For one, stop claiming that the reason this problem exists is because we just aren't giving the mages enough.
First of all JB, I haven't claimed that in this thread, at all. My only problem with the Circles was a need for better Templar oversight, which could have easily fixed this whole goddamn mess we are in now.
Well, we already give them free housing, food, clothes, education; allow them to live in Emperor Drakon's former palace, have the Knight Commander share power with the First Enchanters, allow them to leave for a time if they prove themselves trustworthy, etc.
I am seriously running out of ideas of what else we can give them before they're actually satisfied and agree to stay in the Circle.
They don't get free food or housing. They pay for their own supplies via the tranquil.
As for what you can give them. The right to have a family, dignity, and the feeling of safety from those who watch them.
If they feel like they are stripped of all rights (which depends on the Knight-Commander in question,) are forbidden from having families, are not allowed to have jobs outside of a Circle, and feel like they need permission just to exist, not to mention the fear that they can be killed or made tranquil at the drop of a hat or based on rumors, again depending on the Knight-Commander, it creates an environment where mages don't feel any sort of safety at all.
You can't just give them material comforts and call it good. You have to account for the things that qualifies them, and everyone else, as people. The need for love, families, acceptance.
These are things mages are denied most especially during the critical development years.
Well, we already give them free housing, food, clothes, education;
1)this is a prison and mages-formari pay to much by their magic services what brings Orlais Chantry to much money and influence for make them living in those sh*t..and only enchanters live in good rooms then most of aprentices live in poor barraks
2)again not free and worst than Templars had even that mages pay for Templars existence
3)again not free and this is rather making clothes from materials what left after creating somethink for Templars, Chantry priests and rich nobles
4)survived old mages-enchanters teach young mages in their own prison..teaching by lefted ancient tevinter books what was censored by Orlais Chantry and old mages mostly teaching because they have nothing to do and they cant do anythink
First of all JB, I haven't claimed that in this thread, at all. My only problem with the Circles was a need for better Templar oversight, which could have easily fixed this whole goddamn mess we are in now.
I did not say you did. But the post I replied to implied so and it is a pervasive mentality in these debates.
That we just aren't giving mages enough and if we keep giving them more and more they will, eventually, be happy.
In my experience, if you give someone something, they'll just want more. People are never satisfied with what they have.
They ask them for help and the mages are free to refuse. They don't do it because it's in their best interests to earn some good rep.
Plus, the only cases we know of the mages being allowed to fight was against the Darkspawn and the Qunari.
So, they get every one of their needs provided by the Tranquil without them actually having to work and they're still complaining?
Either they have to learn to make a living or they get free food, etc. Both are mutually exclusive.
Also, take into account that the introduction of mages in the general market could lead to the Circle economically dominating society.
Overpopulation which leads to conflict which leads to a greater need for Templars which leads to a greater need for lyrium which leads to the prices increasing which leads to the Chantry having to find money somewhere, you know where I'm going with this . Plus, emotional instability could lead to demonic possession.
And what about the corruption amidst the mages?
David Gaider has officially confirmed that Lyrium is needed and that the only reason they had Alistair say that was because they were unable to create a mechanic where the Warden or Alistair had to drink lyrium.
Alistair even claims that he has started to use lyrium again in one of the comics.
And the next time the Qunari come knocking?
Telling people they can't have a family isn't going to fly. This is why mages need to make a living.
But mages can be possessed against their will, in which case they will bring harm to other due to circunstances completely beyond their control for no other reason that those bystanders happened to be near them.
In that sense, magic is very much like a plague.
Funny every noble wants a mage when he is sick. The system is corrupt. I see them using them. What was that saying: " Magic is to serve man not to rule them". They really don't see them as a plague and they do use them.
They don't get free food or housing. They pay for their own supplies via the tranquil.
As for what you can give them. The right to have a family, dignity, and the feeling of safety from those who watch them.
If they feel like they are stripped of all rights (which depends on the Knight-Commander in question,) are forbidden from having families, are not allowed to have jobs outside of a Circle, and feel like they need permission just to exist, not to mention the fear that they can be killed or made tranquil at the drop of a hat or based on rumors, again depending on the Knight-Commander, it creates an environment where mages don't feel any sort of safety at all.
So... what are these "rights" that exist in Thedas and for whom do they exist, because I'm pretty sure I remember sentencing a noble to death in Awakening for the lulz - not even counting the games played on nobles by other nobility -, the common people (especially Alienage elves and Casteless dwarves) are abused worse than the worst Circle troublemaker by the nobility and their coin bled by merchants, merchants are free to be murdered without any sort of recourse (Lothering); only the Chantry seems to have "rights" and those are only by grace of belief and often ignored (City Elf Origin). The only group that seems like they might have some concept of a "right" is the Qunari, and I'm not even positive about that.
I mean, human rights really weren't a thing until, what, the Enlightenment? Applying today's ideas about rights and conditions is unfair to the setting, just as it is to apply today's ideas to something like Mass Effect or Jade Empire.
Again, I'm all for mages to be treated better at the Circle, see my earlier post waaaaaay back in this topic, but the argument about rights doesn't really make sense for the setting.
They don't get free food or housing. They pay for their own supplies via the tranquil.
As for what you can give them. The right to have a family, dignity, and the feeling of safety from those who watch them.
If they feel like they are stripped of all rights (which depends on the Knight-Commander in question,) are forbidden from having families, are not allowed to have jobs outside of a Circle, and feel like they need permission just to exist, not to mention the fear that they can be killed or made tranquil at the drop of a hat or based on rumors, again depending on the Knight-Commander, it creates an environment where mages don't feel any sort of safety at all.
You can't just give them material comforts and call it good. You have to account for the things that qualifies them, and everyone else, as people. The need for love, families, acceptance.
These are things mages are denied most especially during the critical development years.
If the Tranquil provide 100% of the income for the Circle, then the mages don't work. Thus, they get everything for free.
While the accountability of Templars is certainly something that must be assured, it bears no difference from the situation of any person living in any Thedosian city where the guards might also decide to be abusive and the local lord can condemn you to death based on inconclusive evidence.
If we allow mages to freely reproduce and even work outside of the Circle, then just what restrictions are we imposing on them? The place where they can sleep? How is that effective?
They can find love, familial ties and acceptance amongst their fellow mages while still mantaining the separation that is necessary to protect both normals and mages.
I did not say you did. But the post I replied to implied so and it is a pervasive mentality in these debates.
That we just aren't giving mages enough and if we keep giving them more and more they will, eventually, be happy.
In my experience, if you give someone something, they'll just want more. People are never satisfied with what they have.
But you aren't giving the mages anything. You are taking their labor, the work of the tranquil, and buying supplies based on that. It's not given to them by donation, charity or the tithes of the faithful.
Most mages see a big tower (or a prison in the case of the Gallows) where they are locked up their whole lives, not allowed to leave, can be beaten for talking to civilians (In Kirkwall,) are put into a forced test where apprentices aren't told what's going on, only those who fail are never seen again, and those who are considered weak can have tranquililty forced on them, or they can be killed on a rumor depending again on who the Knight-Commander is.
What you see as material comforts, they see as appeasement policies to hide the fact that they are treated as slaves of the chantry, or they feel like they need special permission just to be born.
Many mages prefer living without the material comforts, otherwise there wouldn't have been such a strong push to leave the Chantry since all they saw was abuse.
If the Tranquil provide 100% of the income for the Circle, then the mages don't work. Thus, they get everything for free.
While the accountability of Templars is certainly something that must be assured, it bears no difference from the situation of any person living in any Thedosian city where the guards might also decide to be abusive and the local lord can condemn you to death based on inconclusive evidence.
If we allow mages to freely reproduce and even work outside of the Circle, then just what restrictions are we imposing on them? The place where they can sleep? How is that effective?
They can find love, familial ties and acceptance amongst their fellow mages while still mantaining the separation that is necessary to protect both normals and mages.
While any children they have are taken away as Chantry property, and as Wynne tells Alistair, mages are not encouraged to have relationships.
You are dismissing the psychological and the emotional trauma mages go through as you see only material goods.
If the Tranquil provide 100% of the income for the Circle, then the mages don't work. Thus, they get everything for free.
If we allow mages to freely reproduce and even work outside of the Circle, then just what restrictions are we imposing on them? The place where they can sleep? How is that effective?
They can find love, familial ties and acceptance amongst their fellow mages while still mantaining the separation that is necessary to protect both normals and mages.
I think it's fair to count the Tranquil as Mages; yes, they seem to do most of the grunt work (Owain and cleaning), but the rest of the mages do seem to at least contribute to other tasks in the Circle, as well as creating/re-scribing literature (Mage Origin).
This is a bit harsh, I think. While it isn't feasible to give them crazy access at every Circle (the Tower, for example, is in the middle of a lake), letting them interact in a city is good for both groups if for nothing more than the mages seeing what's outside the Circle and the normal folk understanding that most mages can't actually turn people into toads. 
If the Tranquil provide 100% of the income for the Circle, then the mages don't work. Thus, they get everything for free.
While the accountability of Templars is certainly something that must be assured, it bears no difference from the situation of any person living in any Thedosian city where the guards might also decide to be abusive and the local lord can condemn you to death based on inconclusive evidence.
If we allow mages to freely reproduce and even work outside of the Circle, then just what restrictions are we imposing on them? The place where they can sleep? How is that effective?
They can find love, familial ties and acceptance amongst their fellow mages while still mantaining the separation that is necessary to protect both normals and mages.
When Wynne had a child they took her baby away. That is not okay. In a community setting they can earn a living and have the guards around watching.
You said: They can find love. Really! You mean they can find sex and do it in the dark and hope not to get caught. Love and family is different.
So... what are these "rights" that exist in Thedas and for whom do they exist, because I'm pretty sure I remember sentencing a noble to death in Awakening for the lulz - not even counting the games played on nobles by other nobility -, the common people (especially Alienage elves and Casteless dwarves) are abused worse than the worst Circle troublemaker by the nobility and their coin bled by merchants, merchants are free to be murdered without any sort of recourse (Lothering); only the Chantry seems to have "rights" and those are only by grace of belief and often ignored (City Elf Origin). The only group that seems like they might have some concept of a "right" is the Qunari, and I'm not even positive about that.
I mean, human rights really weren't a thing until, what, the Enlightenment? Applying today's ideas about rights and conditions is unfair to the setting, just as it is to apply today's ideas to something like Mass Effect or Jade Empire.
Again, I'm all for mages to be treated better at the Circle, see my earlier post waaaaaay back in this topic, but the argument about rights doesn't really make sense for the setting.
Right to marry and have children, for one. Many in Thedas are limited by circumstance, but they aren't denied that. The right to have relationships for another. Wynne tells Alistair that mages are discouraged from having relationships with each other. And I think the devs said that depending on who the Knight Commander is, some outright forbid mages from having any relations at all.
The right to serve in the army would be another example. Anyone can join outside a Circle. The farmer's son, the merchant, the illegitimate noble's child, they can choose to join. Or they can try to apprentice in a craft or a trade.
Mages have none of these options. It's "go to the circle at the age of four-six, possibly torn from your family in chains, possibly abandoned by your parents who hate your existence because of your magic, study for a few years, take a potentially lethal test with the details kept from you, and then spend a few more years hanging out in said tower, hoping the templars are led by an understanding Knight-Commander, before taking on an apprentice themselves, if they don't get killed in an annulment first."
They are forced to stay in a tower for decades and are not given any options on what to do with themselves.
Mages does not have rights because of Orlais and Orlais Chantry they are slaves, tools what belongs to Orlais Chantry what have a huge magic monopoly what brings them a lot of money and influence
mages does
1)not have rights to be nobles(and their childrens will never be nobles to)
2)not have rights to have freadom to live outside Chantry Circles
3)not have rights to have any personal property or lands
4)not have rights to have family(rarely allow to only a "white marriage" without any relation exept platonic) and especially childrens
5)not have rights to defend ourselfs and to train and use weapons and armors
6)not have rights to learn what Chantry and Templars not allowed and use magic then they are not allow it
not have rights for mostly anything and they are do all what Orlais Chantry and their Templars jailers say for them and if they are not they will be beaten or became tranquil or be executed and noone will care because Templars can do with them anythink what they degenerated and fanatic brains wanted
So... what are these "rights" that exist in Thedas and for whom do they exist, because I'm pretty sure I remember sentencing a noble to death in Awakening for the lulz - not even counting the games played on nobles by other nobility -, the common people (especially Alienage elves and Casteless dwarves) are abused worse than the worst Circle troublemaker by the nobility and their coin bled by merchants, merchants are free to be murdered without any sort of recourse (Lothering); only the Chantry seems to have "rights" and those are only by grace of belief and often ignored (City Elf Origin). The only group that seems like they might have some concept of a "right" is the Qunari, and I'm not even positive about that.
I mean, human rights really weren't a thing until, what, the Enlightenment? Applying today's ideas about rights and conditions is unfair to the setting, just as it is to apply today's ideas to something like Mass Effect or Jade Empire.
Again, I'm all for mages to be treated better at the Circle, see my earlier post waaaaaay back in this topic, but the argument about rights doesn't really make sense for the setting.
Even the poor are allow to get married and have kids. Not mages they are the property of the Chantry.
I did not say you did. But the post I replied to implied so and it is a pervasive mentality in these debates.
That we just aren't giving mages enough and if we keep giving them more and more they will, eventually, be happy.
In my experience, if you give someone something, they'll just want more. People are never satisfied with what they have.
I wouldn't doubt you would be fed up with the circle system within a week if you where ever placed into one.
Right to marry and have children, for one. Many in Thedas are limited by circumstance, but they aren't denied that. The right to have relationships for another. Wynne tells Alistair that mages are discouraged from having relationships with each other. And I think the devs said that depending on who the Knight Commander is, some outright forbid mages from having any relations at all.
The right to serve in the army would be another example. Anyone can join outside a Circle. The farmer's son, the merchant, the illegitimate noble's child, they can choose to join. Or they can try to apprentice in a craft or a trade.
Mages have none of these options. It's "go to the circle at the age of four-six, possibly torn from your family in chains, possibly abandoned by your parents who hate your existence because of your magic, study for a few years, take a potentially lethal test with the details kept from you, and then spend a few more years hanging out in said tower, hoping the templars are led by an understanding Knight-Commander, before taking on an apprentice themselves, if they don't get killed in an annulment first."
They are forced to stay in a tower for decades and are not given any options on what to do with themselves.
Anders seems to imply it's a much more socially liberated culture, what with his "robes" comment. They also do have the rights to relationships; discouraged is not equal to banned and Wynne's lover was a templar, no? I'll take your word for that last statement, but I agree that they should have that right.
They're also immune to conscription outside of the Grey Wardens, which is a very important point. Anyone outside the Circle can be forced into one; take the widowed father, a farmer at Redcliffe, conscripted into an army serving a Lord whose son murdered his wife. I also disagree with your statement about crafting; in Awakening is any indication, they are more than welcome to take up a trade; one Mage was very much into (what was essentially) botany and even allowed outside the Circle without an escort. Granted, that isn't the same as, say, blacksmithing or leather tanning, but that could be simply the lack of availability; I don't recall seeing a forge at the Circle.
You missed a bit there, but point is taken. And Annulments are rare; there were, what, a total of 17 total over 1000 years in over 10 different circles?
Except when they are (Wynne, Cera, Finn, Ines).
Even the poor are allow to get married and have kids. Not mages they are the property of the Chantry.
Can you give me an example of a casteless married to another casteless?
Anders seems to imply it's a much more socially liberated culture, what with his "robes" comment. They also do have the rights to relationships; discouraged is not equal to banned and Wynne's lover was a templar, no? I'll take your word for that last statement, but I agree that they should have that right.
They're also immune to conscription outside of the Grey Wardens, which is a very important point. Anyone outside the Circle can be forced into one; take the widowed father, a farmer at Redcliffe, conscripted into an army serving a Lord whose son murdered his wife. I also disagree with your statement about crafting; in Awakening is any indication, they are more than welcome to take up a trade; one Mage was very much into (what was essentially) botany and even allowed outside the Circle without an escort. Granted, that isn't the same as, say, blacksmithing or leather tanning, but that could be simply the lack of availability; I don't recall seeing a forge at the Circle.
You missed a bit there, but point is taken. And Annulments are rare; there were, what, a total of 17 total over 1000 years in over 10 different circles?
Except when they are (Wynne, Cera, Finn, Ines).
They are immune to conscription because they are the property of the Chantry. What most of them want is the right to have a family. The Chantry is corrupt. It is using these people as their slaves. The circle is a pretty cage.
This is a bit harsh, I think. While it isn't feasible to give them crazy access at every Circle (the Tower, for example, is in the middle of a lake), letting them interact in a city is good for both groups if for nothing more than the mages seeing what's outside the Circle and the normal folk understanding that most mages can't actually turn people into toads.
Which they already do. Rhys remarked how they were allowed to visit Val-Royeaux and buy personal proprierty.
Can you give me an example of a casteless married to another casteless?
I said poor and common man. Elves were married and when you went into towns didn't you see common people married.
edit: I was responding to your comment "the common people (especially Alienage elves "
And Annulments are rare; there were, what, a total of 17 total over 1000 years in over 10 different circles?
actually already 20 for ~600 years after 20 Chantry Cirlces was destroyed
Which they already do. Rhys remarked how they were allowed to visit Val-Royeaux and buy personal proprierty.
Personal property? In Val Royeaux?
How the hell did I miss that one...
What most of them want is the right to have a family.
Yeah, I'm sure all the problems would just go away if we gave babies to mages.
I said poor and common man. Elves were married and when you went into towns didn't you see common people married.
The Casteless of the Dwarves?
Retour en haut