8640 réponses à ce sujet

[Steelcan]

The Right of Annulment, is by definition, genocide. Including elderly and children. 

 

You missed my point

[Master Warder Z_]

The Right of Annulment, is by definition, genocide. Including elderly and children. 

 

Only by Definition, and only if you include mages as a separate subgroup from normal people (which i do)

 

Still don't view it as magically bad though just because some one said the word "GENOCIDE"

 

Its a needed measure upon occasion.

[dzs Angel]

I don't think it has anything to do with moral superiority; I think certain Circle practices like the Rite of Tranquility, the Right of Annulment, and the Harrowing are going to cause some people to strongly disagree with what's done in the Chantry controlled institutions.

The chantry is willing to keep and increase control and abuse of the mages by any means neccessary. That is why they are doing their utmost to keep us afraid of magic in the first place. 

 

Xil, you haven't read any of my discussions about my idea for fixing the circles have you. At no point have I advocated the templars occupying the position of absolute authority they currently possess.

 

And even those who did the best were only doing what they believed was right, history may say it was, but it was still their opinion at the time.

Still you are trying to justify criminal actions of some templars.

[EmissaryofLies]

If I support the RoA does that mean I am a supporter of genocide?  Perhaps a fetishist for it?

 

Nothing wrong with killing a couple mages here and there. Just be sure to claim a divine right, wear a nice uniform and not be a mage.

 

Plus it's not 'genocide' it's 'annulment'! That changes everything!

[dragonflight288]

You missed my point

 

Whether I did or didn't doesn't change the fact that supporting Annulment is also essentially supporting the slaughter of every man, woman and child in a Circle. There is no way around that. And the devs confirmed that even if anyone is spared in an Annulment, they are made tranquil, so they aren't free to live their lives or be relocated to another circle. 

 

The whole point of an annulment is to purge a Circle completely. Nothing changes this. 

[wcholcombe]

More templars are being sent from outside the city to restore order (also, the mages are only spared if there isn't actually an Annulment in Ferelden); it's hardly clear if Cullen will even be in charge for long, and even if he is, he sees Tranquility as a mercy, as shown if you speak to him after completing Dissent.

I don't think so.  Sorry, I think Cullen will follow Gregoire's lead in Ferelden.  He may see it as a mercy, but that doesn't mean he will use it unecessarily. 

[Grieving Natashina]

I point out that it's an issue of contention with the disagreement with the Chantry controlled Circles since the Circles of Magi seem to have now been either emancipated or dissolved since the events of Asunder.

 

Frankly, I don't think a consensus will be possible between the two sides.

I long ago gave up a consensus ever being reached.  I think this thread just serves it's original purpose: To clearly illustrate why more of a balanced depiction of Templars and Mages are so badly needed.  We've all seen the extremes of both factions at the worst, perhaps we should see more moderate members of those factions at their best this time.

 

Crazy thought, I know. 

[Steelcan]

Auld Wulf has been gone too long

[Xilizhra]

I don't think so.  Sorry, I think Cullen will follow Gregoire's lead in Ferelden.  He may see it as a mercy, but that doesn't mean he will use it unecessarily. 

Feel free to disagree with Gaider, I just don't think it's helpful. And if you do, I reserve the right to say that abominations really aren't that bad, because that's also not shown in-game.

 

 

I long ago gave up a consensus ever being reached.  I think this thread just serves it's original purpose: To clearly illustrate why more of a balanced depiction of Templars and Mages are so badly needed.  We've all seen the extremes of both factions at the worst, perhaps we should see more moderate members of those factions at their best this time.

 

Crazy thought, I know. 

It doesn't matter. The templar institution is the problem, not the incidental abuses.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

I long ago gave up a consensus ever being reached.  I think this thread just serves it's original purpose: To clearly illustrate why more of a balanced depiction of Templars and Mages are so badly needed.  We've all seen the extremes of both factions at the worst, perhaps we should see more moderate members of those factions at their best this time.

 

Crazy thought, I know. 

Well, Bioware said somewhere that just like how DA2 showed the worst of both sides, Inquisition will show the more human side to both factions.

[eyezonlyii]

Feel free to disagree with Gaider, I just don't think it's helpful. And if you do, I reserve the right to say that abominations really aren't that bad, because that's also not shown in-game.

 

What? Every abomination we've seen has attacked/killed people. I think the evidence is there.

[dragonflight288]

I long ago gave up a consensus ever being reached.  I think this thread just serves it's original purpose: To clearly illustrate why more of a balanced depiction of Templars and Mages are so badly needed.  We've all seen the extremes of both factions at the worst, perhaps we should see more moderate members of those factions at their best this time.

 

Crazy thought, I know. 

 

I like it despite the crazy. And I suspect MOST of us aren't as divided as the forums may indicate, but disagree on the principle of whether mages should have freedom or not, and even then, no one I know of has even said mages should have total freedom to do whatever they want, despite some impressions I get from some of the more extremist or argumentative supporters of the templars.

[AresKeith]

If I support the RoA does that mean I am a supporter of genocide?  Perhaps a fetishist for it?

 

I guess I'm a supporter too since I consider it necessary as a last resort

[dragonflight288]

What? Every abomination we've seen has attacked/killed people. I think the evidence is there.

 

Wynne attacked and killed darkspawn, it's true. Fear the dangerous abomination Wynne! Slayer of darkspawn and protector of Ferelden! oooh. *waves hand dramaticlly*

[Steelcan]

It doesn't matter. The templar institution is the problem, not the incidental abuses.

 

No, the problem is mages making deals with demons and getting possessed

[wcholcombe]

The chantry is willing to keep and increase control and abuse of the mages by any means neccessary. That is why they are doing their utmost to keep us afraid of magic in the first place. 

 

Still you are trying to justify criminal actions of some templars.

Seriously, do we have to go back to the evil chantry argument.  Fine, you asked for it.

 

And before you jump to defense with the argument that the fear of mages is a chantry product, the chantry doesn't lie about the dangers of magic.  At no point are they fabricating anything.  The magisters enslaved almost the entire continent, Abominations do occur and are horrible -unless you believe Uldred that they are the natural progression of mages...Anyone Anyone?- the abuses of blood magic are horrible, and all indications are that magic unleashed the blight on Thedas.  So you can accuse the Chantry of maybe embellishing, but not lying.

 

And please show me where I have justified ANY criminal action by templars.  I personally think the templars in DA2 who committed criminal acts should be fed to darkspawn or hung from the twin by their necks.  I haven't defended any of those abominations.

 

If you are referring to ROA, Harrowing, or Tranquility-those by definition aren't criminal, they are the law.

And no, I am not  hiding behind the law making it right, I do honestly believe they are necessary.  Show me a proven alternative that works and I will support it.  I refuse to believe no one has attempted the harrowing with a master mage to make it safer for the apprentice. Don't head canon me that they haven't, you can't prove it anymore than I can prove my opinion on it.  Just because we would see it as appalling in our world, doesn't make it a criminal act or morally repugnant in Thedas.

[LobselVith8]

I long ago gave up a consensus ever being reached.  I think this thread just serves it's original purpose: To clearly illustrate why more of a balanced depiction of Templars and Mages are so badly needed.  We've all seen the extremes of both factions at the worst, perhaps we should see more moderate members of those factions at their best this time.

 

Crazy thought, I know. 

 

I get the impression we might get that in Inquisition, given what the developers have said about the reaction from fans to the extremes presented in Dragon Age II. Although I doubt that will sway any of us from the side we currently agree with, I think depth and nuance for both factions will be better than both sides devolving into some sort of monstrosity.

[Xilizhra]

What? Every abomination we've seen has attacked/killed people. I think the evidence is there.

I meant not that powerful.

[dzs Angel]

I point out that it's an issue of contention with the disagreement with the Chantry controlled Circles since the Circles of Magi seem to have now been either emancipated or dissolved since the events of Asunder.

 

Frankly, I don't think a consensus will be possible between the two sides.

Agreed. It is a discussion about dominance against freedom, no matter how they put it.

[wcholcombe]

I point out that it's an issue of contention with the disagreement with the Chantry controlled Circles since the Circles of Magi seem to have now been either emancipated or dissolved since the events of Asunder.

 

Frankly, I don't think a consensus will be possible between the two sides.

neither do I.  However, that is why I plan on using the inquisition./Chantry to make both sides sit down and shut up.

[durasteel]

That, and Xil does have an undeniable sense of moral superiority, which I find utterly hilarious

 

When arguing against a position advocated by at least two posters who claim to identify with D&D alignments on the "evil" side of the spectrum, and when taking a position in favor of the rights of an oppressed minority against the tyranny of a religious majority, well... How the hell would anyone not have a sense of moral superiority?

 

Frankly, I came to this debate with a lot of apathy. The "kill all mages" and "all mages are insane morons" diatribes, in particular some really venomous and altogether baseless opinions regarding Merrill, have driven me pretty solidly into the "pro-mage" camp. The "anti-mage" position has become repugnant.

[wcholcombe]

I meant not that powerful.

Connor was pretty impressive powerful as was Uldred.

[Xilizhra]

Connor was pretty impressive powerful as was Uldred.

Connor had little personal power, just a lot of time to summon other demons into corpses. When actually fighting Connor, the demon isn't too impressive. Uldred is more powerful, but pride demons are at the top of the hierarchy and quite rare.

[Steelcan]

When arguing against a position advocated by at least two posters who claim to identify with D&D alignments on the "evil" side of the spectrum, and when taking a position in favor of the rights of an oppressed minority against the tyranny of a religious majority, well... How the hell would anyone not have a sense of moral superiority?

 

Frankly, I came to this debate with a lot of apathy. The "kill all mages" and "all mages are insane morons" diatribes, in particular some really venomous and altogether baseless opinions regarding Merrill, have driven me pretty solidly into the "pro-mage" camp. The "anti-mage" position has become repugnant.

 

That's not why I find Xil's self righteousness hilarious, good try though

 

I came to BSN fairly pro-mage, then the pro-mage crowd turned me off of that

[Veruin]

When arguing against a position advocated by at least two posters who claim to identify with D&D alignments on the "evil" side of the spectrum, and when taking a position in favor of the rights of an oppressed minority against the tyranny of a religious majority, well... How the hell would anyone not have a sense of moral superiority?

 

Frankly, I came to this debate with a lot of apathy. The "kill all mages" and "all mages are insane morons" diatribes, in particular some really venomous and altogether baseless opinions regarding Merrill, have driven me pretty solidly into the "pro-mage" camp. The "anti-mage" position has become repugnant.

The moral superiority doesn't just stop at those two posters.  That's the problem.  It's used on anyone that doesn't agree with it.  

 

Basically a smug version of Plaintiff's "Don't agree with me?  You're a bigot!"

 

 

That's not why I find Xil's self righteousness hilarious, good try though

 

Also this.