The whole comic book genre is founded on this kind of thing. It's far fetched, of course.. but there's a place for heroes as well.
I'm not one of them myself though. I was a huge jerk at 17.
Most comic books have no basis in reality whatsoever.
Most, the Watchmen was very intelligent; even if the whole plan should crumble to dust the moment people realize aliens are not comming to attack after all.
Do we really know enough about Tevinter to say that though? Sure it's full of corruption but it that the case for all the mages there? It always struck me as being like Orlais but with mages.
In Asunder and the Masked Empire, we get to see two events where the social elite of Orlais gathered to play the Game. There were some barbs here and there and I remember a young noble whose dress was ruined but didn't evolve beyond that.
In "Those who Speak", Titus tried to capture the Ferelden King at a Tevinter ball and it ended up in a bloody mess.
Likewise, slavery in Orlais has to be covered. In Tevinter, slaves are commonplace. Orlais is by no means perfect, but Tevinter is worse.
Guest_StreetMagic_*
Most comic books have no basis in reality whatsoever.
Most, the Watchmen was very intelligent; even if the whole plan should crumble to dust the moment people realize aliens are not comming to attack after all.
Neither does this have any more basis in reality. This isn't an episode of Law and Order or something. Dragon Age is some pretty ridiculous bullsh*t. Comics books and fantasy are kind of equal in my book.
But fun. Don't get me wrong or anything.
Much like mage freedom will never truly lead to non-mage security. Do you think non-mages can defend themselves if they are powerless? Then why should the Templar also not feel forced to do what they do?
Not every Templar is a Red Templar.
However, if we legitimize the mage's right to impose their freedom through force, then we should also legitimize the non-mage's right to impose their safety through force.
Well nothing will truly lead to 100% non-mage security or anyone's security.
The fact that not every Templar is a Red Templar kind of proves my point. What is the difference between Templars and Red Templars? What are mages doing to red templars to make them feel more forced?
I already indicated why certain mages are in different situations and feel forced into blood magic. It really comes down to situations and options, I don't think it's fair to blame Templars for blood magic but they do share blame in certain situations. I don't think mages can really be blamed for the Red Templars though, at least not in the same way.
Neither does this have any basis in reality. This isn't an episode of Law and Order or something. Dragon Age is some pretty ridiculous bullsh*t.
But fun. Don't get wrong or anything.
That depends on what you'd consider as having basis on reality.
Fantasy tends to have fantastical elements but those are just part of the setting. So long as the characters behave like actual people would, I consider it to have a basis on reality.
In Asunder and the Masked Empire, we get to see two events where the social elite of Orlais gathered to play the Game. There were some barbs here and there and I remember a young noble whose dress was ruined but didn't evolve beyond that.
In "Those who Speak", Titus tried to capture the Ferelden King at a Tevinter ball and it ended up in a bloody mess.
Likewise, slavery in Orlais has to be covered. In Tevinter, slaves are commonplace. Orlais is by no means perfect, but Tevinter is worse.
Oh I agree that Tervinter is worse but I just don't think everyone in it is entirely bad and we have no idea what Feynriel may be taught there. Also, aren't the Orleasian nobles often trying to have each other killed?
Guest_StreetMagic_*
That depends on what you'd consider as having basis on reality.
Fantasy tends to have fantastical elements but those are just part of the setting. So long as the characters behave like actual people would, I consider it to have a basis on reality.
Like the other dude said above, not everyone is a sociopath. I've met some people who go out of their way for others. I don't know why they're like that, but they are very much real.
I don't think you have an accurate gauge of how "people" would behave.
That safety is, punishing people for fear of what some of them might do. By that logic doesn't that give women/people the right to lock men/people with certain disorders, up for fear of what they might do? There is nothing just in that. Mages and non mages are born free, the chantry and templars rob them of that freedom. If someone kidnaps you, and you fight back, does it give the kidnappers the right to use force against you?
I don't think either has the right to impose anything, freedom is a right, until it's you've done something that deems you unworthy of it.
The Circle system works on the basis that restricting the freedoms of mages is preferable to having non-mages fall victims to magic.
The ideals of magical freedom work on the principles that, while some non-mages will inevitable fall victim to magic, this is preferable to imposing restrictions on the freedom of mages in the manner than the Circle system does.
They both choose to place the burden of suffering on the opposite side in the name of their own protection. What is the difference beyond that you support one side due to your belief that "freedom is a right"?
At least the Templars have a plan to diminish the number of victims beyond "Let's all be free and hope for the best".
Oh I agree that Tervinter is worse but I just don't think everyone in it is entirely bad and we have no idea what Feynriel may be taught there. Also, aren't the Orleasian nobles often trying to have each other killed?
Evidently, there are all types of people in Tevinter but we know how the culture is and what acts it encourages. Feynriel's own master killed a rival in a duel in broad day light in the street so, he doesn't appear to be outside of the norm.
And if there is one thing Tevinter does not encourage is defending the helpless. Feynriel is just unrealistic.
Guest_StreetMagic_*
Evidently, there are all types of people in Tevinter but we know how the culture is and what acts it encourages. Feynriel's own master killed a rival in a duel in broad day light in the street so, he doesn't appear to be outside of the norm.
And if there is one thing Tevinter does not encourage is defending the helpless. Feynriel is just unrealistic.
Feynriel himself says in his letter that he sometimes looks back on Kirkwall and understands the Templars somewhat. It's not like he went native the minute he went to Tevinter.
To me, Tevinter sounds pretty... Darwinian.. and that kind of mentality doesn't just get embraced because of proximity. You have to get used to it first. Which he is not.
How do you know ALL Templars have rebelled and have become Red Templars?
Feynriel himself says in his letter that he sometimes looks back on Kirkwall and understands the Templars somewhat. It's not like he went native the minute he went to Tevinter.
To me, Tevinter sounds pretty... Darwinian.. and that kind of mentality doesn't just get embraced because of proximity. You have to get used to it first. Which he is not.
Um, what? 
Feynriel himself says in his letter that he sometimes looks back on Kirkwall and understands the Templars somewhat. It's not like he went native the minute he went to Tevinter.
To me, Tevinter sounds pretty... Darwinian.. and that kind of mentality doesn't just get embraced because of proximity. You have to get used to it first. Which he is not.
That letter was a far more reasonable consequence than the "Who need rescuing quest". The morals that Feynriel was taught in Southern Thedas did not abandon him overnight but he also doesn't really do anything against the extablished Tevinter order because it would take far too much effort, it's dangerous and, ultimately, because he benefits from the system. It's only a matter of time until he becomes like either Danarius or Titus or, at best, like that tranvestite Magister whose name I can't remember at the moment(who, admitadelly, it's not all that different from orlesian nobles).
But Feynriel just scouring the Fade, looking for wrongs to right? That I call nonsense.
Guest_StreetMagic_*
Um, what?
Not sure what was confusing.
I said it was Darwinian. As in, survival of the fittest. Might makes right. Seems like strength is valued the most in Tevinter. Beat enough ass and you're cream of the crop.
As for the "proximity" comment. I mean you don't just embrace entirely new mentalities and lifestyles just because you live someplace. I don't know what's so confusing about me saying that.
Not sure what was confusing.
I said it was Darwinian. As in, survival of the fittest. Might makes right. Seems like strength is valued the most in Tevinter. Beat enough ass and you're cream of the crop.
As for the "proximity" comment. I mean you don't just embrace entirely new mentalities and lifestyles just because you live someplace. I don't know what's so confusing about me saying that.
In addition to being blindly selfish sociopaths who would kill their grandmothers for a handful of change, adult humans are apparently as malleable as playdoh. 
Not every Templar is a Red Templar.
However, if we legitimize the mage's right to impose their freedom through force, then we should also legitimize the non-mage's right to impose their safety through force.
Wouldn't that be more apt if the Red Templars weren't just killing everybody?
Not sure what I said that was so confusing.
I said it was Darwinian. As in, survival of the fittest. Might makes right. Seems like strength is valued the most in Tevinter. Beat enough ass and you're cream of the crop.
As for the "proximity" comment. I mean you don't just embrace entirely new mentalities and lifestyles just because you live someplace. I don't know what's so confusing about me saying that.
Oh you mean Social Darwinism.
That's an entirely different thing to Darwinism, it's actually an insuly that Darwin's name was attached to that kind of ideology at all because he did not believe or endorse anything like that.
I don't blame you for that at all though, I was just a bit confused by your comment.
Guest_StreetMagic_*
Oh you mean Social Darwinism.
That's an entirely different thing to Darwinism, it's actually an insuly that Darwin's name was attached to that kind of ideology at all because he did not believe or endorse anything like that.
I don't blame you for that at all though, I was just a bit confused by your comment.
My bad. But yes, social darwinism. Just kind of using shorthand here. Tevinter sounds highly competitive.
It was Mages that came up with the Harrowing, and the ritual is apparently much older than the Templar Order... But sure, blame the Templars for that aswell.
They're the ones forcing the mages to undergo the harrowing or be made tranquil if mages of old developed it doesn't matter.
Guest_StreetMagic_*
That letter was a far more reasonable consequence than the "Who need rescuing quest". The morals that Feynriel was taught in Southern Thedas did not abandon him overnight but he also doesn't really do anything against the extablished Tevinter order because it would take far too much effort, it's dangerous and, ultimately, because he benefits from the system. It's only a matter of time until he becomes like either Danarius or Titus or, at best, like that tranvestite Magister whose name I can't remember at the moment(who, admitadelly, it's not all that different from orlesian nobles).
But Feynriel just scouring the Fade, looking for wrongs to right? That I call nonsense.
I almost think of that as a joke quest. How the girl instantly falls in love with Feynriel and such.. it's supposed to be funny.
As for a realistic reason why he might be there.. maybe he misses home and tried to look for some outlet to traverse the Wounded Coast through the Fade. Then he happened upon that woman.. and decided to do something good.
Just a thought.
They're the ones forcing the mages to undergo the harrowing or be made tranquil if mages of old developed it doesn't matter.
Even the mages of old understood that they were far too dangerous to just be allowed to walk around without some evidence that they were capable of resisting demons. It's the mages of today who seem to fail to understand this simple truth.
The Circle system works on the basis that restricting the freedoms of mages is preferable to having non-mages fall victims to magic.
The ideals of magical freedom work on the principles that, while some non-mages will inevitable fall victim to magic, this is preferable to imposing restrictions on the freedom of mages in the manner than the Circle system does.
They both choose to place the burden of suffering on the opposite side in the name of their own protection. What is the difference beyond that you support one side due to your belief that "freedom is a right"?
At least the Templars have a plan to diminish the number of victims beyond "Let's all be free and hope for the best".
I know why it's there and how it works. But if that is considered "right", to take away someone's freedom just because they might do something that can hurt others. We should all be behind lock and key.
Retour en haut