8640 réponses à ce sujet

[renfrees]

Hah, comparing mage with mundanes is like comparing nuclear bomb with a battalion of riflemen.

[durasteel]

What dangers have I overstated that are not supported outside of Chantry dogma?

 

Specific points, please. I'm not sure why you expect me to argue from positions not my own, so would you please identify those people already and move on to talking about my own positions?

...

I'm quite comfortable in claiming that there are non-existential threats that can still have high enough costs to warrant restrictive precautions against them..

 

I think the one who needs to provide specifics here is you.

 

What specific threats justify, in your mind, segregating mages away from the general population, locked away on penalty of death in a Templar tower of internment? Please also indicate for each threat whether it is the magnitude of the threat or the nature of the specific harm threatened which provides this justification. 

[durasteel]

Hah, comparing mage with mundanes is like comparing nuclear bomb with a battalion of riflemen.

 

Because...

[dzs Angel]

I usually try to avoid responding to you directly, but I'll make an exception.

 

Are you suggesting that if a posse of Thedas rednecks killed your family and burned your house down you would find it unacceptable to give freedom to peasants? The problem with the mage that blows up your house isn't that he's a mage, it's that he blew up your house. The only difference between a mage and a posse of rednecks, in this example, is that the Templars won't give a crap if the rednecks burn your house down with you in it, because they're only on a mission from The Maker regarding one very specific and uncommon danger.

Keep up the good work

 

Since Alistair was Templar enough to know the Circle isn't simply enslavement, humiliation, tranquility, and death (I won't quibble of repression)... yes. I can expect him to maintain it, as he has.

 

Orlais isn't imposing the circle system on everyone: the Andrastian societies themselves have reached a general cultural consensus.

 

Sure you can, and I'm rather amazed you can't think of any examples of a member of a population group oppressing the group. It's only one of the major political trends of the last hundred years.

1.

 

Alistair is the embodiement of a true Paragorn. Of course he would do everything to spare Conner of his fate. Even if he couldn´t, he would at least try.

 

2.

 

I never said I can´t think of any examples where it happened. I said the Grey Wardens couldn´t do it. They do anything to stop the blight. They would enlist every magister of Tevinter, if they had to. They need mages, warriors and rogues as strong as possible. They already use boodmagic. Once they have taken over Anderfels, they will do anything to increase their military strength in order to fight the darkspawn. A circle system, where the chantry controls their most powerful (possible) recruits, wouldn´t be in their best interests. And they don´t have any prejudices against mages and bloodmagic.

[TheKomandorShepard]

Because...

 

Because 1 person isn't threat even close that 1 mage is compare pesant to zathrian or few mages that caused blights...

[Veruin]

 

 

Alistair is the embodiement of a true Paragorn. Of course he would do everything to spare Conner of his fate. Even if he couldn´t, he would at least try.

 

 

This is the same Alistair that threw a fit and effectively abandoned his country because a man he loathed wasn't executed, yes?

 

I like Alistair and he's a good guy, but he's nowhere near being a "true paragon".

[renfrees]

Because...

Because. Project everything, including, but not limiting to fear.

[durasteel]

Because. Project everything, including, but not limiting to fear.

 

You lost me. How does that support your "nuke... riflemen" analogy?

[TheKomandorShepard]

You lost me. How does that support your "nuke... riflemen" analogy?

 

mage local-world scale threat same for nuke non-mage individual scale threat same for rifleman...

[dzs Angel]

This is the same Alistair that threw a fit and effectively abandoned his country because a man he loathed wasn't executed, yes?

 

I like Alistair and he's a good guy, but he's nowhere near being a "true paragon".

He didn´t like Loghain, because Loghain killed his brother, tried to murder his uncle, used his nephew, tried to kill him, enslaved elves, plunged ferelden into civil war to take the thrown, ignored the blight thus risking the extermination of ferelden, destroyed and villainized his Grey Warden Order. So you should still be able to refer to him as a true Paragorn.

 

BTW:

 

He saved his country, reclaimed the thrown and stopped the blight. Loghain couldn´t have stopped the blight, because he doomed the Grey Wardens in Ferelden.

[Heimdall]

You're conflating what a mage can do with effort, planning, and preparation with the damage a mage can do by neglect.

It might be true that only exceptional mundanes can gather together enough thugs, bandits, or soldiers to become a threat equal to a typical mage's power, but these exceptional mundanes are common enough that they seem to outnumber mages. Your argument is like saying, "Yeah, but the mundane has to pick up a sword to be dangerous." There are swords everywhere, so it's a meaningless distinction.

A Mage can tear the veil and cause many deaths through neglect, see Connor. It doesn't take a deliberate act.

Oh come on. Are you really going to keep insisting that a man that can expend great resources to raise an army is equivalent to a Mage? Even were the comparison less ridiculous, your still comparing aggregates as if aggregates are the issue. The issue is that an individual mundane cannot do nearly as much damage as an individual Mage. Your trying to get around that by counting an army of mundanes as extensions of the one, but your only proving the point. If it takes a small army to equal a Mage. Mages are more dangerous.

Besides, it's disingenuous to say such mundanes have killed more men then Mages with the circle system in place.

EDIT: Not to mention, the ability to raise a mundane army is not exclusive to mundanes. Mages with sufficient opportunity can do the same.

[renfrees]

You lost me. How does that support your "nuke... riflemen" analogy?

Do i really have to get into specifics? I thought my analogy was too clear.

[durasteel]

A Mage can tear the veil and cause many deaths through neglect, see Connor. It doesn't take a deliberate act.

Oh come on. Are you really going to keep insisting that a man that can expend great resources to raise an army is equivalent to a Mage? Even were the comparison less ridiculous, your still comparing aggregates as if aggregates are the issue. The issue is that an individual mundane cannot do nearly as much damage as an individual Mage. Your trying to get around that by counting an army of mundanes as extensions of the one, but your only proving the point. If it takes a small army to equal a Mage. Mages are more dangerous.

Besides, it's disingenuous to say such mundanes have killed more men then Mages with the circle system in place.

EDIT: Not to mention, the ability to raise a mundane army is not exclusive to mundanes. Mages with sufficient opportunity can do the same.

 

My point is not that an individual mage is no more dangerous that an individual mundane. That would be silly... you can find individual mundanes much more dangerous than mages, while the average mage is clearly more dangerous than the average mundane. Those distinctions are meaningless.

 

My point is that the threat posed by mages--in general--is not disproportionate when compared to the other threats faced by denizens of Thedas. My point is that common folk who are much more likely to die at the hands of a bandit, a Chasind raider, or a wild animal nevertheless are encouraged to be afraid of apostates, when in fact there is nothing to suggest that Malcolm Hawke was anything other than an upstanding member of the Lothering community.

 

Far from the "ticking time bomb" some of you seem to think mages equate to, there doesn't seem to be much of a chance at all for a mage, going about his normal business, to suddenly and spontaneously abominate. To imply that you wouldn't want a mage to visit your home because he might explode at any moment is hyperbole and paranoia completely unsupported by the games or related media.

[The Baconer]

Hah, comparing mage with mundanes is like comparing nuclear bomb with a battalion of riflemen.

 

[durasteel]

Do i really have to get into specifics? I thought my analogy was too clear.

 

If you're gonna suggest that the thing speaks for itself, then I have to say it's a really, really bad analogy. A troop of heroic warriors from a fantasy setting, like Grey Wardens, Ash Warriors, the Legion of the Dead, or the Templars are more than a match for any single mage in most circumstances, and no single mage has ever come near the destructive potential of a nuclear weapon.

 

Fail analogy is fail.

[wcholcombe]

My point is not that an individual mage is no more dangerous that an individual mundane. That would be silly... you can find individual mundanes much more dangerous than mages, while the average mage is clearly more dangerous than the average mundane. Those distinctions are meaningless.

 

My point is that the threat posed by mages--in general--is not disproportionate when compared to the other threats faced by denizens of Thedas. My point is that common folk who are much more likely to die at the hands of a bandit, a Chasind raider, or a wild animal nevertheless are encouraged to be afraid of apostates, when in fact there is nothing to suggest that Malcolm Hawke was anything other than an upstanding member of the Lothering community.

 

Far from the "ticking time bomb" some of you seem to think mages equate to, there doesn't seem to be much of a chance at all for a mage, going about his normal business, to suddenly and spontaneously abominate. To imply that you wouldn't want a mage to visit your home because he might explode at any moment is hyperbole and paranoia completely unsupported by the games or related media.

While I won't deny the antimages over play the danger of mages, I would also say that the pro mages downplay it too much.  Again, I agree mages don't sneeze and become abominations, but they also don't have to go out of their way to be possessed by a demon.  Lore indicates untrained mages can be possessed through their dreams-read the 1st dragon age comic about the templars and mages.  I fully agree that a trained mage is a much lower threat without intentionally meaning to be, but I have no such confidence in an untrained mage or even an apprentice.

[TheKomandorShepard]

If you're gonna suggest that the thing speaks for itself, then I have to say it's a really, really bad analogy. A troop of heroic warriors from a fantasy setting, like Grey Wardens, Ash Warriors, the Legion of the Dead, or the Templars are more than a match for any single mage in most circumstances, and no single mage has ever come near the destructive potential of a nuclear weapon.

 

Fail analogy is fail.

 

Yeah blight you lost... and no that the warden who is chuck norris in dragon age world can destroy it without effort abomnation is more powerful than any individual in thedas especially more powerful demons like pride demons that cassandra and any other person couldn't even scratch... and again blight that makes damage even bigger than nuke...

 

While I won't deny the antimages over play the danger of mages, I would also say that the pro mages downplay it too much.  Again, I agree mages don't sneeze and become abominations, but they also don't have to go out of their way to be possessed by a demon.  Lore indicates untrained mages can be possessed through their dreams-read the 1st dragon age comic about the templars and mages.  I fully agree that a trained mage is a much lower threat without intentionally meaning to be, but I have no such confidence in an untrained mage or even an apprentice.

 

Lets see ferelden tower full of abomnations why corruption of 1 mage...

lets see kirkwall tower full of abomnations why corruption and possession

blights power hunger of few mages

Zathrian creating curse and agressive powerful animals that infects other because he was angry

connor mage child created small army of undead and destroyed castle and village without effort because he wanted help father

and more yep they are dangerous and it doesn't matter if trained or not...

avernus summoned demons and torn veil for "greater good"

Ih we have also tarohne that was creating abomnations because she was insane

don't forget about qunari mage who almost destroyed world because that he was rised...

baroness torned veil and was killing childrens for blood just because she was "lady"

[durasteel]

While I won't deny the antimages over play the danger of mages, I would also say that the pro mages downplay it too much.  Again, I agree mages don't sneeze and become abominations, but they also don't have to go out of their way to be possessed by a demon.  Lore indicates untrained mages can be possessed through their dreams-read the 1st dragon age comic about the templars and mages.  I fully agree that a trained mage is a much lower threat without intentionally meaning to be, but I have no such confidence in an untrained mage or even an apprentice.

 

I don't necessarily disagree with your general point, but we've really only see evidence of that with untrained mages. That is not a threat mitigated by the Circle system, since mage kids aren't identified until their ability manifests.

 

Again, I've never suggested that mages do not pose a threat, I just don't agree that the threat justifies--or is significantly reduced by--lifelong internment.

[dzs Angel]

Nothing Xena, Gimli, Legolas or Aragorn couldn´t have done by themselves.

[wcholcombe]

I don't necessarily disagree with your general point, but we've really only see evidence of that with untrained mages. That is not a threat mitigated by the Circle system, since mage kids aren't identified until their ability manifests.

 

Again, I've never suggested that mages do not pose a threat, I just don't agree that the threat justifies--or is significantly reduced by--lifelong internment.

And we have had that discussion, I don't think they need lifeterm internment either, but they do have to make concessions as well, the idea of allowing untrained mages to do whatever they want and only address it after something goes wrong isn't practical when a little oversite can achieve it much better.

[durasteel]

There is a limit to how much you can use Zathrian and Connor as examples to represent mages generally, just as there is a limit to how much you can rely on Meredith as a representative Templar. All of them were empowered by plot elements with impossible abilities.

 

Zathrian made himself immortal by binding a demon into a wolf with a curse of some sort. If that were generally possible, Tevinter would be full of cursed animals sealed up within tomb-prisons, and the Magisters would all be hundreds of years old.

 

Connor and his demon girlfriend created an undead army and held the keep's household in thrall for days. If mages were generally able to raise undead armies like that, the Qunari would be a memory, and a cautionary tale against messing with the magisters.

 

Meredith is gone by Act 3, all that's left is a thrall of the red lyrium idol/sword.

 

I think each of these are special snowflakes, and not really examples from which you can extrapolate the characteristics of mages and templars.

[durasteel]

Nothing Xena, Gimli, Legolas or Aragorn couldn´t have done by themselves.

 

I didn't remember Xena from Lord of the Rings...

[durasteel]

And we have had that discussion, I don't think they need lifeterm internment either, but they do have to make concessions as well, the idea of allowing untrained mages to do whatever they want and only address it after something goes wrong isn't practical when a little oversite can achieve it much better.

 

I think that's pretty clearly the "middle ground" in this conflict.

 

How receptive would you be to having "a little oversight" being overseen by mages? If the principle that mages must be governed is accepted, would self-governance be acceptable? I frankly cannot imagine mages at this point ever agreeing to Templar control again.

[TheKomandorShepard]

There is a limit to how much you can use Zathrian and Connor as examples to represent mages generally, just as there is a limit to how much you can rely on Meredith as a representative Templar. All of them were empowered by plot elements with impossible abilities.

 

Zathrian made himself immortal by binding a demon into a wolf with a curse of some sort. If that were generally possible, Tevinter would be full of cursed animals sealed up within tomb-prisons, and the Magisters would all be hundreds of years old.

 

Connor and his demon girlfriend created an undead army and held the keep's household in thrall for days. If mages were generally able to raise undead armies like that, the Qunari would be a memory, and a cautionary tale against messing with the magisters.

 

Meredith is gone by Act 3, all that's left is a thrall of the red lyrium idol/sword.

 

I think each of these are special snowflakes, and not really examples from which you can extrapolate the characteristics of mages and templars.

 

Zathrian did what everyone mage could do at least trained mage just because he was angry and connor did what every other untrained or trained mage would did after turning into abomnation because he wanted help his father... 

 

So yes i can use them as example that represents mages especially that they aren't unique cases we have plenty of them...when zathrian uses magic to get revenge and connor simple turns into abomnation as many other mages ultimately like every other case when it comes about mages it ends as disaster...

 

And well i doubt that any sane mages even if "evil" would want summon spirits/demons to possess undead and mages that do probably don't live long or end possessed.Demon can control such army mage not... 

 

pretty much meredith sums every red templar very well and they will in my pt end there where mages will end as well... and well meredith is very unique example as it never happened before to non-mage or templar all you need to do is destroy red lyrium...

 

 

I think that's pretty clearly the "middle ground" in this conflict.

 

How receptive would you be to having "a little oversight" being overseen by mages? If the principle that mages must be governed is accepted, would self-governance be acceptable? I frankly cannot imagine mages at this point ever agreeing to Templar control again.

 

 

it is not that outside libertarians mages cared about that only they had problem with templar control...

[dzs Angel]

I didn't remember Xena from Lord of the Rings...

That´s because She(Lucy Lawless) is a friend of Hercules(Kevin Sorbo). Xena is a tv series from the 90´s, She is a former deciple of Ares(Kevin Smith)( Greek God of War).