Well I have a solution, all Templars to be castrated,tortured and gang raped during training, a few thousand hours fo torture should be comparable to the way mages are forced to live, if they can then have at least 5 children, they can imprison mages as they do now. The other choice would be to have all limbs cut off, the lips removed, then run through town playing a trumpet and waving a flag.
Well I have a solution, all Templars to be castrated,tortured and gang raped during training, a few thousand hours fo torture should be comparable to the way mages are forced to live, if they can then have at least 5 children, they can imprison mages as they do now. The other choice would be to have all limbs cut off, the lips removed, then run through town playing a trumpet and waving a flag.
Wait what.. Castrated templars are supposed to have children?
Wait what.. Castrated templars are supposed to have children?
Clearly we save their sperm, THEN castrate them.
I think.
Clearly we save their sperm, THEN castrate them.
I think.
And then we use their sperm to track them if they try to run away.
Do you two want to have some time in the bunk? I think your fantasies run a bit too deep.
Well, the system is broken now, so compromises are only useful if it is agreed to start up a dialogue again.
Although, using mages the Circle trusts and specially trains to help Templars hunt down criminal mages sounds like a good idea to me.
I like the idea of the Circle becoming more like a triangle... or something with three parts that has a better sounding name (Triad of Magic?), where there are Templars, seekers, and enchanters. They all have their own ranks and senior officers, Seekers oversee Templars and mages, Templars help police and protect, enchanters research and govern the mages. Enchanters and Templars can join the Seekers, but must have approval from seniors of both Enchanters and Templars, and then lose all ranking within previous group. Mages don't have to become Enchanters, can do whatever the Enchanters and Seekers deem to be allowed/legal/whatever.
Then again, this talk of compromises and such seems a bit silly (which isn't a bad thing, being silly is what bsn is for) because we have no idea what the current situation is for the nations of Thedas regarding the mage-Templar war.
I'm just pro-Circle (gilded cage, free boarding school and housing, or however it can be remade), whatever side that throws me on in DA:I I'll go with them.
Wait what.. Castrated templars are supposed to have children?
I thought the exact same thing when reading that.
Well, the system is broken now, so compromises are only useful if it is agreed to start up a dialogue again.
Although, using mages the Circle trusts and specially trains to help Templars hunt down criminal mages sounds like a good idea to me.
I like the idea of the Circle becoming more like a triangle... or something with three parts that has a better sounding name (Triad of Magic?), where there are Templars, seekers, and enchanters. They all have their own ranks and senior officers, Seekers oversee Templars and mages, Templars help police and protect, enchanters research and govern the mages. Enchanters and Templars can join the Seekers, but must have approval from seniors of both Enchanters and Templars, and then lose all ranking within previous group. Mages don't have to become Enchanters, can do whatever the Enchanters and Seekers deem to be allowed/legal/whatever.
Then again, this talk of compromises and such seems a bit silly (which isn't a bad thing, being silly is what bsn is for) because we have no idea what the current situation is for the nations of Thedas regarding the mage-Templar war.
I'm just pro-Circle (gilded cage, free boarding school and housing, or however it can be remade), whatever side that throws me on in DA:I I'll go with them.
Triumvirate?
How about a compromise? When a person is found to be a mage, they are given a choice: either live in the circle, or be appointed a Templar partner. Mage and Templar will meet beforehand to make sure they are both near enough in ability and temperament. If a family member wants to volunteer then that would be fine too.
The way I see the problem is not in a "pro mage/pro Templar" dichotomy, but more as: pro/anti mage,pro/anti Templar, pro/anti circle. I happen to fall in the pro mage (mages deserve the right to life such as everyone else), pro Templar (a Templar's duty is to protect the people AND mages from the consequences of magic) but anti circle (mages should not have to be corralled for the rest of their lives in a gilded prison).
I think it would be better to allow senior members to be able to apply to live outside their Circle (yet still within the general area), with approval of the Knight Commander and the First Enchanter. Mages both inside and outside the Circle would also be able to establish their own businesses, with the institution taking a cut of their revenue.
It is a valid question. Some people in Thedas will claim that mages are opressed and that the PC should help them fight this opression.
However, we have never seen a Circle mage famished. Meanwhile, we can order the execution of a peasant who stole two sacks of grain because his family was starving after his sheep were killed by the Darkspawn.
I'd much rather help these people than aid the mages in their destructive war meant to increase the quality of life of an already upper class.
Must be nice being able to have a family in the first place.
Unlike the mages who are snatched away from their families and given to the circle, of which they begin to make friends. And slowly see some of these friends mysteriously disappear, 'opt out', or suffer a fate worse than death. So they ultimately have the unique luck of losing their family twice. If they themselves don't suffer the fate of their friends.
The peasants should count themselves lucky as to worry about the fate of their children, while the mages are fortunate to even name theirs. Doesn't help that it's the Chantry of all organizations, taking their kids away to train them up to hate the people that bore them. And if not that, the mages get to wonder if their kid is a mage, and probably hate themselves for the rest of their lives for passing on what they would surely deem by now, as a curse. As Malcolm said, "I wouldn't wish this magic on anyone".
For all the talk of starving and living in poverty, the peasants still get drunk. Some still get to hit up the brothel. They still get their mobility and if not that, they believe that they do. Mages are all too aware of their confines. Some of whom may never get to stand in the rain or kiss a girl; the most barebone of outside social interactions may not even be on the table for mages.
It's also got to be just thrilling to live in very close proximity to people trained specifically to thwart their powers, hate, and fear them on principle. Always watching and waiting, some of them savoring the opportunity to murder the robes. While peasants can at least run from their tormentors and be successful. Mages are not afforded the same luxury; mages are relentlessy hounded (see Awakening Anders) no matter how well meaning and skilled they are (Bethany). They can hope and depend on the good will of their masters for their freedom, live life on the run, or die old and alone in a tower.
But apparently creature comforts not only justify all of it, but qualifies the mages as an 'upper class'? I suppose if the only thing that you care about is material possessions and sustenance, then the circle is for you. But it seems that most people prefer their mobility, families and agency.
My underlining point is that both groups have it pretty bad, simply in different ways. Might as well flip a coin to tell you the truth. Unless of course you're of unshakable belief that mages should always accept their conditions no matter bad things become, simply because of the rare chance of an Abomination or a Glorious Supreme Super Saiyan Goku Blood Magicking Magister Magistrate. In which case we will disagree.
My underlining point is that both groups have it pretty bad, simply in different ways. Might as well flip a coin to tell you the truth. Unless of course you're of unshakable belief that mages should always accept their conditions no matter bad things become, simply because of the rare chance of an Abomination or a Glorious Supreme Super Saiyan Goku Blood Magicking Magister Magistrate. In which case we will disagree.
I do!
I do have that belief! Don't believe it to be a failing either 
Well, the mages formed the Circle in the first place, after negotiating with the Templars and Chantry.
Do we know how mages were regulated before the forming of the Circle in the Divine Age? Ya, we know they were tasked with keeping the fires lit in Chantries, but did they have boarding houses or live in scattered homes where Templars roamed door to door on occasion? Apparently the mages were able to barricade themselves in a Cathedral to change whatever life they had. Probably couldn't practice magic, and so wanted to create the Circle in order to do so?
However, that was then and this is now.
I think you can make a pity case for any group in Thedas.
"And the award for most pitiful/sympathetic/oppressing/sad/challenging existence goes to...."
Also, all we ever get is the neutral or apathetic view of the Circle or the anti-Circle view from enchanters and important mages, we have no leading mage characters who were loyalists to give their view (haven't read Asunder, but don't think there were any major Loyalist characters). We have psycho Templars, neutral Templars, devout templars and sympathetic Templars, but we only have psycho mages, rebellious mages, and middle ground mages. I hear Vivianne is pro-Circle, so I hope she is the missing view point from the mages.
With the Fade issues that are happening, Inquisition priority is certainly protection of the people in my playthrough, slaying all war mongering mages and Templars if needed in this time of crisis.
Also, all we ever get is the neutral or apathetic view of the Circle or the anti-Circle view, we have no leading characters who were loyalists to give their view (haven't read Asunder, but don't think there were any major Loyalist characters). We have psycho Templars, neutral Templars, devout templars and sympathetic Templars, but we only have psycho mages, rebellious mages, and middle ground mages. I hear Vivianne is pro-Circle, so I hope she is the missing view point from the mages.
Why do you need someones views? You have your own.
Because I don't live in the Circle to know what it is like to live in there. I can imagine, but from what I've read and what we've seen in Fereldan. It doesn't seem that bad to me. However, I could be wrong, and bringing a loyalist view can give credit to some ideas and discredit other ideas. It's just best to get all the viewpoints, rather than just one side and guess how the other side feels.
Edit: Also, when the Circle decided to rebel, it was just fraternities voting, it could be that most mages are against this war and were forced into it by the enchanters, who were already split on whether to do so or not and Rhys having the deciding vote. So, this forced rebellion would seem almost like a crime... well, I guess it is technically... anyway, sympathy towards the mages who didn't want to rebel.
Well, the mages formed the Circle in the first place, after negotiating with the Templars and Chantry.
Do we know how mages were regulated before the forming of the Circle in the Divine Age? Ya, we know they were tasked with keeping the fires lit in Chantries, but did they have boarding houses or live in scattered homes where Templars roamed door to door on occasion? Apparently the mages were able to barricade themselves in a Cathedral to change whatever life they had. Probably couldn't practice magic, and so wanted to create the Circle in order to do so?
I think you're referencing the establishment of the Circle Towers, rather than the Circles of Magi themselves. The Circle Towers were the result of when mages lead a peaceful protest by barricading themselves in the cathedral, and Divine Ambrosia II contemplated an Exalted March on the cathedral until the templars dissuaded her from such an extreme act. The eventual result was mages being segregated from society in Circle Towers.
Also, all we ever get is the neutral or apathetic view of the Circle or the anti-Circle view from enchanters and important mages, we have no leading mage characters who were loyalists to give their view (haven't read Asunder, but don't think there were any major Loyalist characters). We have psycho Templars, neutral Templars, devout templars and sympathetic Templars, but we only have psycho mages, rebellious mages, and middle ground mages. I hear Vivianne is pro-Circle, so I hope she is the missing view point from the mages.
With the Fade issues that are happening, Inquisition priority is certainly protection of the people in my playthrough, slaying all war mongering mages and Templars if needed in this time of crisis.
The developers have said that they will have characters give their insights into the views of the templar and mage schism in Inquisition (given how they provided the extremes in Dragon Age II), so you may get some giving you insight into the Loyalist viewpoint.
Edit: Also, when the Circle decided to rebel, it was just fraternities voting, it could be that most mages are against this war and were forced into it by the enchanters, who were already split on whether to do so or not and Rhys having the deciding vote. So, this forced rebellion would seem almost like a crime... well, I guess it is technically... anyway, sympathy towards the mages who didn't want to rebel.
I already said Fiona and Anders have a singular aspect in common, more so then anything else.
The willingness to put people into a position whether they like it or not to die for their propaganda.
I do!
I do have that belief! Don't believe it to be a failing either
I have to ask, do you consider it a failing that some people want to reform that system so mages can be happy within the system, instead of just well-fed within the system?
I have to ask, do you consider it a failing that some people want to reform that system so mages can be happy within the system, instead of just well-fed within the system?
Philosophically?
That some would put petty freedoms that don't exist in that reality over international stability?
Yes.
Overtly though? Not really, People are going to let their own morals dictate how they play the game after all.
Philosophically?
That some would put petty freedoms that don't exist in that reality over international stability?
Yes.
On the philosophical aspect-
Even if the mages stayed within that system, and not only that, wanted to stay in it? Or have whole, gated communities that mages cannot leave, but can have families in, and self-regulate it based on their own resources within that community and have templar guards on the outside, and the moment abominations appear, templars come in swiftly to take care of it? The mages are still separated from the mundanes, abominations, if not prevented, are contained, and any problems that arise are on their heads. What would you think of sch a system?
I do!
I do have that belief! Don't believe it to be a failing either
Nobody believes their beliefs are a failing.
Must be nice being able to have a family in the first place.
Yep, nothing better than watching your child die of starvation. Or maybe mauled by darkspawn. Or bandits. Or that noble thought your daugther was pretty.
Sure would be nice to be able to conjure some fireballs to defend themselves. Or to have some nice organization give you food without having to work 12 hours per day in the field; six of which to be able to pay your stipend.
But having a family makes it all good, right?
The peasants should count themselves lucky as to worry about the fate of their children,
The mages should be grateful they have the luxury of wondering just how free they are.
And if not that, the mages get to wonder if their kid is a mage, and probably hate themselves for the rest of their lives for passing on what they would surely deem by now, as a curse. As Malcolm said, "I wouldn't wish this magic on anyone".
As you can see, the Chantry has good reason to disencourage reproduction in the Circle.
For all the talk of starving and living in poverty, the peasants still get drunk.
Wynne brew beverages in the Circle.
"Some still get to hit up the brothel."
Given how we can discuss what to do with accidental babies, it's obvious the mages are sexually active.
"They still get their mobility and if not that, they believe that they do."
Very few people actually had any mobility in the middle ages. You lived and died wherever you were born.
"Mages are all too aware of their confines. Some of whom may never get to stand in the rain or kiss a girl; the most barebone of outside social interactions may not even be on the table for mages."
Given the fact that Anders claims "everyone was kissing everyone" in Ferelden and how Rhys remarks that mages were allowed to visit Val-Royeaux in the White Spire, it becomes evident that Kirkwall is the exception, not the rule.
And even in Kirkwall, no one batted an eyelash when a mage left the grounds to go meet up with a suitor(that woman Quentin killed). Why? Because she was considered to be trustworthy.
"It's also got to be just thrilling to live in very close proximity to people trained specifically to thwart their powers, hate, and fear them on principle. Always watching and waiting, some of them savoring the opportunity to murder the robes."
There is a rethoric warning against the dangers of magic; and that is very, VERY different being trained to hate mages on principle(would you rather the Chantry censor the dangers of magic?); but, ultimately, Templars are no different from any guardsmen stationed in Thedosian cities. Some will, no doubt, be corrupt jerks who will abuse their power but most of them are either people trying to make enough to survive or people who honestly believe in keeping order and protecting others.
And yes, this is very much true of the Templars. There are certain instances in DA2 where it is made abundantly clear that people like Alrik are a minority within the ranks. For instance, Ella sends you a letter if she is returned to the Circle in where she writes that no one misses Alrik and that most Templars don't want to fight mages, they just want things to return to normal. Bethany says as much in her own letters.
"While peasants can at least run from their tormentors and be successful."
Seriously?
"Mages are not afforded the same luxury; mages are relentlessy hounded (see Awakening Anders) no matter how well meaning and skilled they are (Bethany). They can hope and depend on the good will of their masters for their freedom, live life on the run, or die old and alone in a tower."
Mages are hounded because, if outside of the Circle, they are a threat to themselves and every one else around them. You acknowledge this because I remember you posting something about how the Circle trapped the mages in there with Uldred; but you'd rather expose everyone else to this threat so the mages can have a few freedoms. Never mind that these freedoms are provided, if also restricted, in the Circle.
And yes, Bethany is a good example. Given how good nature and her skill, Meredith spoke well of her. And what did this result in? In Bethany being allowed to go to a party without a Templar escort.
"I suppose if the only thing that you care about is material possessions and sustenance, then the circle is for you. But it seems that most people prefer their mobility, families and agency."
This why people have been known to commit crimes in order to be sent to confortable prisons?
Seriously, ask a thirld-worlder if he'd rather continue living in his home country or go to a prison in Sweden.
"My underlining point is that both groups have it pretty bad, simply in different ways. Might as well flip a coin to tell you the truth. Unless of course you're of unshakable belief that mages should always accept their conditions no matter bad things become, simply because of the rare chance of an Abomination or a Glorious Supreme Super Saiyan Goku Blood Magicking Magister Magistrate. In which case we will disagree."
And my underlining point is that given the fact mages can become weapons of mass destruction to the point a mage child like Connorn can destroy a city, killing dozens or hundreds of innocent, orphaning so many before sending their loved one to eat their faces; and the fact that the Circle provides quality of life in many ways superior to what the average Thedosian experiences, it wouldn't be so ungodly unreasonable to ask them to make some sacrifices to ensure the safety of the general population.
But apparently, that is just too bloody much to ask.
On the philosophical aspect-
Even if the mages stayed within that system, and not only that, wanted to stay in it? Or have whole, gated communities that mages cannot leave, but can have families in, and self-regulate it based on their own resources within that community and have templar guards on the outside, and the moment abominations appear, templars come in swiftly to take care of it? The mages are still separated from the mundanes, abominations, if not prevented, are contained, and any problems that arise are on their heads. What would you think of sch a system?
Having families will inevitably lead to increase of population which will either lead to either having to increase the size of those communities every few years and/or having rebellious little mage teenagers who want out.
Having families will inevitably lead to increase of population which will either lead to either having to increase the size of those communities every few years and/or having rebellious little mage teenagers who want out.
Or they could be like the Quarians in ME, where having such limited resources made them having families and children strictly regulated because they could only support so many. And when the population was in decline, they offered incentives to have more children, but families were usually stuck with only one child. You'll never know unless there's a system in place that actually puts our theory's to the test.
And if rebellious teenagers wanted to leave, they'd have to pass the walls and the templars. Why not just say they have to leave with a contingent of templars or give up blood for a phylactery, and if they don't check in within a week or so, they will be tracked down and brought back?
Or they could be like the Quarians in ME, where having such limited resources made them having families and children strictly regulated because they could only support so many. And when the population was in decline, they offered incentives to have more children, but families were usually stuck with only one child. You'll never know unless there's a system in place that actually puts our theory's to the test.
And if rebellious teenagers wanted to leave, they'd have to pass the walls and the templars. Why not just say they have to leave with a contingent of templars or give up blood for a phylactery, and if they don't check in within a week or so, they will be tracked down and brought back?
See you are offering a parallel of a community that is self sustaining, the circle has NEVER been self sustaining, it exists off the gratitude of the Chantry, You're asking them basically to fund the construction bill of small cities just so Mages can fake having a normal life when they aren't normal.
I'd argue that unless if the circles suddenly stop being cost effective, there is no reasoning to do any of this beyond mage demands and ego.
Oh and on to the subject of rampaging hormonal teenagers?
Or beheaded, or strung up and hanged for desertion of the circle.
Those work as well too, Or 
Fourteen days in the freezy chair!
Retour en haut