537 réponses à ce sujet

[Mistic]

Any person who has a positive expression of magic also has the latent potential to produce the equivalent of Thedasian Ebola. It may never manifest in their lives- or it may come out tomorrow, or a week from now, or a decade after passing their harrowing. Not because they are murderers or serial killers or any sort of terrorist, but because they are, through winning the psuedo-genetic lottery of fate, carriers.

 

Does that mean they deserve to be segregated from society? Plenty of people say no, and have many fine and moral reasons for it. Sometimes we should just expect people to live with the consequences of others.

 

But for anyone who doesn't want potential Patient Zero of the next Ebola outbreak to live in their neighborhood... well, I have quite a bit of sympathy for them, and think there is a bit more than fear from ignorance and superstition behind their concerns.

 

That is the key in the end, isn't it? The management of magic is a social contract. We know that it's a matter in every society in Thedas. Even the Dalish and the Rivaini take that point in consideration, although they must have judged that the benefits overcome the disadvantages (it shouldn't be a coincidence that both are mostly clan/tribal societies, where you don't have the luxury not to use valuable assets to survive). Even Tevinter uses Templars.

 

Of course, it's also said that no sort of contract, including the social contract, can be considered valid unless all parties agree to it voluntarily without coercion. Maybe that was the case during the Nevarran Accord (the original contract), but not anymore.

[Eveangaline]

Tevinter is a tyranny of mages. Only magisters can rule. In Tevinter people without magical ability are an underclass, while in the rest of Thedas the reverse is true.

If there is a perfect solution, it hasn't been tried yet. Both Tevinter and the White Divine Chantry model are deeply flawed. The ideal would be a system where both mages and those without magical ability have equal rights as citizens. But how do you go about achieving that?

. Every other human place is a tyranny of noble humans. The only thing that makes Tevinter worse is the culture of slavery and blood magic.

I don't really see mages being made nobility any worse ethically than maki alistair a log because he had an ancestor that won a war. And while I would love the option to make all of thedas work as democracies with rights for all races and no one brig born ahead of others I'm no holding my breath.

[Hazegurl]

It's not really magical synthesis perse, and to be honest, it sure as hell makes a lot more sense than what happened in Mass Effect 3. 

I would be against it for the same reason I'm against synthesis. I don't believe that everyone should have to become the same in order to get along. 

[lil yonce]

And it's here that I would say that national governments who are demanding that all magical defense of their nations be handled by the Chantry are shirking their responsibility to their own citizens and placing the burden of defense on keeping mages imprisoned... but I would prefer not to go into detail on that because the end of the Circle system would seem to make it rather moot. Though perhaps the Inquisition, if it takes over the responsibility for mages in Andrastian Thedas, will be able to answer these questions in-game, with rather more context and information than we have here.

So would a lighter Chantry templar defense in circles with national magic defense forces outside circles work out? Assuming that mages have control over their own circles and representation in Chantry ranks and at court and all that?

[Dean_the_Young]

Literally anyone can potentially have Ebola (unless you can develop an immunity to it, I don't actually know). Abominationhood is just a disease that a surprisingly small amount of the population is vulnerable to. Locking up everyone who might potentially contract the disease would be utterly insane and logistically impossible.

 

I would have thought the meaning was clear in context, but I suppose not.

 

Even people suspected of carrying Ebola, even if it hasn't outwardly manifested, can end up on the wrong (right?) side of a quarantine. Most people are not suspected.

 

You are right that a quarantine can become unsustainable if the population is large enough. This is why breaking a quarantine of can lead to a catastrophic pandemic, and so you want to quarantine when the suspect population is still small and manageable.

 

 

And it's here that I would say that national governments who are demanding that all magical defense of their nations be handled by the Chantry are shirking their responsibility to their own citizens and placing the burden of defense on keeping mages imprisoned... but I would prefer not to go into detail on that because the end of the Circle system would seem to make it rather moot. Though perhaps the Inquisition, if it takes over the responsibility for mages in Andrastian Thedas, will be able to answer these questions in-game, with rather more context and information than we have here.

 

 

Nationalizing the mages would be an epic disaster in the making and a horrible policy collapse. Internationalizing the mages was among the best possible things that could have happened for both mundanes and mages, and second only to allowing the mages to in turn dominate the international order the collapse of the international mage order would be one of the greatest steps backwards the setting could take right now.

 

The closest 21st analogy would be if we managed to create a viable, relatively neutral, collective space colonization program across the world, imperfect as it may be (let's throw involuntary colonization responsibilities and obligations on the participants who aren't allowed to return to Earth) but providing many public goods and services, and then decided to break it apart and let the nations nationalize whatever parts they could agree to (and get away with).
 

Or, alternatively, the current pending slow-motion balkanization of the internet. When nations switch from using national internet domains to creating their own self-contained intranets (arguably to circumvent US spying, effectively enabling their own domestic spying), the world is going to lose a precious commodity we take for granted today. There may even still be something called the internet twenty-five years from now, but it's not going to be anywhere as open or free as what we think of it today.

 

 

It may be useful to remember, indeed, that while Thedas is terrible in many ways, it's also substantially better in many ways than our own Europe was at a similar level of technological development.

 

 

It is also substantially worse. Medieval Europe only had the Black Death as the potentially apocalyptic factor: Thedas has the super-black death accompanied by its own hyper-breeding mongol hoard, along with abominations and ancient deities and a fully developed totalitarian ideology with an effective indoctrination apparatus.

 

By comparison, Europe just had the tyrannies of religion to deal with. Thedas doesn't even have that on a comparable scale.

[Dean_the_Young]

. Every other human place is a tyranny of noble humans. The only thing that makes Tevinter worse is the culture of slavery and blood magic.

I don't really see mages being made nobility any worse ethically than maki alistair a log because he had an ancestor that won a war. And while I would love the option to make all of thedas work as democracies with rights for all races and no one brig born ahead of others I'm no holding my breath.

Arguably Tevinter is more capable and more callous of far worse atrocities than the Tevinter nations. They not only do more extreme things, they also take them for granted and don't care as much.

 

A Tevinter Magister selling a slave for blood sacrifice is a public taboo but private commonplace even in the normal status quo: an Andrastian national hero who merely sells elves as slaves for funding in the context of a public emergency immediately losses significant public support and immediately has the moral authority of the nation unequivably come down against him despite the availability of context to justify it.

 

There's also the point of the relative difficulty in bringing down an entrenched mage elite (who have more power to resist their upsurption) than an entrenched mundane elite. There is a belief, justified or not, that it's easier to kill of a particularly bad human king than it is to resist a particularly bad mage.

[Dean_the_Young]

That is the key in the end, isn't it? The management of magic is a social contract.

I love you so much right now. This is the concept I have been circling around for years, and hadn't quite been able to put a finger on.
 

 

We know that it's a matter in every society in Thedas. Even the Dalish and the Rivaini take that point in consideration, although they must have judged that the benefits overcome the disadvantages (it shouldn't be a coincidence that both are mostly clan/tribal societies, where you don't have the luxury not to use valuable assets to survive). Even Tevinter uses Templars.

 

 

Of course, social contracts can also establish themselves through an inability to enforce an alternative. Does Tevinter (or the Dalish or the Rivaini) society tolerate a mage elite because of a rational cost-benefit analysis with an emphasis on the benefit of mage-elites? Or do they tolerate a mage elite because the costs were so high that they were considered effectively impossible, and so people just settled for what they couldn't change?

 

People can accept exceptionally unfavorable conditions if they don't think it's reasonable to expect otherwise.

 

 

Of course, it's also said that no sort of contract, including the social contract, can be considered valid unless all parties agree to it voluntarily without coercion. Maybe that was the case during the Nevarran Accord (the original contract), but not anymore.

 

I agree that the acceptance has changed.

 

In my past analysis of the topic I've pointed out the Circle system definitely needs mage buy-in, and I fully agree that the Mages have lost that. What generally follows is the debate about how to change that. Reforms are raised but the most common proposals are unilateral concessions towards the mages. Templars do less, Mages get more.

 

Something that gets precious, precious little consideration in these discussions is the other end of the social contract: is the wider society willing to accept the same contract that the mages are? Most mage proponents spend precious little attention to the commoner consensus or willingness: reforms are to be enforced, over Templar corpses as necessary. The prospect of anti-mage lynch mobs is an intellectual fear, never an active consideration of integration, and I've seen some propose to treat an anti-mage lynch mob on the same way of responding to an abomination. Kill enough and the mundanes would learn acceptance and, presumably, tolerance.

[Hellion Rex]

 

Something that gets precious, precious little consideration in these discussions is the other end of the social contract: is the wider society willing to accept the same contract that the mages are? Most mage proponents spend precious little attention to the commoner consensus or willingness: reforms are to be enforced, over Templar corpses as necessary. The prospect of anti-mage lynch mobs is an intellectual fear, never an active consideration of integration, and I've seen some propose to treat an anti-mage lynch mob on the same way of responding to an abomination. Kill enough and the mundanes would learn acceptance and, presumably, tolerance.

I agree with this point. How would you address the issue of the common man in regards to the Mage Question?

[Xilizhra]

Nationalizing the mages would be an epic disaster in the making and a horrible policy collapse. Internationalizing the mages was among the best possible things that could have happened for both mundanes and mages, and second only to allowing the mages to in turn dominate the international order the collapse of the international mage order would be one of the greatest steps backwards the setting could take right now.

 

The closest 21st analogy would be if we managed to create a viable, relatively neutral, collective space colonization program across the world, imperfect as it may be (let's throw involuntary colonization responsibilities and obligations on the participants who aren't allowed to return to Earth) but providing many public goods and services, and then decided to break it apart and let the nations nationalize whatever parts they could agree to (and get away with).
 

Or, alternatively, the current pending slow-motion balkanization of the internet. When nations switch from using national internet domains to creating their own self-contained intranets (arguably to circumvent US spying, effectively enabling their own domestic spying), the world is going to lose a precious commodity we take for granted today. There may even still be something called the internet twenty-five years from now, but it's not going to be anywhere as open or free as what we think of it today.

I wasn't referring to nationalizing the mages; rather, I was talking about individual nations giving some of their own soldiers templar training to defend against abomination outbreaks.

 

 

I agree that the acceptance has changed.

 

In my past analysis of the topic I've pointed out the Circle system definitely needs mage buy-in, and I fully agree that the Mages have lost that. What generally follows is the debate about how to change that. Reforms are raised but the most common proposals are unilateral concessions towards the mages. Templars do less, Mages get more.

 

Something that gets precious, precious little consideration in these discussions is the other end of the social contract: is the wider society willing to accept the same contract that the mages are? Most mage proponents spend precious little attention to the commoner consensus or willingness: reforms are to be enforced, over Templar corpses as necessary. The prospect of anti-mage lynch mobs is an intellectual fear, never an active consideration of integration, and I've seen some propose to treat an anti-mage lynch mob on the same way of responding to an abomination. Kill enough and the mundanes would learn acceptance and, presumably, tolerance.

The trouble is that the mages and templars cannot be seen as equal negotiators in a healthy relationship, as their roles are completely different; mages are confined citizens, templars are law enforcement. I continue to contend that having one's law enforcement also perform the duties of legislative, executive or judicial government is utter folly; if the Chantry would want to go back to controlling the Circle, such matters should, in my opinion, be handled by either the Circle internally or another (civilian) branch of the Chantry, not the templars.

 

I also believe that there should be two tiers of templars; ones who work for individual Circles and do most of the guarding, and ones who work for the Chantry or other supervisory agency and perform special investigations/interventions when necessary. Similar to the divisions between local and national police in our own world.

[Mistic]

I love you so much right now. This is the concept I have been circling around for years, and hadn't quite been able to put a finger on.

 

Glad to be of help

 

Of course, social contracts can also establish themselves through an inability to enforce an alternative. Does Tevinter (or the Dalish or the Rivaini) society tolerate a mage elite because of a rational cost-benefit analysis with an emphasis on the benefit of mage-elites? Or do they tolerate a mage elite because the costs were so high that they were considered effectively impossible, and so people just settled for what they couldn't change?

 

People can accept exceptionally unfavorable conditions if they don't think it's reasonable to expect otherwise.

 

Well, the theories of social contract try to explain why rational individuals consent to give up their personal freedom for political order. So yeah, fear, weakness or resignation may allow a tyrannical magocracy to go on, because maybe the cost of the alternative is perceived to be too high.

 

Every system has its ways to relieve tension and avoid complete breakdown of the social contract. Civil wars and failed states are product of that. The Mage-Templar War now is proof that there's a sizeable part of the social contract that doesn't accept it. I suppose than in the old days the Blights and the Qunari Wars were a good way to relieve tension. Since the end of the last Exalted March against the Qunari in 7:84, there hasn't been a conflict of such a magnitude. Even Wynne considers that wars are useful for mages, since they can improve their conditions for a time when they are needed and are in a better position to negotiate.

 

Nevertheless, not everyone agrres that the social contract theory is useful, but it certainly explains the event of the Nevarran Accord in Thedas. The Inquisition and the Chantry did sign a contract to manage magic in Southern Thedas, all under the wacthful eye of Emperor Drakon. It would be interesting to know the exact terms of that contract. Despite some colourful stories, it's pretty clear that the institution of the White Chantry Circles was born from the Nevarran Accord, and Lambert used it to justify Seekers and Templars breaking from the Chantry.

 

I also believe that there should be two tiers of templars; ones who work for individual Circles and do most of the guarding, and ones who work for the Chantry or other supervisory agency and perform special investigations/interventions when necessary. Similar to the divisions between local and national police in our own world.

 

But doesn't that supervisory Templar agency already exist? The job you mention sounds exaclty like what the Seekers of Truth are supposed to be.

[Xilizhra]

But doesn't that supervisory Templar agency already exist? The job you mention sounds exaclty like what the Seekers of Truth are supposed to be.

Almost. The only problem is that the Seekers don't appear to have templar antimagic abilities, and would also need greater numbers for reinforcements to be called in in the case of a Broken Circle-esque situation.

[Mistic]

Almost. The only problem is that the Seekers don't appear to have templar antimagic abilities, and would also need greater numbers for reinforcements to be called in in the case of a Broken Circle-esque situation.

 

I understand. However, I do think they have Templar abilities. After all, they are selected from the Templar ranks, according to Dawn of the Seeker. Lambert is a good example of that (he defeated the mages easily in Asunder), and I wouldn't be surprised if Cassandra is the one who will teach us the Templar specialization in Inquisition.

 

As for the numbers, yes, you're right. The entry about Therinfal Redoubt suggests that they were undermanned and, worst of all, underfinanced. Still, they had enough to take part in the annulment of Dairsmuid Circle.

[Xilizhra]

I understand. However, I do think they have Templar abilities. After all, they are selected from the Templar ranks, according to Dawn of the Seeker. Lambert is a good example of that (he defeated the mages easily in Asunder), and I wouldn't be surprised if Cassandra is the one who will teach us the Templar specialization in Inquisition.

 

As for the numbers, yes, you're right. The entry about Therinfal Redoubt suggests that they were undermanned and, worst of all, underfinanced.

Cassandra certainly never displayed any hint of templar abilities or lyrium addiction in Dawn of the Seeker.

 

However, I think we could somehow pull off fair Chantry government of the Circle, provided mages are allowed to join the Chantry's government to ensure fair representation.

[The Baconer]

As for the numbers, yes, you're right. The entry about Therinfal Redoubt suggests that they were undermanned and, worst of all, underfinanced. Still, they had enough to take part in the annulment of Dairsmuid Circle.

 

I actually don't think that was an official annulment. The note from WoT mentions that it occurred after the events at the White Spire, which would mean it was actually purged by renegade Seekers and Templars.

[Mistic]

I actually don't think that was an official annulment. The note from WoT mentions that it occurred after the events at the White Spire, which would mean it was actually purged by renegade Seekers and Templars.

 

Since we were discussing Seeker numbers and forces, that's even better for them. It means that even divided and with no Chantry support they had enough numbers in Rivain to lead the purge of a Circle, so they may have more power than we think. However, I also realize that even if they were the leaders, most part of the dirty job would have been done by Templars, according to the codex in WoT.

[TK514]

I wasn't referring to nationalizing the mages; rather, I was talking about individual nations giving some of their own soldiers templar training to defend against abomination outbreaks.

 

 

The trouble is that the mages and templars cannot be seen as equal negotiators in a healthy relationship, as their roles are completely different; mages are confined citizens, templars are law enforcement. I continue to contend that having one's law enforcement also perform the duties of legislative, executive or judicial government is utter folly; if the Chantry would want to go back to controlling the Circle, such matters should, in my opinion, be handled by either the Circle internally or another (civilian) branch of the Chantry, not the templars.

 

I also believe that there should be two tiers of templars; ones who work for individual Circles and do most of the guarding, and ones who work for the Chantry or other supervisory agency and perform special investigations/interventions when necessary. Similar to the divisions between local and national police in our own world.

 

This is a significant shift from your usual message, and one that seems to fit well with a 'reformed Circle' proposal.  This almost sounds like what the Circles were intended to have looked like when the Navarran Accords were drawn up, and much closer to what they were apparently like as recently as 20 years previous to DA2.

[Xilizhra]

This is a significant shift from your usual message, and one that seems to fit well with a 'reformed Circle' proposal.  This almost sounds like what the Circles were intended to have looked like when the Navarran Accords were drawn up, and much closer to what they were apparently like as recently as 20 years previous to DA2.

Keep in mind that that's missing the second pillar of my plan, which involves having mages within the Chantry's government, and being eligible for all positions therein. If the Chantry is to govern the mages, I believe the mages should get fair representation in its government.

[Mistic]

Keep in mind that that's missing the second pillar of my plan, which involves having mages within the Chantry's government, and being eligible for all positions therein. If the Chantry is to govern the mages, I believe the mages should get fair representation in its government.

 

What would be a fair representation? Would you use quotas according to the number of mages that are members of the Chantry? Because we know from the Imperial Chantry that there's also the risk of over-representation.

[Xilizhra]

What would be a fair representation? Would you use quotas according to the number of mages that are members of the Chantry? Because we know from the Imperial Chantry that there's also the risk of over-representation.

In terms of doctrine, I far prefer the Imperial Chantry; its biggest flaw is being intertwined with Tevinter's government. But that's somewhat beside the point. I'm not actually sure whether there would be quotas or whether it would just be open enrollment, though the former could be wiser for the time being. Ideally, I wouldn't want the Chantry involved at all, but I'm willing to make concessions to necessity.

[DarthLaxian]

Errr.. Those are rare exceptions. In DA2 if you spare a Blood Mage cult they appear later in Act 3 now fully corrupted by their Blood Magic, causing issues for Kirkwall and the Circle itself(They were stealing members away to bring them over to Blood Magic), and may even be Abominations with how insane they've become. They also had no issue turning on their own benefactors for not agreeing with "Kill Hawke, now!" demand.

 

Mages need to have Freedom, yes, but they also need to be taught to control their powers and checks and balances put in place to prevent surges of Abominations and rampant Blood Magic abuse.

 

Mages are also people so they aren't all perfect and there will be those that slip or simply want to watch the world burn. The difference between the regular crazy person and a crazy Blood Mage is that Blood Mages are ridiculously powerful and can easily slaughter entire villages on their own if they wanted.

 

 

Blood Magic has almost always been shown to corrupt and lead to Abominations being created. Only very few exceptions exist of the rule.

 

Heck, without Hawke than Merrill would have become an Abomination. She even gets tempted by the Demon's offer for more power in that one Quest when you went into the Fade.

 

No - that's like saying "normal" magic always leads to a burning house or having nuclear weapons leads to their eventual use (it hasn't so far, for most countries - the US are the ONLY country to ever use nukes in a war)

 

As for Merril - she was tempted while in the fade (the fade makes you more susceptible to suggestion in the first place...bringing Merril with her strong desires was asking for trouble anyway (hell, our DA:O-Companions didn't do much better in the fade)...yes, I made the same misstake as I normally traveled with 3 mages and a rogue in DA2 - except for quests I knew I needed a Tank for (like the high dragon!)) and only to entertain a fantasy (the demon never asked her to let it in - she probably would have refused, she knows of abominations...yes, she would have died in that situation without Hawke (locked in the fade she would have died of starvation and thirst, but not because she became an abomination)

 

It's not the magic that corrupts - it's power in all forms (if you let it, at least - and with a good grounding in morals and a nice childhood (not being ripped from your parents, just because you have magic!), that is unlikely - otherwise all powerfull people would be monsters)

 

How did Ben Franklin say it? - If you want to really get to now a persons nature, give them power (I am paraphrasing - I only know the german translation of that directly and don't need to look it up to get my point accross I think)

 

Meaning:

 

Those who get corrupted will get corrupted either way (and forbidding it actually adds the alure of the forbidden to it - I still remember doing a lot of things my dad told me not to as a child, just because he told me I couldn't - and they will do it anyway!)

 

I would rather have all mages know blood-magic as that makes stoping a bloodmage easier (a non bloodmage can't really fight a well trained bloodmage - firstly they have mind-control and secondly they have access to a lot more power and of course the abilites to make your blood boil etc.) - because Templars (unless in really great numbers - remember, Jowan a novice bloodmage overcame 4 Templars without breaking a sweat (and one of them was a veteran Knight-Commander as well!)...now Imagine a trained bloodmage...you would probably need at least 10 Templars to even make him sweat a little)) are not much use against them!

 

And bloodmagic is rather usefull, too - Phylacteries are bloodmagic as is the Joining (should everybody who helped prepare either now be killed as a bloodmage, because people who help need to know what they are doing, so they have at least some training...It's rather hyprocritical to go after one bloodmage while praising another for providing templars (who often abuse their charges and/or hate them) with the tools of their trade (!))

 

greetings LAX

[Mistic]

In terms of doctrine, I far prefer the Imperial Chantry; its biggest flaw is being intertwined with Tevinter's government. But that's somewhat beside the point. I'm not actually sure whether there would be quotas or whether it would just be open enrollment, though the former could be wiser for the time being. Ideally, I wouldn't want the Chantry involved at all, but I'm willing to make concessions to necessity.

 

Given recent news, I wouldn't be a fan of the Imperial Chantry either:

http://dgaider.tumbl...d-was-wondering

 

Apparently, they love the Rite of Tranquility in Tevinter. A good way to keep mages in line. It makes sense. A magocracy would have means to control their mage population, since they know better than anyone what they are capable of. Kings were nobility too, but they feared the power of the nobles because they knew the danger of having a vassal much more powerful that their lord.

[Senya]

Given recent news, I wouldn't be a fan of the Imperial Chantry either:

http://dgaider.tumbl...d-was-wondering

 

Apparently, they love the Rite of Tranquility in Tevinter. A good way to keep mages in line. It makes sense. A magocracy would have means to control their mage population, since they know better than anyone what they are capable of. Kings were nobility too, but they feared the power of the nobles because they knew the danger of having a vassal much more powerful that their lord.

Somehow, I'm not surprised.

[DarthLaxian]

Doesn't surprise me - why not?

 

They probably love enchantments as much as the next guy (and watching an ex-opponent become an enchanting drone - must be quite satisfying, if your are into that)

 

Note: But I seem to remember that the Magisters had a way to use Lyrium despite them being mages themselves (at least the one who made Fenris did, otherwise he would have been unable to draw those markings on Fenris and then "burn" them into the skin (so they become permanent))

 

greetings LAX

[Hellion Rex]

Doesn't surprise me - why not?

They probably love enchantments as much as the next guy (and watching an ex-opponent become an enchanting drone - must be quite satisfying, if your are into that)

Note: But I seem to remember that the Magisters had a way to use Lyrium despite them being mages themselves (at least the one who made Fenris did, otherwise he would have been unable to draw those markings on Fenris and then "burn" them into the skin (so they become permanent))

greetings LAX

Provided it's processed (like mana potions) any mage can use lyrium. It's not something restricted to magisters.

[Mistic]

Doesn't surprise me - why not?

 

They probably love enchantments as much as the next guy (and watching an ex-opponent become an enchanting drone - must be quite satisfying, if your are into that)

 

Note: But I seem to remember that the Magisters had a way to use Lyrium despite them being mages themselves (at least the one who made Fenris did, otherwise he would have been unable to draw those markings on Fenris and then "burn" them into the skin (so they become permanent))

 

Remember that Tevinter is a slaver society. I wouldn't be surprised if Danarius had Tranquil slaves.