Well, I have been known to do a lot of things for cookiesYou guys should just throw in with us Pro-Magers. You've already got the right attitude. And besides, Pro-Magers get cookies. Magical cookies. You know what Pro-Templar people get? Bread. Stale bread.
Well I like my templars just fine so I wouldnt want them no to exist XD I think that makes me poor pro-magesCookies, Pandaa. Magical Cookies.
Mages should have the right to be safe, from themselves, from the Fade, and from mundanes, and mundanes should have the right to be safe from mages. That's basically what it comes down to for me. Some level of supervision is a must, be it Templars or some new secular order, because mages alone can spontaneously become abominations (without Fade-tearing occurring), and I feel that abominations are the true danger that mages both face and invite.
It's such a hard topic to think about. Safety vs Freedom. I align more with safety, myself, in this case. I'm hopeful Cullen feels the same.
Mages should have the right to be safe, from themselves, from the Fade, and from mundanes, and mundanes should have the right to be safe from mages. That's basically what it comes down to for me. Some level of supervision is a must, be it Templars or some new secular order, because mages alone can spontaneously become abominations (without Fade-tearing occurring), and I feel that abominations are the true danger that mages both face and invite.
It's such a hard topic to think about. Safety vs Freedom. I align more with safety, myself, in this case. I'm hopeful Cullen feels the same.
There's the catch 22...many mages turn to demons because of the way they are treated, because they are so desperate....if their noose was loosened then the need for the power to help them survive wont exist. Or drastically lessened rather. You would still get power hungry mages that would do that regardless.
Freedom in a safer environment would be a good thing. Don't lock them up, but still keep an eye on them sure. But don't take away their right to be treated as anyone else because of what they might or might not ever do.
lol You guys are almost taking on Hobbes/Machiavelli/Locke/Rousseau approaches on how mages should be governed. xD
Edit: I like this conversation, just seeing a similar comparison!
You know, sometimes I would really love to see the devs' faces when they get wind of what we're talking about in here. I mean the theories we make, especially if we get one right actually.
There's the catch 22...many mages turn to demons because of the way they are treated, because they are so desperate....if their noose was loosened then the need for the power to help them survive wont exist. Or drastically lessened rather. You would still get power hungry mages that would do that regardless.
Freedom in a safer environment would be a good thing. Don't lock them up, but still keep an eye on them sure. But don't take away their right to be treated as anyone else because of what they could or could not ever do.
Indeed. The happier mages are, it seems, the less likely they are to become abominations. But. Even the happiest mage can have a moment of weakness. Abominations happen in Tevinter and among the Dalish, where mages are free (less so with the Dalish, but still a level of freedom above that of some Circle mages). Thus it comes back to a need for supervision. So, I am for more rights for mages, but not complete freedom. It's just not safe enough.
Mages should have the right to be safe, from themselves, from the Fade, and from mundanes, and mundanes should have the right to be safe from mages. That's basically what it comes down to for me. Some level of supervision is a must, be it Templars or some new secular order, because mages alone can spontaneously become abominations (without Fade-tearing occurring), and I feel that abominations are the true danger that mages both face and invite.
It's such a hard topic to think about. Safety vs Freedom. I align more with safety, myself, in this case. I'm hopeful Cullen feels the same.
If a mage is willing to kill any mage who uses/abuses their power to serve their own purpose they deserve their freedom. Any mage willing to take a vow to use their power to help others deserves freedom.
All mages do not have evil intentions. I believe the Circles should continue but be reformed so mages can earn their freedom.
Indeed. The happier mages are, it seems, the less likely they are to become abominations. But. Even the happiest mage can have a moment of weakness. Abominations happen in Tevinter and among the Dalish, where mages are free (less so with the Dalish, but still a level of freedom above that of some Circle mages). Thus it comes back to a need for supervision. So, I am for more rights for mages, but not complete freedom. It's just not safe enough.
Oh I agree with you, there has to be some form of supervision, because yeah their power is dangerous. But a person with a sword in hand, no matter how trained and disciplined, could also have a lapse, snap and run someone through, if the circumstances are right.
The chances of either happening are the same and no more easier to avoid, they are just different.
There's the catch 22...many mages turn to demons because of the way they are treated, because they are so desperate....if their noose was loosened then the need for the power to help them survive wont exist. Or drastically lessened rather. You would still get power hungry mages that would do that regardless.
Freedom in a safer environment would be a good thing. Don't lock them up, but still keep an eye on them sure. But don't take away their right to be treated as anyone else because of what they might or might not ever do.
If a mage is willing to kill any mage who uses/abuses their power to serve their own purpose they deserve their freedom. Any mage willing to take a vow to use their power to help others deserves freedom.
All mages do not have evil intentions. I believe the Circles should continue but be reformed so mages can earn their freedom.
I agree, not all mages are evil. Wynne, for example, if a good person. My only problem is abominations. A mage doesn't have to mean harm to do harm. If the threat of abominations are removed from the picture, I am all for this. (This is why Tranquil mages are allowed out and about without supervision. It was originally believed they couldn't become possessed and, thus, abominations.)
I believe in the structure and purpose of the Circle. I think we need it, though the drastic power imbalances between mages and Templars need to be fixed immediately. Similarly, perhaps Loyalist mages can join the Seekers, as a gesture of goodwill. Older mages may have the right to visit their families, under supervision. Blood magic is only allowed in attempts to study it, at the behest of the Chantry. We need better defenses against it, and better demonic defenses. The Litany is not enough.
This is almost exactly how I feel about how the Circle should work. I would be more lenient about letting mage children maintain healthy contact with their family (even if it's only the family being allowed to visit the Circle).
Parents would be less inclined to try to hide their children's magic, and children would be less inclined to be terrified about being taken away.
If it wasnt this thread I dont think Id engage in mage-templar discussion. That topic tends to get heated quickly ^^;At least it's all been civil. Seriously, you guys are almost insanely nice and welcoming.
Howdy, Folks! Just checking in briefly. Seems no real news, outside of Zev will not appear, but will be mentioned?
I must say, laughing that we're back to debating the mage-templar war ... yet again...
Be excellent to each other!
Howdy, Folks! Just checking in briefly. Seems no real news, outside of Zev will not appear, but will be mentioned?
I must say, laughing that we're back to debating the mage-templar war ... yet again...
Be excellent to each other!
You know, sometimes I would really love to see the devs' faces when they get wind of what we're talking about in here. I mean the theories we make, especially if we get one right actually.
Maybe, something like this.
I think that while that could be true in some, if not most, cases at the moment, the demons would just change tactics. Instead of a demon tempting a mage with hopes of freedom, they'd just tempt them with hopes of something else they may want. It's just our nature to want more than we have.
The thing is temptation is always around, non mages face temptations all the time, it's that thing inside us that says no this is wrong. I wont do that. Granted it would be harder to resist a demon than robbing a bank to feed your family, but there are mages strong enough to resist. It's just not fair to treat everyone the same.
If it wasnt this thread I dont think Id engage in mage-templar discussion. That topic tends to get heated quickly ^^;
I think it helps that a lot of us are very middle-of-the-road. Also, we're in a Templar character's thread. And a lot of us have rolled an Amell/Surana to see Cullen in DAO. We get both sides of the story.
I think it helps that a lot of us are very middle-of-the-road. Also, we're in a Templar character's thread. And a lot of us have rolled an Amell/Surana to see Cullen in DAO.
...and the rest of us just don't engage anymore...
I can get behind this. I, as a player have a knee-jerk reaction against DA's system, but my PCs want the maximum number of people to be safe and happy.I believe in the structure and purpose of the Circle. I think we need it, though the drastic power imbalances between mages and Templars need to be fixed immediately. Similarly, perhaps Loyalist mages can join the Seekers, as a gesture of goodwill. Older mages may have the right to visit their families, under supervision. Blood magic is only allowed in attempts to study it, at the behest of the Chantry. We need better defenses against it, and better demonic defenses. The Litany is not enough.
My only hopes for DAI regarding the mages/templars are simply that there are more options than:
1. Side with mages
2. Side with templars
3. Not get involved/think both are too extreme and do nothing about it
And that I really hope the conflict is more important than a background quest. (Ex. Stormcloaks/Imperials like in Skyrim) It's been such a big issue for some time it would be a shame for it to end in the side lines!
I don't think he needs to have been forced at all. Templars are perceived as holy protectors. I can see why someone wanting to make a difference would want that life. Not wanting to kill mages is like a cop not wanting to kill people--I'd be worried if he thought otherwise. But I think watching over a Circle would drive him crazy quickly.
Agree. I actually think in many ways, he's the perfect person for the Circle. Because it shouldn't be about politics. And it should be about shades of grey and trying to do the best for both sides. I see him as uniquely qualified for a job that has fallen into the trend of hiring people based more on their "unshakable faith" than their morality.
^Cole has a VA!!!! James Norton!
Lovely to see you R2!
Only other news I think has been Cole's VA. Other than that it's the same old mix of photoshop and philosophy here
ah, right. Saw that, but I have no idea who that is. Haven't bee able to watch any of the vids that went by. Where should I know him from...?
Retour en haut