772 réponses à ce sujet

[Hellion Rex]

Why do we care about Chantry laws?

Well, Rivain's monarchy are heavily Andrastian so they have to care lol

 

For all intents and purposes, it seems like most of the Chantry looked the other way for a long time, at least until the Annulment.

[Aaleel]

So, the First Enchanter doesn't mention problems and that means we should just accept that and assume none exist?

Because she is not biased? Because she doesn't have a different culture that attributes importance to different things?

 

We know for a fact Seers allow themselves to be possessed and then rule over human communities. That's two major Chantry laws broken. If she doesn't recognize this as a problem, then why should we accept anything else she says?

 

Seers are a position given by nobles who fund them.  Seers are not ruling over anything.  They have to assist Templars when asked to continue receiving the aid.  If they were ruling the city why would they assist templars,obviously they're answering to someone.

 

But even if we look past.  Where is the oppression, the nuclear destruction, the chaos you've continually said would ensue in mages aren't cloesly watched?  It isn't therein Rivian.

[MisterJB]

Why do we care about Chantry laws?

Well, if she does not care about Chantry laws, then there is no basis upon which we can believe her claims that nothing wrong was happening.

It's like if a member of a civilization where cannibalism was commonplace claiming nothing bad is going on because, due to different cultures, they don't consider cannibalism a bad thing.

She claims nothing bad is happening but her culture has no issues with possession so, what else does it have no issues with that we would have issues with?

 

Also, the Circle is an arm of the Chantry and thus beholden to the laws set by it. If they break them, then the Chantry has the right to determine punishment.

[Xilizhra]

Well, if she does not care about Chantry laws, then there is no basis upon which we can believe her claims that nothing wrong was happening.

It's like if a member of a civilization where cannibalism was commonplace claiming nothing bad is going on because, due to different cultures, they don't consider cannibalism a bad thing.

She claims nothing bad is happening but her culture has no issues with possession so, what else does it have no issues with that we would have issues with?

 

Also, the Circle is an arm of the Chantry and thus beholden to the laws set by it. If they break them, then the Chantry has the right to determine punishment.

Well, not anymore.

[MisterJB]

Seers are a position given by nobles who fund them.  Seers are not ruling over anything.  They have to assist Templars when asked to continue receiving the aid.  If they were ruling the city why would they assist templars,obviously they're answering to someone.

They don't rule the city, that's the most Andrastean area of the country.

However, they rule over more traditional communities and assist the Templars because then they leave them alone. It's not "answering to somebody", it's compromisewith neighboring powers.

 

 

But even if we look past.  Where is the oppression, the nuclear destruction, the chaos you've continually said would ensue in mages aren't cloesly watched?  It isn't therein Rivian.

Well, we already have magic ruling over man and possessions. Two bad things we say will happen if mages are free are happening.

As for the rest, we don't know much about Rivain. But that doesn't mean they don't ocurr.

 

Until The World of Thedas came out, we didn't know areas of the country were a magocracy but now we do.

[MisterJB]

I'm still trying to figure out how it took so damn long for the Chantry to figure out what was going on considering this was in the capital of Rivain and right under thei noses.

Maybe they just don't care enough about Rivain. It's a relatively weak nation in the far North with no evidence of there being anything of value there.

[Hellion Rex]

Maybe they just don't care enough about Rivain. It's a relatively weak nation in the far North with no evidence of there being anything of value there.

From WoT, it seems like the Chantry tolerated the seers since they agreed to help the Rivain templars when their aid was requested. I think the issue either came about in one of two ways:

 

1. They heard about the actual Circle mages training under the seers, while initially it had only been village girls and the like. Having actual Circle mages flirting with spirits and demons would set off some major alarm bells.

 

2. Dairsmuid's Annulment came after Lambert left, and some of his group decided to smack down on the Rivaini Circle.

[LobselVith8]

No, the hahren did no such thing.

 

The hahren forbid the relationship. For all the talk about how elven mages have absolute authority in the clans, this stands as a prime example that there are rules that govern the Dalish community, and even the Keeper didn't try to publicly override the ruling made by the hahren.

 

There is no "Dalish community". There are different clans that rule themselves and the Keeper of one has no authority over the elves of another clan exactly like there are different human nations that rule themselves and the king of one has no authority over the citizens of another.

 

The clans all adhere to a certain ethos, and even come together for the Arlathvenn; they are all Dalish. They adhere to the same rules, like vir sulevanan.

 

The hahren of the mother's clan forbied HER and only HER from marrying. They did not forbid any Keeper because they were from a different clan to begin with.

 

The hahren forbid the two from being together. For all the talk in this thread about how the mages have unbridled power within the clan, this is a telling example where the Keeper didn't try to publicly subvert the ruling of the hahren, despite being an elven mage.

 

So, again, just because the Keeper does not have absolute authority over the elves of a different clan, that doesn't mean he or she doesn't have absolutely authority over the members of his or her clan.

 

You talk about the Keeper as though the person is a dictator, which isn't the case. The Dalish have more freedom within the clan than most do within one of the Andrastian kingdoms; the freedom to leave and go their own way is another example of agency that some within the Andrastian kingdoms don't have.

[AshenEndymion]

 

The rulers are Andrastian nobility, not the traditionalists.

 

The rulers of Dairsmund(the "capital" of Rivain) are Andrastian nobility.  The wiki, and the book of Thedas, imply that the Andrastians don't have any control over Rivain outside of the Capital(though they like to claim they do).  The Qun holds a city in northern Rivain, but most of the country is run by the seers in charge of the various villages of Rivain.

 

The Keeper and the hahren have positions of authority within the clan; the Dalish Warden's parents were technically forbidden from being together because the hahren forbid the Keeper from officially being together, so the two had to meet in secret. There is no reason to vilify societies simply because they don't brutally oppress their mages.

 

The Dalish Warden's mother was a huntress("a very good huntress") from a different clan.  The Dalish Warden's father was the keeper before Marathari.  The Dalish Warden's mother was forbidden by "the elders of her clan"(these are the words Ashalle uses.  Not hahren, elders) from entering in a relationship with the Dalish Warden's father.  They met in secret, he died, she was banished from her clan(because she was pregnant) and taken in by Marathari out of respect to the former keeper.

 

That she was banished suggests that the keeper of the Dalish mother's clan had a say in whether or not she could see the Dalish Warden's father(and that keeper said "no")....  So, basically, a mage oppressing a non-mage to spite another mage...  But everyone's okay with this because "tradition'.

[AresKeith]

From WoT, it seems like the Chantry tolerated the seers since they agreed to help the Rivain templars when their aid was requested. I think the issue either came about in one of two ways:

 

1. They heard about the actual Circle mages training under the seers, while initially it had only been village girls and the like. Having actual Circle mages flirting with spirits and demons would set off some major alarm bells.

 

2. Dairsmuid's Annulment came after Lambert left, and some of his group decided to smack down on the Rivaini Circle.

 

It did?

[Aaleel]

They don't rule the city, that's the most Andrastean area of the country.

However, they rule over more traditional communities and assist the Templars because then they leave them alone. It's not "answering to somebody", it's compromisewith neighboring powers.

 

 

Well, we already have magic ruling over man and possessions. Two bad things we say will happen if mages are free are happening.

As for the rest, we don't know much about Rivain. But that doesn't mean they don't ocurr.

 

Until The World of Thedas came out, we didn't know areas of the country were a magocracy but now we do.

 

Magicis not ruling over man.  Mages are not in control, nobles fund the circle and tell them what they do.  Mages are forced to maintain a circle and aid templars. Mages aren't forcing a certain lifestyle onto non mages.  Just because mages hold positions doesn't make it a mageocracy, just like having a religious person hold a position doesn't automatically make a country a Theocracy.  Everything is not always as black and white as you try to make it.

[Hellion Rex]

It did?

We don't know the exact date of when Dairsmuid's Annulment, but it was close. It's just a possibility. And if Dairsmuid happened before Lambert left, then I think my other statement is a better explanation.

[MisterJB]

Look, Lob, this is really not complicated and I can't believe you don't get this. Are you just trying to argue for the sake of arguing?

 

Here's the thing:

We have Dad and Mom.

Dad is a a mage and a Keeper from clan A.

Mom is a normal and a huntress from clan B.

 

The elders of clan B forbid Mom from marrying Dad. However, this does not mean their forbid Dad from doing anything.

The only person being forbidden by an elder here is Mom who is not a Keeper; they are not forbidding Dad from doing anything.

Since it takes two to marry and she is forbidden, there is no marriage.

 

However, the fact that Dad can't force the elders of clan B, does not mean that he doesn't have authority over clan A, his own. Just like Celene, who can't command nobles from Ferelden, still has has absolute authority over those from Orlais.

Every clan is a nation unto itself and while they follow similar customs, they are still separated.

 

Therefore, the elders were never forbidding a Keeper.

 

Like I said, it's very simple.

[MisterJB]

Magicis not ruling over man.  Mages are not in control, nobles fund the circle and tell them what they do.  Mages are forced to maintain a circle and aid templars. Mages aren't forcing a certain lifestyle onto non mages.  Just because mages hold positions doesn't make it a mageocracy, just like having a religious person hold a position doesn't automatically make a country a Theocracy.  Everything is not always as black and white as you try to make it.

Rivain doesn't have a central government that commands the whole nation. It's fractured into three different areas; the Traditionalists, the Andrasteans and the Qunari.

The Andrastean area has a Circle which prevents mages from ruling in that area. However, the Andrastean monarchy has little to no say in the more Traditionalist areas where Seers ruve over communities.

This is all in "The World of Thedas".

[LobselVith8]

The rulers of Dairsmund(the "capital" of Rivain) are Andrastian nobility.  The wiki, and the book of Thedas, imply that the Andrastians don't have any control over Rivain outside of the Capital(though they like to claim they do).  The Qun holds a city in northern Rivain, but most of the country is run by the seers in charge of the various villages of Rivain.

 

It doesn't state that the Andrastian nobles have no power within Rivain, it reads that the kingdom is matriarchal, and that the people in the nation believe women are the most suited to rule.

 

The Dalish Warden's mother was a huntress("a very good huntress") from a different clan.  The Dalish Warden's father was the keeper before Marathari.  The Dalish Warden's mother was forbidden by "the elders of her clan"(these are the words Ashalle uses.  Not hahren, elders) from entering in a relationship with the Dalish Warden's father.  They met in secret, he died, she was banished from her clan(because she was pregnant) and taken in by Marathari out of respect to the former keeper.

 

In other words, we have a prime example of an elven mage who didn't try to impose his authority over non-mages, and had to pursue a romantic relationship in secret?

[Aaleel]

.

Rivain doesn't have a central government that commands the whole nation. It's fractured into three different areas; the Traditionalists, the Andrasteans and the Qunari.

The Andrastean area has a Circle which prevents mages from ruling in that area. However, the Andrastean monarchy has little to no say in the more Traditionalist areas where Seers ruve over communities.

This is all in "The World of Thedas".

 

Seers existed in the Circle ran part of Rivian and mages weren't locked up, they could come and go from the Circle as they pleased.  Which worked out fine, not the doomsday I've been hearing about ITT.  Which has been my point this entire time.  The Circle being a school were mages can come and go voluntarily and still aid templars when needed works better than the Circle being a prison.

[AshenEndymion]

It doesn't state that the Andrastian nobles have no power within Rivain, it reads that the kingdom is matriarchal, and that the people in the nation believe women are the most suited to rule.

 
And that all decisions involving the welfare of the communities rests solely with the eldest women.  The most senior of these women are called seers, who freely practice magic.
 
The World of Thedas, on page 81, specifically states "Because of it's location and lack of Chantry authority outside of Dairsmund, Rivain is the favored home of raiders and those who wish to skirt the Chantry laws common in other human nations."  That line implies that outside of Dairsmund, Andrastian nobles don't have all that much power(if any at all).  Because if they did, those Chantry laws would be enforced.
 

In other words, we have a prime example of an elven mage who didn't try to impose his authority over non-mages, and had to pursue a romantic relationship in secret?

More like a prime example of an elven mage imposing authority over a non-mage, who then has to pursue a romantic relationship in secret.  And then further imposing said authority by banishing said non-mage from the community when the secret relationship is discovered.

[aTigerslunch]

This may be the last post on this subject for me in this thread, will see. 

 

Some want to oppress mages out of fear, and their possibility of becoming a murderer.  (non-mage can do that as well, kill without thinking about it if pushed enough, been proven in our and Thedas history).

 

They wont change their minds.

 

At least, racial/genderism/sexualism or anything else that been oppressed in history didn't cause magical deaths, just regular multitude of deaths. (same amount of death one mage would cause in few shots in short time, which ONE mage CAN be killed EASIER than a MASSIVE army of non-mage).  just saying......(historical Thedas proves non-mage CAN destroy mage held lands.)  So, I propose to lock everyone up that is capable of killing (a five year old shot his younger sister, to emphasize anyone can kill.)  Yep, mage can kill more in one blast, but everyone is capable of killing. A newborn is capable of killing its mother due to birthing. Since, we fear mages so much for capacity to kill.....maybe we should live like I, Robot instead?     again.... just saying... anyone is capable, are they willing or not? That is why not everyone is locked away.

 

 

 

I will side with the mages all but one time. The one time to just see how that plays out. I don't agree with segregation or the imprisonment cause someone has the capacity to kill.  (we all do. good thing we don't assume everyone will just kill for the hell of it....what would the world be like then?)

 

 

Someone can argue what I said if they wish, but will never change my mind, as I expect what I wrote here will not change those that like segregating people for some reasons.  Divergent, The Giver, Hunger Games comes to mind as well when talking of separating people due to who they are, oh right no mage.....cause ONLY a mage has the capacity to kill hundreds. (they just do it quickly but die easier than an army).

 

That is my stance, I may not respond to arguing to change my mind on this or reply to those that say no one has the capacity to kill but a mage. I said they can, but I will not fear them.

 

Fearing someone gives them power over yourself.

[LobselVith8]

Look, Lob, this is really not complicated and I can't believe you don't get this. Are you just trying to argue for the sake of arguing?

 

Here's the thing:

We have Dad and Mom.

Dad is a a mage and a Keeper from clan A.

Mom is a normal and a huntress from clan B.

 

Yes, Mahariel's mother was a skilled hunter (according to Ashalle, "one of the finest"), and her father was the Keeper before Marethari.

 

However, the fact that Dad can't force the elders of clan B, does not mean that he doesn't have authority over clan A, his own. Just like Celene, who can't command nobles from Ferelden, still has has absolute authority over those from Orlais.

Every clan is a nation unto itself and while they follow similar customs, they are still separated.

 

Actually, it's said by Ashalle that the elders "did not approve of the match", which is why the two had to meet in secret.

 

Ashalle follows this up by saying that a group of bandits consisting of humans and city elves killed her father, and her mother gave birth to her, and then she left the clan because her heart was "wracked with grief".

 

Therefore, the elders were never forbidding a Keeper.

 

Like I said, it's very simple.

 

Yeah, the actual dialogue that's said by Ashalle is very simple to comprehend - I agree.

[Sinuphro]

Ideally, mages should be required to attend some form of mandatory training so that they are at minimum familiar with fade spirits and the use of their powers.  That's probably as far as I'm willing to take it.  What they choose to do with their abilities should be up to each individual... the majority has no right to imprison them indefinitely or kill them as a means of preventing whatever damage they might cause. 

 

The Templars should be replaced by a secular law enforcement branch that only owes allegiance to their nation's government.  Considering the fact that there are spells like Mana Clash and Dispel Magic, mages should be allowed to join this order if they choose to.  If they just restructure the system, and allow mages to actually help out in policing their own, I'm sure that they could handle whatever problems arise in a timely fashion.

 

There's really no need for the system to be as strict as it was before the current mage rebellion... now that the old system has fallen, I'm hoping that it can be reborn as a strictly secular institution that promotes the understanding of magic rather than control over those who possess it.  We must remember that abominations can be prevented for the most part... it is not inevitable that all mages will become possessed by demons or that they will abuse their powers as maleficarum.  Punishing them preemptively for the "common good" cannot be reasonably justified, as there are many examples of mages who live well into old age without ever bargaining with demons or losing control in any way.

 

Finally, any option that includes genocide is immediately off the table.  There's nothing more to say about that one.

This. Agree with everything here, word for word. Also, food for thought...everyone in the world of thedas have equal odds of having a child that could be a mage. of course the odds are higher if the child's father and mother are both mages. So....even those templars and chantry members discriminating against mages...at some point even those templars could have kids that may end up being mages. No one wants bad things done to their loved ones, so why inflict bad things unto others??

[MisterJB]

(sigh) Ok, how exactly does "did not approve of the match" disprove anything I said?

[LobselVith8]

 
And that all decisions involving the welfare of the communities rests solely with the eldest women.  The most senior of these women are called seers, who freely practice magic.
 
The World of Thedas, on page 81, specifically states "Because of it's location and lack of Chantry authority outside of Dairsmund, Rivain is the favored home of raiders and those who wish to skirt the Chantry laws common in other human nations."  That line implies that outside of Dairsmund, Andrastian nobles don't have all that much power(if any at all).  Because if they did, those Chantry laws would be enforced.

 

You seem to be conflating Chantry authority with the power of the Andrastian nobles.

 

More like a prime example of an elven mage imposing authority over a non-mage, who then has to pursue a romantic relationship in secret.  And then further imposing said authority by banishing said non-mage from the community when the secret relationship is discovered.

 

This makes no sense. If the hahren of the clan have the authority to say that they don't "approve of the match", then I don't see how it's an example of the Keeper imposing his authority over non-mages. And the mother left because her heart was stricken with grief - it's pointed out by Ashalle that she hold out as long as she could to give birth, but that she couldn't go on without Mahariel's father.

[lil yonce]

Mages can harm people in many ways beyond demonic possession. The Tevinter mages demonstrate that trained mages can't live freer lives.

 

However, there are other examples. Quentin who turned to blood magic for no reason other than the natural death of his wife.

And then there is the Baroness, both a blood mage and Abomination.

And what about mages like Huon who earned "freedom" and imediatelly used it to harm others?
Or Thrask's daugther who meant no harm to anyone and yet, she was threatened by outlaws and becamwe an Abomination.

Xil answered this.

 

Of course there is. It implies normal people have no identity beyond their lack of magic.

Normal, like I said before, comes from norm. Since those bereft of magic are actually the majority they are, by definition, normal.

Mundane, on the other hands, carries the connotations of "worthless". Not to mention we're still defining normal people in comparison to mages.

In Tevinter, I've no doubt that mundane is a half-insult, but it means common as mundane can, and in another definition distinguishes non-mages from the other-worldliness of mages in connection to the Fade. It's also used elsewhere in the lore and when it isn't, the term non-mage is used. Normal is never used to describe people without magic In WoT. Its inappropriate.

 

Tribes, yes. But the Anderfels, Free Marches, Nevarra, Orlais and Rivain were all formed through violent separation from the Imperium.

Drakon created a society bent on subverting Tevinter and spread it, with force in some cases. There was no round table consensus in creating societies that rejected mages in power, and Nevarra and Rivain have never rejected magic to the extent of Orlais.

 

So much naivety. All the mages have to do to control all of society is to use magic towards making money. They already produce glowing stones for Val-Royeaux thus, we see the beginnings of electricity except it can only be produced by mages. Do you see us today holding a revolution against electricity?

If allowed to flourish, magic would eventually dominate the entire making the population entirely dependant on mages. After that, it's a matter of sending the right money into the right pockets to approve the right laws.

And that is merely one of the possibilities. Mage children born to nobles being allowed to inherit their father's authority is another. And then of course, there is always blood magic to control the King.Give mages freedom, and they'll be in control within a century. Which is why they should have no power to make decisions beyond what happens within the Circle.

And you don't think non-mages could invent a cheaper and more efficient alternative to glowlights? Even a mage that might want to make coin from a novel alternative?

 

That doesn't really adress my point of how mage leadership affected cultural tendencies towards making society less safe for normals.

They may have some authority but it's not as much as the Seers. Certainly not enough to stop them from allowing themselves to be possessed.

The people in these communities seem to like things fine or at least find it preferable to their alternatives. If they didn't, I doubt they would have resisted the Chantry as they have so thoroughly. If they can accept abominations as natural disasters, I don't see it as anyone else's concern.

 

No, his plan was a direct response of him being power greedy; as Wynne says, Uldred was only ever interested in his advancement.

See, you can't prove Abominations ocurrs because of Circle operation. I can always counterargue that it was the personality of the mage in question that lead them down that path and that the Circle is what prevented them from harming others.

I won't laud his character, but I don't think that's wholly accurate.

 

The only point you have is the Abomination created through the Harrowing but those are always killed before they harm anyone.

If the circle is at least in part about preventing abominations, it shouldn't have a test that produces them just as often as not.

Modifié par lil yonce, 04 août 2014 - 12:07 .

[MisterJB]

Seers existed in the Circle ran part of Rivian and mages weren't locked up, they could come and go from the Circle as they pleased.  Which worked out fine, not the doomsday I've been hearing about ITT.  Which has been my point this entire time.  The Circle being a school were mages can come and go voluntarily and still aid templars when needed works better than the Circle being a prison.

And where exactly is it stated that the number of magical incidents were fewer than in other places? Besides, we already know areas of Rivain are magocracies. Maybe the Seers in the Circle were a new thing. Maybe they were plotting to overthrow the monarchy.

We don'tt know.

 

The Circle being a school does not work. I don't know about you, but I'd rather there being solid walls and guards keeping those capable of setting me on fire with their minds preventing them from doing so rather than just rely on their goodwill.

[Xilizhra]

This makes no sense. If the hahren of the clan have the authority to say that they don't "approve of the match", then I don't see how it's an example of the Keeper imposing his authority over non-mages. And the mother left because her heart was stricken with grief - it's pointed out by Ashalle that she hold out as long as she could to give birth, but that she couldn't go on without Mahariel's father.

To clarify for onlookers their separation had nothing to do with anyone disapproving of anyone; it was because bandits killed the father and the mother plunged into despair.