8640 réponses à ce sujet

[EmperorSahlertz]

True and it's just one more thing that needs improving.

 

Though the peasant can leave their location. While the mage cannot, unless beckoned by his/her kindly master.

It isn't that a peasant CAN'T it is that he would most likely starve to death if he did. You see, peasants do not have their every need catered and provided for. They actually have to earn their own money and food, most of which they will have to give to some lord. What little they do get to is barely enough. But no no, by all means let us focus on the nobility in all but name, mages and their poor oppresive life where they can't take long walks in the woods. Such cruelty.

[wcholcombe]

@ Emissary, In some places peasants arn't allowed to leave.

 

In medival europe the lords didn't allow their peasants to leave their lands.

The peasant had to ask for permission and the reason had to be damn good, and the lord would have to be very very generous.

 

Peasants were workers and taxpayers, loosing one meant a loss of income and a reduction to the workforce.

 

These days, it's harder to move to a place than to leave it.... Kind of opposite. Back then people were a resource, now they are a (potential resource but often regarded as a liability)

 

It's always been tricky, historicly aswell a contemporary migration policies.

 

The difference with mages is that they are born into a kind of permanent housearrest unless "ordered" to perform a service somewhere.

They arn't told they can't leave their country or town, they are told they can't leave their home, they can't go to the pub or the beach or anywhere.

From what we have seen Thedas doesn't actually employ a serf system.  Its just that peasants have no means to be able to move around greatly.  Plus, they have few rights of any kind.  This isn't a Templar deal or anything, it is just the facts of midevil europe society.

[Veruin]

I think people should realize that Thedas has no concept of human rights and should stop applying our ideals to it.

 

"It's the right thing to do!"

 

They don't give a damn.

[Hellion Rex]

I think people should realize that Thedas has no concept of human rights and should stop applying our ideals to it.

 

"It's the right thing to do!"

 

They don't give a damn.

Nonetheless, we still project much of our world's constructs within Thedas, and yet is a concept of human/people's rights that far fetched?

[Veruin]

Nonetheless, we still project much of our world's constructs within Thedas, and yet is a concept of human/people's rights that far fetched?

Given that the only people who have seem to have any form of rights are nobles/people in power, I'd say yes.

 

Even then, those "rights" aren't guaranteed.  They only have it because of the power that have.  That goes away, and they're just another peasant in the dirt.

[EmissaryofLies]

It isn't that a peasant CAN'T it is that he would most likely starve to death if he did. You see, peasants do not have their every need catered and provided for. They actually have to earn their own money and food, most of which they will have to give to some lord. What little they do get to is barely enough. But no no, by all means let us focus on the nobility in all but name, mages and their poor oppresive life where they can't take long walks in the woods. Such cruelty.

 

I know right? Those mages have it so good! Never having privacy; Templars constantly over their shoulder. Some of them taking 'liberties' with the mages. On a really bad day being killed or made tranquil for existing. Seeing their friends suffer such a fate if they themselves don't. Being thrown to the wolves straight out of the gate and the penalty for losing is death or its friendly cousin. Being openly hated by the chantry and a lot of people outside the circle if you just so happen to ever earn the privelege of even stepping outside of it. Committing suicide simply to escape life in the circle.

 

Sign me up!

[The Baconer]

Given that the only people who have seem to have any form of rights are nobles/people in power, I'd say yes.

 

Even then, those "rights" aren't guaranteed.  They only have it because of the power that have.  That goes away, and they're just another peasant in the dirt.

 

I'm looking forward to making more peasants in fall 2014.

[wcholcombe]

Given that the only people who have seem to have any form of rights are nobles/people in power, I'd say yes.

 

Even then, those "rights" aren't guaranteed.  They only have it because of the power that have.  That goes away, and they're just another peasant in the dirt.

Agreed, while we as players mostly have a concept of human rights and dignity, in game that doesn't exist.

 

The concept that a being in Thedas has a right to exist and be happy is as alien to them as the concept of the internet would be.

[LobselVith8]

I think people should realize that Thedas has no concept of human rights and should stop applying our ideals to it.

 

"It's the right thing to do!"

 

They don't give a damn.

 

There are characters who express that groups should have rights. Anders voices that he thinks the elves should rise up over their lack of rights, despite being a human mage. Alistair makes the move to give the elves representation at royal court, so it can be inferred that he genuinely cares about their rights, even as a human noble. Even Aldenon the Wise sought to establish a kingdom where all people were free:

 

Aldenon conceived a plan to enlist strong allies and Calenhad went into the Brecilian Forest to make it so. But unbeknownst to the mage, Calenhad had made contact with the Chantry. When Calenhad returned at the head of the Ash Warriors as Aldenon expected, so as well did templars and Circle mages join our host. Aldenon was in a fury such as I've never seen. He wanted a kingdom of free men, of moral people beholden to law. Where a common man could tend his land safely and in peace. He lifted his staff and his voice echoed through the hills: "A civilization cannot be civil if it condones the slavery of another. And that is what this Circle is! But by accident of birth, those mages would be free to live, love, and die as they choose. The Circles will break—if it be one year, a decade, a century, or beyond. Tyrants always fall, and the downtrodden always strive for freedom!"

 

 

I don't think the idea of "human rights" (for lack of a better word) is a foreign concept in Thedas, despite the lack of rights and freedoms certain groups experience because of how they are born.

[wcholcombe]

There are characters who express that groups should have rights. Anders voices that he thinks the elves should rise up over their lack of rights, despite being a human mage. Alistair makes the move to give the elves representation at royal court, so it can be inferred that he genuinely cares about their rights, even as a human noble. Even Aldenon the Wise sought to establish a kingdom where all people were free:

 

 

I don't think the idea of "human rights" (for lack of a better word) is a foreign concept in Thedas, despite the lack of rights and freedoms certain groups experience because of how they are born.

Inidividuals can have a concept of human rights sure, but that doesn't make it a generally accepted belief.  You can find writings from the middle ages about the idiocy of divine right and the horribleness of nobility by birth over commoners but that didn't change the reality of the time.

 

Also, Allistairs elven appointment is more quid pro quo than any desire for fairness.  The elves assisted in the defeating of the blight.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

I think people should realize that Thedas has no concept of human rights and should stop applying our ideals to it.

 

"It's the right thing to do!"

 

They don't give a damn.

Hey, Thedas has to start sometime. My characters are bridge builders, and that bridge is called Equality. 

[durasteel]

From what we have seen Thedas doesn't actually employ a serf system.  Its just that peasants have no means to be able to move around greatly.  Plus, they have few rights of any kind.  This isn't a Templar deal or anything, it is just the facts of midevil europe society.

 

The peasants in Ferelden seem to be much more like the ceorles of Anglo-Saxon society (who were free men) than the serfs that lived in bondage in much of the rest of Western Europe. Based on BioWare's use of historical analogs for the societies of Thedas, though, I would expect the peasant class in Orlais to be serfs.

[wcholcombe]

The peasants in Ferelden seem to be much more like the ceorles of Anglo-Saxon society (who were free men) than the serfs that lived in bondage in much of the rest of Western Europe. Based on BioWare's use of historical analogs for the societies of Thedas, though, I would expect the peasant class in Orlais to be serfs.

That is indeed possible, but in Asunder it seemed more like they were free men, just didn't have a lot of rights when compared to the nobility.  I didn't get the vibe that the commoners in Orlais were sold along with the land they worked.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

I think the Elves are supposed to be the ones who took the Serf equivalent.

[Mistic]

That is indeed possible, but in Asunder it seemed more like they were free men, just didn't have a lot of rights when compared to the nobility.  I didn't get the vibe that the commoners in Orlais were sold along with the land they worked.

 

We only saw one village in Asunder, and it was only to showcase how much mages are feared outside their Circles. Not enough to talk about their current state. What we do know is that chevaliers have some nasty privileges over common folk, as Liselle's explains it in DA:O, something that doesn't happen in Ferelden.

[wcholcombe]

We only saw one village in Asunder, and it was only to showcase how much mages are feared outside their Circles. Not enough to talk about their current state. What we do know is that chevaliers have some nasty privileges over common folk, as Liselle's explains it in DA:O, something that doesn't happen in Ferelden.

Yeah but see, the fact that it was a village and not living on the land of the lord and the fact that they had money to spend in  a tavern are both things that are contrarian to serfdom.

[durasteel]

...

 

The problem many pro-mages have is that stepping out of the Circles is a privilege, not a right, and that it must be earned, and is not granted freely.

 

...

 

The threat of demonic possession isn't something that goes away after your mage tests and education- it's a matter of context, and aboloshing the Circles and offering mages total freedom won't remove those contexts.

 

The distinction between rights and privileges does not easily apply to the society of Thedas, since there doesn't seem to be a ubiquitous code or common law to provide the necessary context. Thedas isn't governed, by and large--it is ruled. Authority and power are one and the same, so the individual (like Flemeth) who has the power to defy the the zealots of the Chantry has the right to live free of their oppression.

 

The threat of demonic possession is obviously real, but I think it is dramatically exaggerated by the Chantry in order to spread the belief that they, and the Circle system they impose, are necessary and indispensable. If you look at societies outside of the Chantry's grasp, the abomination-fueled chaos you might expect to find simply doesn't exist. The Chasind's shamans, the Dalish keepers, the seers of Rivain, and hedge mages everywhere do not seem to pose the threat that the Chantry insists that apostates represent, despite the fact that these mages live more-or-less as free as any other member of their society.

 

Even in Tevinter, where mages not only can basically do as they please but in fact rule the non-mage society, the threat of demonic possession doesn't seem to be any greater than in the lands that fall under the influence of the "white chantry." 

 

Clearly, the assertion that it is necessary to lock mages away in towers to prevent them from becoming possessed is a load of crap. 

[durasteel]

I don't know if I'm really "pro-mage," and I don't think I'm "anti-templar." I'm definitely against the Chantry, which I think has predictably become a perversion of Andraste's philosophy over the past thousand years.

 

For me, personally, the idea of a circle of magi is not inherently bad. For one of my "main" characters to get behind the idea, however, several things would need to change from the current model (as we've seen it.) First, it would need to be optional. If a mage chose to leave the circle and live as a hedge mage, there would be no Templar hunters, no phylacteries, no threat of capture or death. The circle would provide organisation, safety, security, and comfort. Enchanting income and donations from wealthy patrons could support a standard of living much higher than most hedge mages could achieve.

 

Secondly, the Templar order would exist to defend the mages, not to control them. Defending mages would include killing dangerous abominations, and enforcing the code of conduct mages would need to agree to in order to live in the Circle. Using prohibited techniques like mind control would be grounds for the Templars to arrest the errant Circle mage, return him or her to the Circle tower for trial, and potentially carry out the sentence imposed by the court of enchanters.

 

Third, the Circle would need to be secular, not an arm of the Chantry. If an elf wants to join the Circle, it shouldn't be necessary to abandon veneration of (what's left of) the elvhen pantheon of gods. If a mage wants to venerate the flying spaghetti monster, so be it. The Circle shouldn't be governed in accordance with Chantry dogma, subject to Chantry edict, or related financially to the Chantry. The same goes for the Templars, they should be supported by the Circle and completely Chantry-independant. 

 

I think that the Circle towers should be individual grants from the crown, and the grant should be contingent upon circle mages swearing never to seek to rule any land beyond that granted (which might include a village and some farmland in addition to the tower itself.) The tower should swear to defend the kingdom, as the king promises to defend the tower.

 

I think there is a (very) remote chance that something like this might come to pass in Ferelden, and if it does my characters will support it (except for the contrarian ones, obviously.) I think there is a snowball's chance in hell of anything remotely like this happening in Orlais, though, so I find myself tending to gravitate more towards supporting thrashing the entire Circle system there, which seems to be what's happened. So, viva la revolution! 

[EmperorSahlertz]

I know right? Those mages have it so good! Never having privacy; Templars constantly over their shoulder. Some of them taking 'liberties' with the mages. On a really bad day being killed or made tranquil for existing. Seeing their friends suffer such a fate if they themselves don't. Being thrown to the wolves straight out of the gate and the penalty for losing is death or its friendly cousin. Being openly hated by the chantry and a lot of people outside the circle if you just so happen to ever earn the privelege of even stepping outside of it. Committing suicide simply to escape life in the circle.

 

Sign me up!

Where to start, where to start.....

 

1: There has been a grand total of ONE, confirmed rape of mages in the Circles. ONE. SINGULAR. Then we have a case of implied sexual abuse of Tranquils. Yet here you are, claiming that it happens all the time to the mages? Based on what evidence? Nothing? The facts you just pulled out of your arsehole? I would REALLY like to see what you base such accusations on, since there is NOTHING in the games which lends ANY credence to your claims.

 

2: Only ONE case in the entirety of the lore, of a Templar known to abuse of the Rite of Tranquility. ONE. SINGULAR. And yet here you are claiming it happens all the time. See where this is going? You are making baseless claims, simply because you have NOTHING else to actually back up your half-arsed arguements.

 

3: Only the INCOMPETENT or WEAK mages, who would ahve fallen to demons anyway are ever made Tranquil, and this happens ONLY with the authorization of the First Enchanter, which you may know is a MAGE. If the First Enchanter does not approve of it, then the apprentice can try his luck in the Harrowing, in which case he can prove himself a reliable mage.

 

4: Contrary to popular propaganda, the Chantry does NOT hate the mages. They fear them yes. It is a healthy fear however, since mages present a cosntant danger to the human way of life. Nor does the Chantry preach hatred towards mages. As a matter of fact, the Chant even says that magic is a GIFT given by the Maker, but that it is ALSO a curse. Which is of course a true assesment of Magic.

 

5: Anders is the ONLY source of your wild claim of a rampant rate of mage suicides. You of course accept his word as gospel, since it apparently aligns with your own wild claims of the Circle life, which holds just about as much water as any of the bile Anders ever spew.

 

6: Again contrary to popular propaganda the mages DO have privacy. NOTHING in the games so far supports the idea that Templars are constantly watching. As a matter of fact, there mere concept of the mages actually being able to concieve children together PROVES that Templars don't constantly watch the mages.

 

So yeah.. Let us NOT focus on the self-entitled mages just yet... And instead try to help people with REAL problems, like the peasants or better yet the City Elves.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.

 

Hmm, oddly fitting to the circumstances we find ourselves in.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

So yeah.. Let us NOT focus on the self-entitled mages just yet... And instead try to help people with REAL problems, like the peasants or better yet the City Elves.

While I feel for the Mages, I do agree that if any group should be helped, the City Elves and Casteless Dwarves should come first.

[wcholcombe]

I don't know if I'm really "pro-mage," and I don't think I'm "anti-templar." I'm definitely against the Chantry, which I think has predictably become a perversion of Andraste's philosophy over the past thousand years.

 

For me, personally, the idea of a circle of magi is not inherently bad. For one of my "main" characters to get behind the idea, however, several things would need to change from the current model (as we've seen it.) First, it would need to be optional. If a mage chose to leave the circle and live as a hedge mage, there would be no Templar hunters, no phylacteries, no threat of capture or death. The circle would provide organisation, safety, security, and comfort. Enchanting income and donations from wealthy patrons could support a standard of living much higher than most hedge mages could achieve.

 

Secondly, the Templar order would exist to defend the mages, not to control them. Defending mages would include killing dangerous abominations, and enforcing the code of conduct mages would need to agree to in order to live in the Circle. Using prohibited techniques like mind control would be grounds for the Templars to arrest the errant Circle mage, return him or her to the Circle tower for trial, and potentially carry out the sentence imposed by the court of enchanters.

 

Third, the Circle would need to be secular, not an arm of the Chantry. If an elf wants to join the Circle, it shouldn't be necessary to abandon veneration of (what's left of) the elvhen pantheon of gods. If a mage wants to venerate the flying spaghetti monster, so be it. The Circle shouldn't be governed in accordance with Chantry dogma, subject to Chantry edict, or related financially to the Chantry. The same goes for the Templars, they should be supported by the Circle and completely Chantry-independant. 

 

I think that the Circle towers should be individual grants from the crown, and the grant should be contingent upon circle mages swearing never to seek to rule any land beyond that granted (which might include a village and some farmland in addition to the tower itself.) The tower should swear to defend the kingdom, as the king promises to defend the tower.

 

I think there is a (very) remote chance that something like this might come to pass in Ferelden, and if it does my characters will support it (except for the contrarian ones, obviously.) I think there is a snowball's chance in hell of anything remotely like this happening in Orlais, though, so I find myself tending to gravitate more towards supporting thrashing the entire Circle system there, which seems to be what's happened. So, viva la revolution! 

That isn't all together a bad idea.  The main objection I would have are mostly built around the differing opinion of the threat of demonic possession.  I could point out things that disagree with you such as the chasind basically practicing the same right as the harrowing to prove an apprentice can resist possession, the documented high degree of insanity among hedge wizards, etc, but it is pointless to do so as we won't agree.

 

Do I think mages should have more freedoms, yes.  Do I think they should be able to live wherever they want-no.  I think that if they aren't required to live at a circle, they should at the very least be required to be members of a cicle and to return to the circle 2 or 3 times a year in order to continue training, share knowledge, and verify that they haven't fallen off the wagon so to speak.

[Grieving Natashina]

While I feel for the Mages, I do agree that if any group should be helped, the City Elves and Casteless Dwarves should come first.

Aye, same here.  In Inquisition, I'd like to get a chance to talk to an Orzammar dwarf and see how things are going.  I did pick Bhelen after all, so hopefully DA:I recognizes it.

[durasteel]

That isn't all together a bad idea.  The main objection I would have are mostly built around the differing opinion of the threat of demonic possession.  I could point out things that disagree with you such as the chasind basically practicing the same right as the harrowing to prove an apprentice can resist possession, the documented high degree of insanity among hedge wizards, etc, but it is pointless to do so as we won't agree.

 

Do I think mages should have more freedoms, yes.  Do I think they should be able to live wherever they want-no.  I think that if they aren't required to live at a circle, they should at the very least be required to be members of a cicle and to return to the circle 2 or 3 times a year in order to continue training, share knowledge, and verify that they haven't fallen off the wagon so to speak.

 

I'm not 100% against the use of a harrowing-type of initiation for Circle membership, although I think that it should be possible for a Circle to come up with a better way to do it than to dangle the aspirant into fade as bait and see if anything bites (figuratively speaking.) As far as hedge mages going insane, hell... let 'em. My concept leaves them on their own, so they have no protection. If they become a threat, kill 'em. If they become too big a threat, then the Circle (mages and templars both) would go after them under the "protect the kingdom" mandate.

 

If you've lived a while as a hedge mage, maybe healing villagers and livestock and tweaking the weather a little bit for the farmers in exchange for food and sundries, and you realise that you've begun to talk to yourself a little more than you're comfortable with, maybe it's time to join the Circle.

[EmissaryofLies]

Where to start, where to start.....

 

1: There has been a grand total of ONE, confirmed rape of mages in the Circles. ONE. SINGULAR. Then we have a case of implied sexual abuse of Tranquils. Yet here you are, claiming that it happens all the time to the mages? Based on what evidence? Nothing? The facts you just pulled out of your arsehole? I would REALLY like to see what you base such accusations on, since there is NOTHING in the games which lends ANY credence to your claims.

 

2: Only ONE case in the entirety of the lore, of a Templar known to abuse of the Rite of Tranquility. ONE. SINGULAR. And yet here you are claiming it happens all the time. See where this is going? You are making baseless claims, simply because you have NOTHING else to actually back up your half-arsed arguements.

 

3: Only the INCOMPETENT or WEAK mages, who would ahve fallen to demons anyway are ever made Tranquil, and this happens ONLY with the authorization of the First Enchanter, which you may know is a MAGE. If the First Enchanter does not approve of it, then the apprentice can try his luck in the Harrowing, in which case he can prove himself a reliable mage.

 

4: Contrary to popular propaganda, the Chantry does NOT hate the mages. They fear them yes. It is a healthy fear however, since mages present a cosntant danger to the human way of life. Nor does the Chantry preach hatred towards mages. As a matter of fact, the Chant even says that magic is a GIFT given by the Maker, but that it is ALSO a curse. Which is of course a true assesment of Magic.

 

5: Anders is the ONLY source of your wild claim of a rampant rate of mage suicides. You of course accept his word as gospel, since it apparently aligns with your own wild claims of the Circle life, which holds just about as much water as any of the bile Anders ever spew.

 

6: Again contrary to popular propaganda the mages DO have privacy. NOTHING in the games so far supports the idea that Templars are constantly watching. As a matter of fact, there mere concept of the mages actually being able to concieve children together PROVES that Templars don't constantly watch the mages.

 

So yeah.. Let us NOT focus on the self-entitled mages just yet... And instead try to help people with REAL problems, like the peasants or better yet the City Elves.

 

1. Right out of the gate with putting words in my mouth. How quaint. Perhaps you should read my post again before inferring things that aren't there. Some templars taking liberties with mages is a fact. Karras was blatant about it. Alrik all but ripped Ella's clothes off and violated her on the spot or can't you read between the lines? You want to stick your fingers in your ears and ignore the obvious, be my guest. 

 

2. And again you put more words into my mouth. I was referring to the rite of annulment, what do you think 'one really bad day' refers to? Or does that not count? You only need to be murdered or mind wiped once. Not to mention that Kirkwall proved that mages have absolutely no one to count on when templars choose to abuse their power. Not to mention that Alrik was NEVER punished for his actions by an actual authority. As a matter of fact it would seem that they are not by default held accountable for their actions. It seems to fall upon the KC's shoudlers and seeing how the Chantry recruits, the odds are not looking good for those spoiled mages.

 

3.Because no templar has ever strong armed a first enchanter. And the templars who are recruited because of their religous fervor and have been taught to fear and hate mages for potentially the entirety of their lives will be completely impartial and loving in their judgements.

 

4. The Chantry doesn't hate mages, the same way that they didn't and don't hate the elves. I suppose it makes no difference, when they're still responsible for what's happened to mages over the course of nearly a thousand years, 17 recorded genocides is just the tip of the iceberg. The chantry is a duplicitous mealemouthed organization that wouldn't know integrity if a Qunari headbutted them with it. And I guess Uldred's helpful suggestion of lighting the beacon at Ostagar being met with "we will not trust our lives to your spells mage!" by a chantry priest is an anomaly, funny, I also guess that mages being blamed for Thedas' version of original sin is an anomaly too.

 

5. Anders? The mage who healed mundanes in his clinic for free for almost a decade? That Anders? Yes, I suppose because of one arguably evil action he made it completely and utterly null and voids anything he ever said. Oh and btw, I never said there was a rampant rate of suicide. Try again.

 

6. Yes children that are then ripped away and given to the loving and benevolent Chantry that has never done nothing to nobody. And the templars standing around the circle of Fereldan are simply figments of my imagination. Not to mention several mage testimonies, in both games. But that doesn't matter! Somewhere a peasant is being kicked out of the tavern for being a drunk... The injustice!

 

Do what you like.