Despite the mage situation not fitting the definition of slavery?
Despite the Mage situation not being even vaguely comparable to slavery?
The fact that people have debated the view of the Chantry controlled Circles as slavery would suggest that it's not quite as simple as that, but the point I was making (if you bothered to read what I wrote) was that the conditions of the Circle don't preclude it from being slavery.
A Choice is a choice.
Slaves aren't given any of those.
And Tranquility isn't so bad if you listen to the Tranquil, seems like a very mellow, uncomplicated existence.
I don't know. "Obey or die" is a choice. As for Tranquil, we all know your blatant disregard of evidence from those who actually have all of their faculties back.
I don't know. "Obey or die" is a choice. As for Tranquil, we all know your blatant disregard of evidence from those who actually have all of their faculties back.
"Its more like, Take the test and fail if you fail you die, or you can take this handy rite and even leave the circle if you like"
And your blatant disregard for the evidence of the fact their not emotionally composed and cannot be rationale in said states.
Asunder made it very clear, not my fault you don't believe what was wrote.
But then again its you, you take your personal headcanon over the lore any day.
Those within Darismund brought it upon themselves, you think rocking the boat after Kirkwall is smart? Them trying to rebel was about the same as playing chicken with a tank. And Orsino and Anders are just as much to blame as Meredith :/ The mages of Kirkwall weren't saints and trying to paint them as victims is laughable.
Right but were they performing mass blood magic rituals? I didn't hear so. As a matter of fact check out the Rivain entry on Dragon Age Wikia. I can quote it if you like. Nothing written seems to come close to supporting the idea that mages cannot be integrated into society, or that they cannot be trusted with their freedom. Almost the entire templar/chantry position falls apart when applied to Rivain. Which is exactly why the Chantry slaughtered them in a fit of rage. As I believe.
Alrik to date has only done so once, and that was only according to Anders, presumably i'd argue that consorting with an Apostate is a crime worthy of tranquilty and thus Karl's was justified. and he didn't even rape, her made a playful bit of innuendo which you can interpret that way.
Exactly, he definitely wasn't going to rape her! I know when I see a woman on her knees begging a man for mercy and he claims that she'll "do anything I ask", I think of playful innuendo! You cannot be serious.
What does the Gray Warden bit have to do with anything we are discussing here? Are you just that low on ammunition? And Mage children, Again Hyperbole and unsubstantiated. Assuming you go by what a handful of mages told you, that can vary depending what was done and how it was done.
The Grey Warden bit shows just how far they are willing to go even when it is not their place. Even when Anders was copasetic and operating with efficiency. Of course you can blame that on gameplay or companion immunity, pick your poison if you're so bold.
The claims about mage children are not unsubstianted, Wynne claims as much. But go ahead and dismiss it, changes nothing.
:/ You can support every word you typed, but to me its just a mess of propaganda and Rhetoric and every thing you just about claimed was either biased or unconfirmed.
Of course it is. Anything that puts templars into a not so innocent light is propaganda and fallacious in some way or another. Because as far as I can tell, templars have never done nothin' to nobody. And everything that I typed that is demonstrably true or supported with evidence is simply rheotic and propaganda, almost like the rite of tranquility is a "mercy". 
Mages aren't forced to do anything that the mudanes aren't, disregarding education.
By definition the circles aren't slavery.
Putting men, women, and children into a confined area where they are governed by a religious organization that has made it dangerous to be a mage outside of the Circle Tower because of their religious rhetoric, the same organization that has absolute control and authority over their lives and humanity in the name of religion and law, and where they can either have their humanity stripped from them with no option to contest this Rite or where they can all be killed en mass, makes me feel that you're being more than a little disingenuous about the nature of the Chantry controlled Circles.
Also, by definition, the Chantry controlled Circles can be viewed as slavery.
Anders. Because he basically is mage Meredith, they just choose not to have him be the end boss.
Seriously. Anders-Justice Meredith-Idol
Meredith Annuls the Circle Anders blows up the chantry
Neither of them believe in compromise and refuse to see the views of others.
Anders would have made such a better evil mage than Orsino did.
This is kinda long but I promise its worth the read. Anders was never meant to be the big bad.
People are going either "OMG HE'S AN EVIL MURDERING BASTARD" or "OMG FINALLY SOMEONE BLEW UP THE CHANTRY" and missing the bloody point: that Anders himself never questioned that what he did was wrong. He fully acknowledges that his actions were murder, and were morally contemptible, and that justice was required of him for what he did. What he understood is that it wasn't about right or wrong, it was about necessity. He believed that the system of imprisoning mages within Circles, under the watch of the Chantry's templars, was wrong, and would accept nothing less than total freedom. And with that, he understood that unless someone was willing to take drastic measures, then nothing ever would change. He knew that the templars would rise against mages everywhere for his action, and that therefore all the mages locked within Circle towers would be forced to rise up against the templars in order to save themselves. By his actions, no mages would be able to take, say, Wynne's position that the templars and Circles are necessary, except for those mages who hated their own magic and wanted to embrace imprisonment or even suicide. They would have to either submit to templar tyranny, or fight to save their own lives. By extension, he also removed middle-of-the-road templars who weren't quite so eager to terrorize the mages under their watch. So he removed any stalemate--"there can be no compromise"--in the name of ending an indisputably broken system that served no one.
The fact that people have debated the view of the Chantry controlled Circles as slavery would suggest that it's not quite as simple as that, but the point I was making (if you bothered to read what I wrote) was that the conditions of the Circle don't preclude it from being slavery.
People have debated if the moon was made out of cheese, the fact people argue over something doesn't give an argument merit.
The fact that people have debated the view of the Chantry controlled Circles as slavery would suggest that it's not quite as simple as that, but the point I was making (if you bothered to read what I wrote) was that the conditions of the Circle don't preclude it from being slavery.
Slavery is a bit harder of a sell. I could actually possibly go with wrongful imprisonment to a degree or even forced indenturetude. Not saying I would agree it is necessarily wrong, based off the mattes at risk, but either of those would serve the argument better.
Alas, the promage won't use forced indenturetude because it doesn't have the visceral reaction that slavery causes and because forced indenturetude can somewhat be legally defended as a punishment for a crime. The promages argue what crime and the templars reply using magic and we are back to semantics.
I do think ya'll would a better argument though if you used a term that fit better rather than playing on the emotional argument of all slavery is evil.
I don't know. "Obey or die" is a choice. As for Tranquil, we all know your blatant disregard of evidence from those who actually have all of their faculties back.
I have to agree, "obey or suffer" isn't really a choice.
As for tranquility, I'd be more than happy for an alternative to severing a mage from the fade to be found.
People have debated if the moon was made out of cheese, the fact people argue over something doesn't give an argument merit.
I'm sorry to inform you, once again, that your opinion isn't indisputable fact.
I have to agree, "obey or suffer" isn't really a choice.
As for tranquility, I'd be more than happy for an alternative to severing a mage from the fade to be found.
Qunari's collar, voila.
Right but were they performing mass blood magic rituals? I didn't hear so. As a matter of fact check out the Rivain entry on Dragon Age Wikia. I can quote it if you like. Nothing written seems to come close to supporting the idea that mages cannot be integrated into society, or that they cannot be trusted with their freedom. Almost the entire templar/chantry position falls apart when applied to Rivain. Which is exactly why the Chantry slaughtered them in a fit of rage. As I believe.
Exactly, he definitely wasn't going to rape her! I know when I see a woman on her knees begging a man for mercy and he claims that she'll "do anything I ask", I think of playful innuendo! You cannot be serious.
The Grey Warden bit shows just how far they are willing to go even when it is not their place. Even when Anders was copasetic and operating with efficiency. Of course you can blame that on gameplay or companion immunity, pick your poison if you're so bold.
The claims about mage children are not unsubstianted, Wynne claims as much. But go ahead and dismiss it, changes nothing.
Of course it is. Anything that puts templars into a not so innocent light is propaganda and fallacious in some way or another. Because as far as I can tell, templars have never done nothin' to nobody. And everything that I typed that is demonstrably true or supported with evidence is simply rheotic and propaganda, almost like the rite of tranquility is a "mercy".
Asunder made it very clear the circle was in revolt when it was annulled, it wasn't annulled offhandedly. That's basically where i end the story there, there wasn't much detail given and i don't make gross assumptions about it.
Uh no i can actually disagree with you, and given Mages rightfully fear tranquility their bargaining didn't strike me as odd. Although i grant you Alrik was possibly going to take advantage of her, but he never actually did, its about like saying "Terrorist A said he was going to blow up a chantry but we caught him before hand"
Not their place? Policing Mages and Magic is their Place, and given Chantry Law supersedes Grey Warden Agreements with the various Thedosian Monarchies they didn't even do anything wrong.
And Wynee magically knows about every case beyond her own? It was a broad sweeping sympathy statement, much as "are these children going to be killed by your hand as well if you decide to help the templars?" And in her own case she admits that all she got was a few nights locked in a barn before she was taken by the Templars, so it can't be personal experience. Excuse me for not taking her blanket statements as fact.
I agree wholeheartedly with your last point. Pity it was done in sarcasm but its about the truth of it.
I'm sorry to inform you, once again, that your opinion isn't indisputable fact.
When you stop touting the Dalish Master race line perhaps you won't be so... I don't know ludicrous when you make such assumptions.
As she should, Mage Hawke is an apostate. It would be hugely hypocritical of her to like him as an apostate just because he is connected. It is actually kind of dissappointing that Meredith doesn't throw down and arrest him at the start.
I have already said that she should have shut down those pieces of filth. If he wants to protect the circle, yes not making it a target of suspicion for harboring blood mages would be a good start.
Quentin wasn't even in the circle. Meredith would have appreciated the assistance. And heck, Elthina wasn't going to approve a right of Annulment over an apostate in kirkwall.
Which would undoubtedly demonstrate Meredith's reasonability when it comes to mages.
By gambling with their lives? Funny way of looking at it.
What Meredith would've done is unknown, I will concede as much. However, given her disposition her history and the way she behaves/her attitudes towards mages, I can come up with a few ideas. Also the fact that she's dying to pin something on Orsino(supported by the horse's mouth) to possibly quicken the annulment that she sent to Val Royeaux(Over old and stupid's head) for...Does not strengthen the belief that Meredith would have been understandable. Orsino was also 100% right about Meredith all along as well.
The point is that it is a gamble. It is not as simple as take the evidence to Meredith and go on your merry way. The right thing might have been to turn in the evidence, though I am not sure that it's the best move when looking at the big picture.
"Its more like, Take the test and fail if you fail you die, or you can take this handy rite and even leave the circle if you like"
And your blatant disregard for the evidence of the fact their not emotionally composed and cannot be rationale in said states.
Asunder made it very clear, not my fault you don't believe what was wrote.
But then again its you, you take your personal headcanon over the lore any day.
This doesn't work logically, because all emotions would be amplified. If he felt anything good about Tranquility at all, he'd be swinging back and forth between great anticipation and great fear; instead, it's solely fear and despair.
This is kinda long but I promise its worth the read. Anders was never meant to be the big bad.
People are going either "OMG HE'S AN EVIL MURDERING BASTARD" or "OMG FINALLY SOMEONE BLEW UP THE CHANTRY" and missing the bloody point: that Anders himself never questioned that what he did was wrong. He fully acknowledges that his actions were murder, and were morally contemptible, and that justice was required of him for what he did. What he understood is that it wasn't about right or wrong, it was about necessity. He believed that the system of imprisoning mages within Circles, under the watch of the Chantry's templars, was wrong, and would accept nothing less than total freedom. And with that, he understood that unless someone was willing to take drastic measures, then nothing ever would change. He knew that the templars would rise against mages everywhere for his action, and that therefore all the mages locked within Circle towers would be forced to rise up against the templars in order to save themselves. By his actions, no mages would be able to take, say, Wynne's position that the templars and Circles are necessary, except for those mages who hated their own magic and wanted to embrace imprisonment or even suicide. They would have to either submit to templar tyranny, or fight to save their own lives. By extension, he also removed middle-of-the-road templars who weren't quite so eager to terrorize the mages under their watch. So he removed any stalemate--"there can be no compromise"--in the name of ending an indisputably broken system that served no one.
Yes, but you can make the exact same argument for Meredith. She pretty much admits that her actions aren't all just, but states they are required. She see the threat that an abomination presents from her own life experiences and believes it was a NECESSITY for her actions.
I never argued that Anders was meant to be the big bad, just that it would have worked far better, as he and Meredith are two sides of the same coin. Orsino is more like Elthena's opposite if you remove the blood mage connection. He didn't actively go against the Templars until the lives of mages were at stake.
That is my point. Anders is the Mage Meredith. The fact that you may agree with one or the other or in my case neither, doesn't change the fact that they are the embodiements of their contrasting viewpoints and I would have felt far more satisfied as a game player with Orsino alive and me killing an Anders Harvester who sheltered and assisted my mother's murderer. There it even reads better.
Slavery is a bit harder of a sell. I could actually possibly go with wrongful imprisonment to a degree or even forced indenturetude. Not saying I would agree it is necessarily wrong, based off the mattes at risk, but either of those would serve the argument better.
Alas, the promage won't use forced indenturetude because it doesn't have the visceral reaction that slavery causes and because forced indenturetude can somewhat be legally defended as a punishment for a crime. The promages argue what crime and the templars reply using magic and we are back to semantics.
I do think ya'll would a better argument though if you used a term that fit better rather than playing on the emotional argument of all slavery is evil.
I was simply pointing out that the living conditions don't preclude it as such. The debates about whether or not the Chantry controlled Circles should be viewed as slavery never reach a consensus. I'm well aware that this isn't going to change now any more than it did when it was discussed years ago.
Furthermore, the term 'slavery' tends to be used by some people because that's how some in-characters view it, from the historical Aldenon the Wise to the pro-mage Champion of Kirkwall, and that's genuinely how some players perceive the Circles under the status quo.
I don't know. "Obey or die" is a choice. As for Tranquil, we all know your blatant disregard of evidence from those who actually have all of their faculties back.
Yes, but commoners are told obey or die all the time by nobles/chevalier/etc.
Yes, but commoners are told obey or die all the time by nobles/chevalier/etc.
Which is also bad and should be changed.
I was simply pointing out that the living conditions don't preclude it as such. The debates about whether or not the Chantry controlled Circles should be viewed as slavery never reach a consensus. I'm well aware that this isn't going to change now any more than it did when it was discussed years ago.
Furthermore, the term 'slavery' tends to be used by some players because that's how some in-characters view it, from the historical Aldenon the Wise to the pro-mage Champion of Kirkwall, and that's genuinely how some people perceive the Circles under the status quo.
Not arguing against you, just wanted to point out that in the context of this debate most promages use slavery for the visceral emotional response it has, and the protemplars are just insulted taht you accuse them of slavery when they aren't going to view it as such.
Uldred says that abominations are the natural end point of mages, but just because it is in game doesn't make it a valid point for argument.
I am not trying to argue, just give a reason for why using Slavery isn't really a good argument for promages.
Which is also bad and should be changed.
True but if it is the context of the world they live in and it is in the game, than you can't say that mages are slaves because they live in the same situation as free commoners deal with.
This doesn't work logically, because all emotions would be amplified. If he felt anything good about Tranquility at all, he'd be swinging back and forth between great anticipation and great fear; instead, it's solely fear and despair.
Because the human mind is entirely rational and logical, its not like that if we experience something we find vaguely unpleasant and then magically have those feelings amplified several dozen fold our minds won't fold in on each other like a warm blanket. Hate to say but this actually would be a half decent argument if you weren't arguing that a mind can bounce from polar opposite extremes in such a fashion when out a fella going catatonic.
I'm of the mind it was buried personally underneath said fear and despair, But its not confirmed i suppose but it doesn't necessarily have to be given that we have yet to hear a tranquil that wasn't unburdened of his emotional faculties given a prognosis on tranquility, until that day i will not assume its an overly horrid process to them.
True but if it is the context of the world they live in and it is in the game, than you can't say that mages are slaves because they live in the same situation as free commoners deal with.
I'm saying that the whole society has too much in common with slavery.
Because the human mind is entirely rational and logical, its not like that if we experience something we find vaguely unpleasant and then magically have those feelings amplified several dozen fold our minds won't fold in on each other like a warm blanket. Hate to say but this actually would be a half decent argument if you weren't arguing that a mind can bounce from polar opposite extremes in such a fashion when out a fella going catatonic.
I'm of the mind it was buried personally underneath said fear and despair, But its not confirmed i suppose but it doesn't necessarily have to be given that we have yet to hear a tranquil that wasn't unburdened of his emotional faculties given a prognosis on tranquility, until that day i will not assume its an overly horrid process to them.
He was bouncing between other things in precisely that manner. With everything involving the reclamation of his emotions being sheer joy, funnily enough.
Yes, but you can make the exact same argument for Meredith. She pretty much admits that her actions aren't all just, but states they are required. She see the threat that an abomination presents from her own life experiences and believes it was a NECESSITY for her actions.
I never argued that Anders was meant to be the big bad, just that it would have worked far better, as he and Meredith are two sides of the same coin. Orsino is more like Elthena's opposite if you remove the blood mage connection. He didn't actively go against the Templars until the lives of mages were at stake.
That is my point. Anders is the Mage Meredith. The fact that you may agree with one or the other or in my case neither, doesn't change the fact that they are the embodiements of their contrasting viewpoints and I would have felt far more satisfied as a game player with Orsino alive and me killing an Anders Harvester who sheltered and assisted my mother's murderer. There it even reads better.
Yet she does it to oppress but Anders does it to free. Its a tyrant versus a freedom fighter (who usually murder to reach their goals in history)
From a neutral point of view its quite clear who gets more negativity. Also Meredith is not ready to face punishment for her actions, she is not trying to redeem herself at all and resists till the end to the point of madness. Anders can be killed and is willing to die or help save mage's lives he endangered which are redeeming qualities.
I agree Orsino was kinda "forced" to be the end boss but Anders would have been as bad. Act 3 is just rushed as the game was not going to make it to the deadline EA wanted. Everyone knows that. Act 1 is brilliant, act 2 is quite ok and act 3 is just terrible.
Which would undoubtedly demonstrate Meredith's reasonability when it comes to mages.
By gambling with their lives? Funny way of looking at it.
What Meredith would've done is unknown, I will concede as much. However, given her disposition her history and the way she behaves/her attitudes towards mages, I can come up with a few ideas. Also the fact that she's dying to pin something on Orsino(supported by the horse's mouth) to possibly quicken the annulment that she sent to Val Royeaux(Over old and stupid's head) for...Does not strengthen the belief that Meredith would have been understandable. Orsino was also 100% right about Meredith all along as well.
The point is that it is a gamble. It is not as simple as take the evidence to Meredith and go on your merry way. The right thing might have been to turn in the evidence, though I am not sure that it's the best move when looking at the big picture.
Orsino was gambling with their lives by not cooperating with Meredith to root out blood mages. If he had reported Quentin when he first knew about him it would have helped relations, he for dang sure should have reported him when he knew what Quentin was doing.
A big part of Meredith's issue with Orsino was that she felt he was hiding something and she didn't trust him. Guess what, he validated that belief.
Yes, it is a gamble, but it is also a gamble and endangerment to the other mages to help Quentin with the risk of if Meredith found out. Seriously, which would have gone worse, Orsino turning Quentin in or Meredith finding out Orsino was sheltering Quentin?
Retour en haut