8640 réponses à ce sujet

[Lulupab]

Despite them being Feudalistic in every sense other then not having an absolute Monarchy?

 

It still beats other nations especially Orlais.

[Dean_the_Young]

Maybe. I don't usually care about trivial matters. As for western liberalism I don't deny that it has affected my decisions and its my job to protect that liberty but that doesn't mean it can't be applied to Thedas. Its no surprise I adore Ferelden to no end.

'Trivial' is just about how any historian would analyze your claims of necessity. It really calls to mind Sophia Dreyden's rebellion.

 

The irony of self-awareness is that your claim to protect the liberty of Thedas and inclination towards preventative measures from greater abuses is the rational for the Circle System in the first place.

[Lulupab]

'Trivial' is just about how any historian would analyze your claims of necessity. It really calls to mind Sophia Dreyden's rebellion.

 

The irony of self-awareness is that your claim to protect the liberty of Thedas and inclination towards preventative measures from greater abuses is the rational for the Circle System in the first place.

 

The real irony is you are trying to give value to system that by its very nature allowed systematical abuse and in the end fail miserably. I have always claimed an autonomous circle could work. I've never dismissed Templar are necessary as well but I see a change in system is necessary too and sadly Thedas has never changed without violence in all of its history so there you have it, mage-templar war.

[wcholcombe]

It still beats other nations especially Orlais.

Yes, because Ferelden has much better laws and such. Oh wait...all the lore as has already been pointed out shows that Ferelden largely depends on a might makes right philosophy of inforcement which is largely the same as the enforcement of laws in Orlais.

[Lulupab]

Yes, because Ferelden has much better laws and such. Oh wait...all the lore as has already been pointed out shows that Ferelden largely depends on a might makes right philosophy of inforcement which is largely the same as the enforcement of laws in Orlais.

 

"Better" is subjective where as more free and diverse is not. You can't expect liberty to be like postmodern times. Ironically all countries with liberal rights had might makes right policy in their past such as duels. That was how the things work in feudal age. "The king's seneschal personally appoints arbiters (judges)called "blackhallers" to hear disputes. Blackhallers adjudicate cases from the black granite senschal's hall in Denerim, hence the name and in the countryside, sheriffs appointed by the local bann patrol and keep track of upcoming cases for the blackhallers to hear" This is liberal. There are actually courts and they hold them for each criminal. Both the criminal and the wronged can get one blackhaller (Lawyer). It goes without saying that the King or Queen is not the ultimate power and in more than many cases they were overruled. Ferelden has a lot of similarities to England or Scotland for that matter.

[wcholcombe]

"Better" is subjective where as more free and diverse is not. You can't expect liberty to be like postmodern times. Ironically all countries with liberal rights had might makes right policy in their past such as duels. That was how the things work in feudal age. "The king's seneschal personally appoints arbiters (judges)called "blackhallers" to hear disputes. Blackhallers adjudicate cases from the black granite senschal's hall in Denerim, hence the name and in the countryside, sheriffs appointed by the local bann patrol and keep track of upcoming cases for the blackhallers to hear" This is liberal. There are actually courts and they hold them for each criminal. Both the criminal and the wronged can get one blackhaller (Lawyer). It goes without saying that the King or Queen is not the ultimate power and in more than many cases they were overruled. Ferelden has a lot of similarities to England or Scotland for that matter.

But see, when your laws are built on might makes right in Ferelden, you are no different than the laws of Orlais.  A powerful enough elf in Orlais can pretty much do whatever they want if they had the requisite power.  Would it take more power than in Ferelden? Yes, but it isn't like Ferelden has this gigantic moral high ground on its laws and such.

 

As I posted previously: WIki on Ferelden law:

The Andrastian Chantry is now revered by the 90% of the population.^[2] Fereldan cities are considered virtually anarchic by the standards of most outsiders. The Fereldan desire for freedom has engendered a cultural mistrust of law enforcement, and 'laissez-faire' attitudes in general. While the worst offenses are quickly put down, many others are ignored and citizens are often left to make their own justice. Petty theft is common, as guardsmen will only go out of their way to deal with serious disruptions. Commerce is given little official scrutiny as long as taxes are paid; businesses such as brothels and gambling halls are not only tolerated, but expected.^[21]

Fereldan law is relatively unregulated compared to that of older nations, and is expected on an individual level to be supplemented by one's martial prowess. Indeed, most petty crimes like theft are overlooked by the city guard in Denerim, whose main concern is protecting their posts.^[26] Consequently, the common Fereldan should not expect much help fending off criminal activity unless murder or major property damage has occurred.^[26]Slavery is illegal in Ferelden, but criminals still practice it in secret.

There are no laws regulating personal behavior such as bearing arms, drinking, gambling and prostitution.^[26] Similarly, local prejudices and violence against non-human residents—notably alienage elves—often go unpunished. In part this is pragmatism, as Ferelden king's law states that killing a human in defense of an elf is a crime.^[27]

[Lulupab]

But see, when your laws are built on might makes right in Ferelden, you are no different than the laws of Orlais.  A powerful enough elf in Orlais can pretty much do whatever they want if they had the requisite power.  Would it take more power than in Ferelden? Yes, but it isn't like Ferelden has this gigantic moral high ground on its laws and such.

 

No need to bring morality into discussion. Ferelden represents a sense of liberality, as much as a feudal society can. It surfaces when you take elements such as how the circles are handled or how the landsmeet works. So far it has been much better than the other circles explored such as Kirkwall or Cumberland and most likely Orlais too. Unlike most kingdoms, power does not reside exclusively with the nobility. Rather, it arises from the support of the freeholders and even the king is not the unchallenged ruler. For many centuries the nobility gathers annually to hold the Landsmeet, a council which functions as the official legislative body of Ferelden and it can even override the king or queen on any matter of law. Possibly it can even override chantry as well. Because the magi boon is granted regardless of chantry's stance on it. The prologue mentions the resistance from chantry but the boon is done.

[wcholcombe]

No need to bring morality into discussion. Ferelden represents a sense of liberality, as much as a feudal society can. It surfaces when you take elements such as how the circles are handled or how the landsmeet works. So far it has been much better than the other circles explored such as Kirkwall or Cumberland and most likely Orlais too. Unlike most kingdoms, power does not reside exclusively with the nobility. Rather, it arises from the support of the freeholders and even the king is not the unchallenged ruler. For many centuries the nobility gathers annually to hold the Landsmeet, a council which functions as the official legislative body of Ferelden and it can even override the king or queen on any matter of law. Possibly it can even override chantry as well. Because the magi boon is granted regardless of chantry's stance on it. The prologue mentions the resistance from chantry but the boon is done.

Gaider or Laidlaw has flat out said that Allistair/Anora requested the Mage Boon from the Chantry and were told no and it doesn't happen.  This is the case as explained by them as Ferelden has no authority over the circles.  Authority lies with the Chantry alone.

[Lulupab]

Gaider or Laidlaw has flat out said that Allistair/Anora requested the Mage Boon from the Chantry and were told no and it doesn't happen.  This is the case as explained by them as Ferelden has no authority over the circles.  Authority lies with the Chantry alone.

 

I know the prologue however is different . It can be interpreted that at that time especially after blight Ferelden has no power to oppose chantry because Alistair/Anora firmly confirm that the boon will be done and prologue mentions it. But They can't do it in the end. The attempt is important not the deed.

[renfrees]

This circle of violence and abuse never ends. We've had absolute Magocracy, and in response to that - Nevarran Accord, and in response to that - Mage's Uprising. We are in transitional state now in the times of DAI, and who knows where it'll take us.

[EmissaryofLies]

This circle of violence and abuse never ends. We've had absolute Magocracy, and in response to that - Nevarran Accord, and in response to that - Mage's Uprising. We are in transitional state now in the times of DAI, and who knows where it'll take us.

 
If the Inquisitor doesn't arrive to save the day. It'll take us all to Belize.

[renfrees]

Chaotic times are ahead, that's for certain. So be ready.

[Cat Lance]

Chaotic times are ahead, that's for certain. So be ready.

I agree! I think bioware has a great story ahead for us and can't wait to see where we can take it! I'm guessing that the Inquisitor will have the opportunity to side with the mages or the templars in order to strengthen a group for saving Thedas. I'm hoping to be able to take a middle ground approach that brings the two groups together as well!

[Aimi]

No need to bring morality into discussion. Ferelden represents a sense of liberality, as much as a feudal society can. It surfaces when you take elements such as how the circles are handled or how the landsmeet works. So far it has been much better than the other circles explored such as Kirkwall or Cumberland and most likely Orlais too. Unlike most kingdoms, power does not reside exclusively with the nobility. Rather, it arises from the support of the freeholders and even the king is not the unchallenged ruler. For many centuries the nobility gathers annually to hold the Landsmeet, a council which functions as the official legislative body of Ferelden and it can even override the king or queen on any matter of law.

 
None of this necessarily indicates 'liberality'. You can locate organizations like these - assemblies of landed Estates, associations of free smallholders, etc. - in all sorts of late-medieval and early modern European states from history: England, France, the Habsburg domains, the Hohenzollern territories, Muscovy-Russia, Sweden. Describing any one of those as meaningfully 'liberal' is ahistorical.

There is no meaningful representation for the overwhelming bulk of the population. While rural interests, especially the petty nobility, possess access to certain avenues of legislative power through (for example) the Landsmeet, tenant farmers lack that access, as do the urban population. The majority of freeholders are members of the aristocracy, but aristocratic rights do not extend to commoner free smallholders, who in and of themselves do not possess access to representation. The only thing that remotely resembles a national legal institution for the entirety of society is the small, overworked, disparate group of blackhallers and local banns' sheriffs, and even those serve only as avenues for individual redress, not representation. As much as some Circle mages scream about slavery, they at least have a self-elected leader who can petition various authorities - the Chantry, the crown - for redress and to shape policy. Groups like the elves of Denerim's alienage have a hahren who is routinely ignored by the state's legal authorities...when those authorities are not participating in the attacks on his community themselves.

As has been mentioned endlessly in this thread and others, there are few in Thedas who have any conception of universal rights. Mages are out for the mages. City elves are out for the city elves. The Dalish are out for the Dalish. The Bannorn are out for themselves - either individually or as a community. The liberal pretension of human rights - which might be better described in Thedas as 'sentient' rights - is nonexistent, save perhaps among certain elements of the Chantry. Even then, the sort of person who would seriously suggest that, say, qunari deserve the same sort of legal and moral consideration as Andrastians is rare. If we are to speak of layers of identity, I believe that one would find that, in Thedas, most people place the greatest amount of emphasis on national, religious, racial, and communitarian layers...and not on universal ones.

Which brings us back to those historical examples. In some countries, institutions such as assemblies of Estates, which began with a very limited franchise, eventually metamorphosed into modern universally representative forms. The British Parliament can, with some hiccups in the seventeenth century, trace its existence back to the advisory councils of nobles created by medieval English kings like Edward I. Other countries' legislatures, while not possessing the same legal continuity, use naming conventions to evoke the same sort of similarity. The German Bundestag, formerly the Reichstag, was named for the Diets convened by the Holy Roman Emperors; the Bundesrat, or federal assembly of states (Länder) was named for a similar Imperial institution called the Reichsrat. Greece's Vouli is named for boulē, a form of legislative council in many classical "democracies", such as Athens. And then, of course, there's the American Senate, named explicitly in emulation of the famous Roman aristocratic assembly.

It's expedient for modern institutions to try to evoke these ties. Ideologically, however, modern institutions of representation bear little similarity to the old Estates. The Estates were explicitly pressure groups for a limited franchise to enhance their legal and bargaining power within the framework of the evolving medieval and early modern state.

More instructively, many of those Estates did not metamorphose into modern representative institutions. In Russia, for example, boyars' councils and the later Holy Senate transformed into rubber-stamp groups to approve decisions that the tsars had already made. The Hohenzollern kings of Brandenburg-Prussia co-opted the old landed East-Elbian estates into a form of oligarchy; when Prussia finally got a representative institution, the Landtag, in the nineteenth century, it was a new innovation. Early modern France's parlaments, a sort of judiciary and Estate representation organization combined into one (and, I would add, a fine analogue to the Landsmeet of Ferelden), were explicitly circumvented by the monarchy in 1789; instead, Louis XVI called up amorphous assemblies of representatives and named them after an assembly of medieval Estates to which the new group bore little similarity.

There is no reason to assume that Ferelden's Landsmeet will provide a sound basis for a durable universally representative institution. It might very well in the far future; no one can discount the possibility. But it remains only that: a possibility. Reforms to landed Estates are not the only avenue to universal representation and modern liberalism; they might not even be the best or most likely one. We cannot therefore give the Landsmeet credit for being a proto-Parliament. Instead, we must take it on its own merits as they are during the time period of the games, and whatever other merits Fereldan politics in the Dragon Age possess, modern liberalism is not one of them.

[Mistic]

Eirene, your posts about history are incredibly instructive. Thanks for posting these things

[Dean_the_Young]

The real irony is you are trying to give value to system that by its very nature allowed systematical abuse and in the end fail miserably. I have always claimed an autonomous circle could work. I've never dismissed Templar are necessary as well but I see a change in system is necessary too and sadly Thedas has never changed without violence in all of its history so there you have it, mage-templar war.

All systems, by their very nature, allow systematic abuses and failures. This is a tautology.

 

Nor does it identify the real weakness of a preventative system: that it is non-falsifiable. The Circle is a system which will only fail if mages rise to dominance over mundanes and allow them to work unchecked on its watch. That's pretty much what hasn't occurred for the last thousand years- the Tevinter circle failed, but the real issue for mages is that the Templars can point at the last thousand years of the Circle working, rather than being unnecessary.

[Lulupab]

 
None of this necessarily indicates 'liberality'. You can locate organizations like these - assemblies of landed Estates, associations of free smallholders, etc. - in all sorts of late-medieval and early modern European states from history: England, France, the Habsburg domains, the Hohenzollern territories, Muscovy-Russia, Sweden. Describing any one of those as meaningfully 'liberal' is ahistorical.

There is no meaningful representation for the overwhelming bulk of the population. While rural interests, especially the petty nobility, possess access to certain avenues of legislative power through (for example) the Landsmeet, tenant farmers lack that access, as do the urban population. The majority of freeholders are members of the aristocracy, but aristocratic rights do not extend to commoner free smallholders, who in and of themselves do not possess access to representation. The only thing that remotely resembles a national legal institution for the entirety of society is the small, overworked, disparate group of blackhallers and local banns' sheriffs, and even those serve only as avenues for individual redress, not representation. As much as some Circle mages scream about slavery, they at least have a self-elected leader who can petition various authorities - the Chantry, the crown - for redress and to shape policy. Groups like the elves of Denerim's alienage have a hahren who is routinely ignored by the state's legal authorities...when those authorities are not participating in the attacks on his community themselves.

As has been mentioned endlessly in this thread and others, there are few in Thedas who have any conception of universal rights. Mages are out for the mages. City elves are out for the city elves. The Dalish are out for the Dalish. The Bannorn are out for themselves - either individually or as a community. The liberal pretension of human rights - which might be better described in Thedas as 'sentient' rights - is nonexistent, save perhaps among certain elements of the Chantry. Even then, the sort of person who would seriously suggest that, say, qunari deserve the same sort of legal and moral consideration as Andrastians is rare. If we are to speak of layers of identity, I believe that one would find that, in Thedas, most people place the greatest amount of emphasis on national, religious, racial, and communitarian layers...and not on universal ones.

Which brings us back to those historical examples. In some countries, institutions such as assemblies of Estates, which began with a very limited franchise, eventually metamorphosed into modern universally representative forms. The British Parliament can, with some hiccups in the seventeenth century, trace its existence back to the advisory councils of nobles created by medieval English kings like Edward I. Other countries' legislatures, while not possessing the same legal continuity, use naming conventions to evoke the same sort of similarity. The German Bundestag, formerly the Reichstag, was named for the Diets convened by the Holy Roman Emperors; the Bundesrat, or federal assembly of states (Länder) was named for a similar Imperial institution called the Reichsrat. Greece's Vouli is named for boulē, a form of legislative council in many classical "democracies", such as Athens. And then, of course, there's the American Senate, named explicitly in emulation of the famous Roman aristocratic assembly.

It's expedient for modern institutions to try to evoke these ties. Ideologically, however, modern institutions of representation bear little similarity to the old Estates. The Estates were explicitly pressure groups for a limited franchise to enhance their legal and bargaining power within the framework of the evolving medieval and early modern state.

More instructively, many of those Estates did not metamorphose into modern representative institutions. In Russia, for example, boyars' councils and the later Holy Senate transformed into rubber-stamp groups to approve decisions that the tsars had already made. The Hohenzollern kings of Brandenburg-Prussia co-opted the old landed East-Elbian estates into a form of oligarchy; when Prussia finally got a representative institution, the Landtag, in the nineteenth century, it was a new innovation. Early modern France's parlaments, a sort of judiciary and Estate representation organization combined into one (and, I would add, a fine analogue to the Landsmeet of Ferelden), were explicitly circumvented by the monarchy in 1789; instead, Louis XVI called up amorphous assemblies of representatives and named them after an assembly of medieval Estates to which the new group bore little similarity.

There is no reason to assume that Ferelden's Landsmeet will provide a sound basis for a durable universally representative institution. It might very well in the far future; no one can discount the possibility. But it remains only that: a possibility. Reforms to landed Estates are not the only avenue to universal representation and modern liberalism; they might not even be the best or most likely one. We cannot therefore give the Landsmeet credit for being a proto-Parliament. Instead, we must take it on its own merits as they are during the time period of the games, and whatever other merits Fereldan politics in the Dragon Age possess, modern liberalism is not one of them.

 

Very informative thank you. Considering the circumstances and what you said doesn't that still make Ferelden best of the worst? In a liberal point of view anyway.

 

All systems, by their very nature, allow systematic abuses and failures. This is a tautology.

 

Nor does it identify the real weakness of a preventative system: that it is non-falsifiable. The Circle is a system which will only fail if mages rise to dominance over mundanes and allow them to work unchecked on its watch. That's pretty much what hasn't occurred for the last thousand years- the Tevinter circle failed, but the real issue for mages is that the Templars can point at the last thousand years of the Circle working, rather than being unnecessary.

 

All systems can abused however the question is how much hesitation will someone who wants to abuse the system would have? In other words does the punishment for abuse create enough fear to make that person think twice? We have yet to see a Templar getting punished for such abuses by someone other than the protagonist who can choose to do that and there was no sign of stress at all among those templars, it seemed like it was a routine thing and no fear of punishment.

 

Using my own country as en example, we have a very liberal Justice system, punishments are less harsh compared to rest of the world and our prison's conditions are top notch, we are the best rivaled only by Finland. However if someone in the Justice system IE a Judge has proven to be corrupt that Judge will go to a especial court and after trial and proven guilty will go to a especial correction facility that only people who abused the Justice system go to. They will also receive a much harsher punishment and longer time in prison than normal criminals.

 

Although quite liberal and very "kind" to criminals, Netherlands have one of the lowest crimes rates in the world. Why do you think that is? Its because the system prevents as much as abuse as possible and punishes any sort of abuse with severity.

[MisterJB]

You wouldn't want to simply be able to live your life? Possibly even to serve a greater purpose?

I like to think that I would but I very much doubt it. Many people wouldn't either.

 

Thy does everyone keep insisting on saying that I just want to do away with everything when i have not?

Also, I am posting from my phone so please forgive he extended response times and any signs of irritation. I am greatly enjoying this discussion, barring folk putting words in my mouth. Any annoyance is at the interface.

 

Such was not my intention. When you asked me to place myself in the position of the mages, you neglected to take into consideration any possible improvements I might wish to see done to the Circle.

Therefore, I asked for you to place yourself in the position of normal people as the situation is, now as how you wish it would be.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Ya know, I was planing on adding my two cents...but then I realized it's not necessary.

 

Dean and Eriene and others are cleaning house in a most spectacular manner.

Hats off to you gentlemen.

[Ryzaki]

But see, when your laws are built on might makes right in Ferelden, you are no different than the laws of Orlais.  A powerful enough elf in Orlais can pretty much do whatever they want if they had the requisite power.  Would it take more power than in Ferelden? Yes, but it isn't like Ferelden has this gigantic moral high ground on its laws and such.

 

As I posted previously: WIki on Ferelden law:

 

Similarly, local prejudices and violence against non-human residents—notably alienage elves—often go unpunished. In part this is pragmatism, as Ferelden king's law states that killing a human in defense of an elf is a crime.^[27]

 

Seriously? Welp guess everyone in my party is a hardcore criminal XD. My poor elf mage.

[Aimi]

Very informative thank you. Considering the circumstances and what you said doesn't that still make Ferelden best of the worst? In a liberal point of view anyway.

 

Well...it's hard to say. There are many positive aspects to Ferelden's legal system, but there are also drawbacks. 

 

One serious potential concern is that the representation and influence afforded to the aristocracy through the Landsmeet closes off commoners from the political process more than would a system in which aristocrats lack the legal authority to band together in such a way. Marxian analysis of historical societies yielded claims that a strong centralized monarchical government was in many ways better at improving the lot of non-aristocrats, because, ostensibly, the crown would have to align with commoner interests against the entrenched aristocracy. There's a great deal of reductionism in that, and it fails to account for the consensus-dominated historiography of the last several decades, which emphasized collaborative aspects of late medieval and early modern monarchical-aristocratic relationships. But it can't be dismissed entirely, because there are fairly explicit examples of it happening.

 

Another relevant concern is Ferelden's poor legal system. The blackhaller and sheriff network is small and ad hoc, and justice is often cursory and violent when it is meted out at all. Other times, statutes are enforced, but these are actively negative and destructive (e.g. the one Ryzaki just highlighted about killing humans in defense of elves). Do other Thedosian societies possess equivalently capricious and ineffective means of legal redress? We don't really know, but I would hedge on the side of 'probably not'. That doesn't indicate, to me, that Ferelden is the best of a bad lot.

 

For another thing, we really don't know very much about justice and government outside Ferelden, Orzammar, and Kirkwall. There's no standard of comparison; we have a cursory glimpse at Orlesian society in The Masked Empire, which isn't even technically out yet, and there are bits and pieces of things about qunari and Tevinter society from the comic books, but most of what we have to go on is the Codex and WoT. And those don't really qualify as adequate sources to form strong opinions about this stuff.

 

Finally, there's the thing that Dean brought up. The operation of each system in theory is often different than in practice. Ferelden's shoddy legal system looks even worse in the games than it does in the theoretical one of statutes and institutions. Conversely, the Landsmeet held during the Fifth Blight theoretically would not have incorporated concerns outside of those of the Fereldan aristocracy, but in practice Eamon's backing of the Wardens allowed them (if they so chose) to place other issues on the table and, even if obliquely and non-democratically, gave other Fereldan interests a voice.

 

Given all of these concerns, can we really make involved comparisons between Orlesian, Nevarran, Rivaini, Ander, and Fereldan law and justice? I don't think so. We'd need more information before taking a stand on which system was the 'best of a bad lot'.

[Cat Lance]

All systems, by their very nature, allow systematic abuses and failures. This is a tautology.
 
Nor does it identify the real weakness of a preventative system: that it is non-falsifiable. The Circle is a system which will only fail if mages rise to dominance over mundanes and allow them to work unchecked on its watch. That's pretty much what hasn't occurred for the last thousand years- the Tevinter circle failed, but the real issue for mages is that the Templars can point at the last thousand years of the Circle working, rather than being unnecessary.

The thing is, for those of us calling for Reformation, the fact that perfection cannot necessarily be attained is not a reason not to improve. The world (any one) does not improve if we sit back and say, "Well, we can't achieve Utopia, so why try to make things better at all?" You just keep trying, keep working at things.

  

You wouldn't want to simply be able to live your life? Possibly even to serve a greater purpose?
I like to think that I would but I very much doubt it. Many people wouldn't either.
 
Thy does everyone keep insisting on saying that I just want to do away with everything when i have not?
Also, I am posting from my phone so please forgive he extended response times and any signs of irritation. I am greatly enjoying this discussion, barring folk putting words in my mouth. Any annoyance is at the interface.
 
Such was not my intention. When you asked me to place myself in the position of the mages, you neglected to take into consideration any possible improvements I might wish to see done to the Circle.
Therefore, I asked for you to place yourself in the position of normal people as the situation is, now as how you wish it would be.

Ah! Sorry! I I'd not realise you were asking me to perform another thought experiment!

As a normal person, I take it you mean a non mage? But in case you also meant a peasant I'll include that too. I imagine most peasants are fairly unaware of the inner workings of the Circle and Templars. Those that would... Oh! Maybe a merchant who supplies a circle tower. I'd say my opinion in that case would be fairly based off what I saw making deliveries. I'd probably wonder how the mages could stand being cooped up all the time. Further than that would depend on if i got to chat with mages. But there is no TV in Thedas with news to do reports on "The Mage Problem" oror "The Plight of the Circles" or what have you.

I can say that my player characters have pretty universally felt for the common mage despite battling plenty of the examples of what an happen with an out of control one. They have also meet good and bad templars. My characters have pretty universally felt that something needs to change in the dynamic. Intriguingly my only mage play through was as a Hawke and she hated the templars while also feeling the least empathy or mages that stayed in the circle.

So, there you go. I'm pretty WYSIWYG. I also tend to look at issues from all sides before opening my mouth to venture my opinion.

[Lulupab]

Seriously? Welp guess everyone in my party is a hardcore criminal XD. My poor elf mage.

 

That's why all elves should become Dalish. 

 

 

Well...it's hard to say. There are many positive aspects to Ferelden's legal system, but there are also drawbacks. 

 

One serious potential concern is that the representation and influence afforded to the aristocracy through the Landsmeet closes off commoners from the political process more than would a system in which aristocrats lack the legal authority to band together in such a way. Marxian analysis of historical societies yielded claims that a strong centralized monarchical government was in many ways better at improving the lot of non-aristocrats, because, ostensibly, the crown would have to align with commoner interests against the entrenched aristocracy. There's a great deal of reductionism in that, and it fails to account for the consensus-dominated historiography of the last several decades, which emphasized collaborative aspects of late medieval and early modern monarchical-aristocratic relationships. But it can't be dismissed entirely, because there are fairly explicit examples of it happening.

 

Another relevant concern is Ferelden's poor legal system. The blackhaller and sheriff network is small and ad hoc, and justice is often cursory and violent when it is meted out at all. Other times, statutes are enforced, but these are actively negative and destructive (e.g. the one Ryzaki just highlighted about killing humans in defense of elves). Do other Thedosian societies possess equivalently capricious and ineffective means of legal redress? We don't really know, but I would hedge on the side of 'probably not'. That doesn't indicate, to me, that Ferelden is the best of a bad lot.

 

For another thing, we really don't know very much about justice and government outside Ferelden, Orzammar, and Kirkwall. There's no standard of comparison; we have a cursory glimpse at Orlesian society in The Masked Empire, which isn't even technically out yet, and there are bits and pieces of things about qunari and Tevinter society from the comic books, but most of what we have to go on is the Codex and WoT. And those don't really qualify as adequate sources to form strong opinions about this stuff.

 

Finally, there's the thing that Dean brought up. The operation of each system in theory is often different than in practice. Ferelden's shoddy legal system looks even worse in the games than it does in the theoretical one of statutes and institutions. Conversely, the Landsmeet held during the Fifth Blight theoretically would not have incorporated concerns outside of those of the Fereldan aristocracy, but in practice Eamon's backing of the Wardens allowed them (if they so chose) to place other issues on the table and, even if obliquely and non-democratically, gave other Fereldan interests a voice.

 

Given all of these concerns, can we really make involved comparisons between Orlesian, Nevarran, Rivaini, Ander, and Fereldan law and justice? I don't think so. We'd need more information before taking a stand on which system was the 'best of a bad lot'.

 

It makes perfect sense to wait until more information is released regarding other nations but from what we gathered Ferelden is perhaps further advanced because its existence is in opposition to Orlais; their nationalism is defined in opposition to Orlesian norms. We know that Ferelden operates quite differently than Orlais and pretty much rest of nations follow Orlesian example. Well all except Tevinter. So we should not expect Orlais and Nevarra to be too different, especially not like Ferelden and Orlais. 

 

In my theory Ferelden have a lot of similarities to England (or Scotland). That said during old times England operated quite differently from rest of the Europe and had similar rules to Ferelden. I think its quite possible devs had this in mind when they created Ferelden.

[Ryzaki]

**** even my elf mage can't stand the dalish.

 

They can take their flat eared crap and shove it where the sun doesn't shine.

[EmissaryofLies]

The Dalish can never catch a break. I'd be pissed too.