced and coopted into non-neutral actors.

 

Since the closest thing to the UN and an organized international system in the DA setting is the Chantry... well, there's no real substitute here. Saying 'we'll create a new agency, which will be better, and everyone will support it' rather ignores the 'how' it will come into existence and 'why' it will be maintained as to the vision.

 

 

Other proposed reforms need their own issues solved before they can be presented as solutions. Abomination-scanning and identification needs to be reliable for when an abomination is trying to remain hidden: until such a time, there is no 'temporary' short-term measures in regards to potential abominations following an outbreak. At this point, there really is none: even a potentially possessed mundane Templar, in an act of mercy, would be under observation for ten years. Mages, being a greater risk, would warrant more. Similar scanning and identification would be needed for blood mages and provocateurs. Until survivors of an Annulment can prove they are not influenced, the fact that an Annulment has been reached places them all under the extreme risk of having been influenced.

 

 

Mages having unlimited access to the oversight institution, however, is more than a non-starter: it's incredibly stupid for any regulatory agency to be beholden by the people it's watching. Politically, financially, or in composition, there is no success story in oversight agencies under the influence of the subjects of oversight.

[Xilizhra]

Since the closest thing to the UN and an organized international system in the DA setting is the Chantry... well, there's no real substitute here. Saying 'we'll create a new agency, which will be better, and everyone will support it' rather ignores the 'how' it will come into existence and 'why' it will be maintained as to the vision.

This is why we can use them for their money and PR to set up the new system, and then leave again when they're no longer necessary.

 

Other proposed reforms need their own issues solved before they can be presented as solutions. Abomination-scanning and identification needs to be reliable for when an abomination is trying to remain hidden: until such a time, there is no 'temporary' short-term measures in regards to potential abominations following an outbreak. At this point, there really is none: even a potentially possessed mundane Templar, in an act of mercy, would be under observation for ten years. Mages, being a greater risk, would warrant more. Similar scanning and identification would be needed for blood mages and provocateurs. Until survivors of an Annulment can prove they are not influenced, the fact that an Annulment has been reached places them all under the extreme risk of having been influenced.

Merrill's blood thing seems reliable, and I don't see why we couldn't use Anders' force bolt technique either.

 

Mages having unlimited access to the oversight institution, however, is more than a non-starter: it's incredibly stupid for any regulatory agency to be beholden by the people it's watching. Politically, financially, or in composition, there is no success story in oversight agencies under the influence of the subjects of oversight.

The sentinels will require nonmages because only they can use the antimagic techniques properly, but given that mages aren't a monolithic organization and that different Circles will still have individual identities, I see no problem with letting the mages into the Chantry. They're people, who require extra protective measures because of the whole risk of possession, but will not be treated as prisoners.

[Dean_the_Young]

The fact that you see no issue with letting the oversight become influenced by the targets of the oversight is why you aren't good at designing a security state apparatus. You're blind to the history of what happens when you make an enforcement mechanism contingent on trusting voluntary adherence.

 

Which begs the question of... who are you designing it for? By all appearance you are designing it for the mages, which is a fundamentally wrong approach for an actual institution to restrict how mages can interact with the non-mages. When mages can overrule the oversight, the oversight will cease to restrict them.

 

The in-thedas institutional analog for your model is actually the Tevinter Imperium, where mages weren't restricted from gaining political authority over the Templars. You may not intend for that to happen, but until you have institutional limits on what mages can do and keep them from gaining such power, you can't prevent a Tevinter scenario from occuring. Institutional checks are devised on the assumption of bad actors, not good actors, and an institution that plans around the better assumptions of human nature will be vastly unprepared to deal with the bad actors.

 

 

So, let's stress-test your institution. Mages get into the Chantry without restriction- what is in place to prevent the Mages from gaining control over the Templars?

[Xilizhra]

The fact that you see no issue with letting the oversight become influenced by the targets of the oversight is why you aren't good at designing a security state apparatus. You're blind to the history of what happens when you make an enforcement mechanism contingent on trusting voluntary adherence.

 

Which begs the question of... who are you designing it for?

I'm designing it because, if the Chantry purports to govern the mages, then the government should have mage representation, otherwise you're governing without consent of the governed. And yes, I'd prefer to institute such systems all across Thedas, not just here.

[Heimdall]

I'm designing it because, if the Chantry purports to govern the mages, then the government should have mage representation, otherwise you're governing without consent of the governed. And yes, I'd prefer to institute such systems all across Thedas, not just here.

It sounds like you want to design a liberal democracy, not a security system. That's a problem.

[Xilizhra]

It sounds like you want to design a liberal democracy, not a security system. That's a problem.

I don't see why it would be more in the interest of a mage than a nonmage to let demons destroy a Circle.

[dragonflight288]

I'm designing it because, if the Chantry purports to govern the mages, then the government should have mage representation, otherwise you're governing without consent of the governed. And yes, I'd prefer to institute such systems all across Thedas, not just here.

 

What you are proposing is similar to the Handmaidens in KOTOR 2. They are specifically trained to resist the force and tricks on the mind, and it is their duty to watch the Jedi to keep them from falling. But they were founded by a Jedi, Atris, and they follow her. As such, being so close to her and believing everything she says about the exile and the handmaiden who join a male exile, are completely unable to see Atris's own fall.

 

The exile can say it's a pazaak card pyramid, with a weak foundation. And that's what happens when the watchers are governed by the watched.

[dragonflight288]

I don't see why it would be more in the interest of a mage than a nonmage to let demons destroy a Circle.

 

It's not. But it does allow the mage criminals, or at least the stupid ones who think they can control demons when they can't, an easier time conducting experiments that put everyone else in danger.

 

It's nice on paper, but in practice it'll probably have some kinks to work out. 

[Xilizhra]

What you are proposing is similar to the Handmaidens in KOTOR 2. They are specifically trained to resist the force and tricks on the mind, and it is their duty to watch the Jedi to keep them from falling. But they were founded by a Jedi, Atris, and they follow her. As such, being so close to her and believing everything she says about the exile and the handmaiden who join a male exile, are completely unable to see Atris's own fall.

 

The exile can say it's a pazaak card pyramid, with a weak foundation. And that's what happens when the watchers are governed by the watched.

I haven't played that game, so I can't comment.

 

 

It's not. But it does allow the mage criminals, or at least the stupid ones who think they can control demons when they can't, an easier time conducting experiments that put everyone else in danger.

 

It's nice on paper, but in practice it'll probably have some kinks to work out. 

How so?

[Mistic]

Meredith's inevitable downfall in particular is one I am nowhere near as comfortable in asserting as you are- a significant aspect of the situation in Kirkwall is Meredith and the Templars own rise in power, to the point that the Chantry can't simply assert authority. Meredith, not even the Grand Cleric, is the most powerful person in the city, and with her insanity of purpose I could easily see her putting her heels in and refusing to be dismissed... and many of her Templars following her in that. She might go eventually, but not easily and not without leaving a bad precedent on multiple levels. Meredith is representative of how the Templars are able to break free from the Chantry.

 

I agree with you. There is a distinct possibility that a Knight-Commander, instead of submitting to the Cahntry's will, will decide by himself or herself that the Grand Cleric or the Divine isn't fit to give them orders, an obstacle to their duty and thus it's morally right to oppose their orders and do "what must be done". Even if their original duty came from the Chantry itself.

 

You know, scrap the "distinct possibility" part, since it has already happened: Lord Seeker Lambert, without any need for a red-lyrium-induced madness, did exactly that. Since I believe Lambert was honest in his actions, I think it's a clear sign that the system is broken.

 

The biggest issue for desires to secularize the Templars and separating them from the Chantry is finding another institution with the public support, reach, and legitimacy to do it. That's not something you can create out of thin air from good intentions and progressive ambitions- institutions require actual support from pre-existing actors with means of rewarding and pressuring for compliance. Secular!Templars without the backing of the Chantry would be far more prone to being influenced and coopted into non-neutral actors.

 

Since the closest thing to the UN and an organized international system in the DA setting is the Chantry... well, there's no real substitute here. Saying 'we'll create a new agency, which will be better, and everyone will support it' rather ignores the 'how' it will come into existence and 'why' it will be maintained as to the vision.

 

Well, the Grey Wardens are also an organized international system, and that's why I'm a supporter of the Inquisition becoming the new managers for the Circle system, or whatever they choose to call it in the future.

 

It's not a matter of good intentions and progressive ambitions. It's that by the time DA:I ends, the Inquisition could be an international force, with armies, fortresses and public legitimacy after solving the Veil Tear crysis, not unlike the Grey Wardens after the end of the First Blight. Support from pre-existing actors only matters if they have enough power to oppose you. With the Inquisition having the actual monopoly on violence in several key places, the Chantry without its teeth and their most adherent supporters weak after a civil war (with the distinct possibility of the victor being indebted to the Inquisitor), their room for negotiation might improve a lot.

 

But as I usually say, it's just an idea.

[Star fury]

 

And that is why the Order should no longer be allowed to control the Circles.

Even if the Circles get some form of self-autonomy, they will be under control of the Chantry or Inqiusition.

 

Besides, Bioware should be bold and show us templar butchering of mages, children included. Even if it's just results and some bodies like they did in the Human Noble Origin. By the way Obsidian had shown how Legionnaires raped female Rangers of NCR in FNV, Bioware could do teh same with templars and female mages.

[Star fury]

I'm designing it because, if the Chantry purports to govern the mages, then the government should have mage representation, otherwise you're governing without consent of the governed. And yes, I'd prefer to institute such systems all across Thedas, not just here.

It would be simpler and cheaper if mages become a government and ruled mundanes with an iron fist in a velvet glove. We don't need excesses like in Tevinter, it means no blood magic(only to repel darkspawn), no sacrifices, no slavery. 

[BlueMagitek]

Kotor 2 Spoilers~

 

Dragon Flight is correct in his evaluation about KotOR 2; the only ones who are capable of understanding that Atris has been corrupted are outside of her system, or left her system.  Some see it sooner than others (Kreia), but The Exile & the Handmaiden (who may be Kreia's daughter) spot it next time, the rest of the crew don't really have much to say, if I recall correctly.

 

Of course, because LSF is canon, only the Exile & Kreia really see it coming.

[The Elder King]

It would simpler and cheaper if mages become a government and ruled mundanes with an iron fist in a velvet glove. We don't need excesses like in Tevinter, it means no blood magic(only to repel darkspawn), no sacrifices, no slavery.

And you think mundanes will submit to mages.....why, exactly?

[Star fury]

And you think mundanes will submit to mages.....why, exactly?

Freedom is life's great lie.