764 réponses à ce sujet

[The Baconer]

Who says suicide is freely available? I don't think the Templars would allow the mages to just start offing themselves when that's not allowed in criminal prisons.

 

How would the Templars stop them?

[TheEternalStudent]

How would the Templars stop them?

Deny them pointy things, deny them staves without having to sign them in and out, post templars outside every door if need be, one or two might manage, but if they fail they're in for a great deal of suffering for tehmselves and thier friends.

[The Baconer]

Deny them pointy things, deny them staves without having to sign them in and out, post templars outside every door if need be, one or two might manage, but if they fail they're in for a great deal of suffering for tehmselves and thier friends.

 

What's the use of denying them pointy things and staves when they can literally light themselves on fire? If they're feeling a bit dramatic, how are the Templars supposed to stop someone from committing suicide-by-demon, if not by preemptive Tranquility?

[TheEternalStudent]

What's the use of denying them pointy things and staves when they can literally light themselves on fire? If they're feeling a bit dramatic, how are the Templars supposed to stop someone from committing suicide-by-demon, if not by preemptive Tranquility?

First, repurcussions. It would be an act of selfishness to even succeed at suicide, let alone the pain that would come from failing.
Let's toss in that burning yourself alive takes extreme willpower (no humor intended)
Suicide by demon just proves the Templar right, and harms others
And the two ex-tranquil we met would have died rather than return to that state, I think it's safe to say not many mages would volunteer to be given the same level of respect in return for giving personality.

[The Baconer]

First, repurcussions. It would be an act of selfishness to even succeed at suicide,

 

Come on.

 

[...] Let's toss in that burning yourself alive takes extreme willpower (no humor intended)
Suicide by demon just proves the Templar right, and harms others

 

Well, if the apparent total injustices of the Circles aren't enough to make it worth the effort, then it's clear that continued respiration is indeed preferable to death.

[Dean_the_Young]

Who says suicide is freely available?

Magic, amongst other things. Potions, abominations, sharp pointy things, exceptionally alert guards specially trained to kill mages, stair cases, pillows, potions of varying effects, and so on. Even choking on a pretzel or ale could do.

 

If a mage can't figure out how to kill themselves, they ain't trying.
 

 

I don't think the Templars would allow the mages to just start offing themselves when that's not allowed in criminal prisons.

 

The Templars wouldn't have much of a choice, except in the case of Suicide by Templar, in which case the Templars would be in self defense.

 

If you really want to get down to brass tacks in terms of what the Templars allow the mages to do or not do, the Templars run a pretty inept prison state. They aren't even allowed to search mage quarters for subversive materials, let alone shivs.

 

 

I discount most non-mage opinion as uninformed,

 

 

You are a non mage.

 

 

Tranquil are raped,

 

 

Irrelevant, as every population group in the setting has been raped. The only Tranquil serial rapist introduced in the setting was one Templar in particular- hardly a pattern unless we wish to apply the one man standard to other subjects as well.

 

and either most people don't care or don't know.

 

 

Those are perfectly valid standards for determining what social norms of acceptance are.

 

 

 

And a majority of mages are so opposed to the system they felt justified in declaring independance, while a seperate section agreed things needed to change, just not so drastically. Virtually all the mages agreed the situation sucked, they disagreed on the correct method of reaction.

 

 

And yet none of them believed that dieing was preferable to living. Imagine that.

[Dean_the_Young]

Deny them pointy things, deny them staves without having to sign them in and out, post templars outside every door if need be,

 

But the Templars don't deny them pointy things. In fact, the Templars don't even have unlimited rights to go into mage quarters- even in Kirkwall, the epitome of Templar abuses, Meredith couldn't conduct an unlimited search of the tower.

 

Not to mention, of course, that posting a Templar outside every door only makes it easier if, say, the method of suicide is suicide by Templar. Throw in just a bit of blood magic, and bam.

 

one or two might manage, but if they fail they're in for a great deal of suffering for tehmselves and thier friends.

 

Yeah, like that has ever been an effective deterrent of just about any crime ever.

 

Of course, if they are suffering they could just go and kill themselves. If the Templars were able to stop people from becoming abominations in the first place, the entire system would be different.

[Dean_the_Young]

First, repurcussions. It would be an act of selfishness to even succeed at suicide, let alone the pain that would come from failing.

 

So what?

 

Selfishness has not, and never has been, a preventative factor from people doing what they want. Selfishness is, if anything, a catalyst for doing what one wants to do.

 

Besides the options of suicide that would be painless, any competent suicide plan would have a reliable likelihood of working. Planning on the assumption of failure is better used in regards to, say, a mage revolt without planning or outside diplomatic support or broad consensus and preparation.

Let's toss in that burning yourself alive takes extreme willpower (no humor intended)

 

 

Not quite. Starting a fire is easy, and once you catch on, it's actually harder to stop.

 

Self-immolation is painful after it starts, but it's not a continuous effort. Initiating it takes about as much willpower as any other form of suicide.

 

This is, of course, not even touching on the much less painful and easier forms of suicide (like throwing one's self off a tower).

 

 

Suicide by demon just proves the Templar right, and harms others

 

 

So? For one thing, violent rebellion proves the Templars right and harms others. For another, you'll be dead and not have to deal with it. For a third, harm to others is irrelevant to the question of suicide in the first place.
 

 

And the two ex-tranquil we met would have died rather than return to that state,

 

And the three tranquil we met were quite content in that state, while we also have examples of cases (historical and in the games) of people requesting the state.
 

 

 

I think it's safe to say not many mages would volunteer to be given the same level of respect in return for giving personality.

 

Many is irrelevant- others do, and enough mages do that Tranquil provide a major function in supporting the functioning of the Circles. It is an option available to mages who wish to, or rather do not wish to take the status quo or die, and it is an option taken frequently enough that there is a significant Tranquil population at any given time.

[TheKomandorShepard]

I will be nice guy and help mages with suicide i will help all of them.

 

Of course if mages want kill themelves well i don't have problem with that easier for me.

 

And well i doubt that templars would care so what is problem here? 

[Iakus]

So...how about that Andraste?

[LobselVith8]

So...how about that Andraste?

 

You think, if there are options (which I'd assume are likely possible, given Weekes' comments about religiously Andrastian and atheist characters being taken into consideration), I think my elven Inquisitor would decline to be called 'Herald of Andraste', although not out of disrespect to her.

[SgtSteel91]

I'd rather be called "Fadewalker" or something like that. Though "Hereald of Andraste" may be cool in the context of the Andraste the rebel rather than Andraste the bride of the Maker.

[Iakus]

You think, if there are options (which I'd assume are likely possible, given Weekes' comments about religiously Andrastian and atheist characters being taken into consideration), I think my elven Inquisitor would decline to be called 'Herald of Andraste', although not out of disrespect to her.

At the moment, we don't even know how pervasive the title might even be.

[TheKomandorShepard]

Well if peoples start to call you that you can do little unless you will beat the crap out of them then you will get another title.On other hand such title rather goes heavily on chantry side.

 

I rather doubt it will be optional as 1 of mods said that they played not very chantry character and still had this title.

[LobselVith8]

Well if peoples start to call you that you can do little unless you will beat the crap out of them then you will get another title.On other hand such title rather goes heavily on chantry side.

 

I rather doubt it will be optional as 1 of mods said that they played not very chantry character and still had this title.

 

Well, the developers did say we could either encourage the religious connotations that some people have about us or discourage it, so I was addressing that. It doesn't appear to be something that the player has to endorse with their character. I certainly don't imagine my character would want Cullen referring to him by that title, for example; perhaps your character may believe he (or she) is the Herald, in contrast. There's also Iakus' point about our general lack of knowledge about the title.

[TheKomandorShepard]

Well, the developers did say we could either encourage the religious connotations that some people have about us or discourage it, so I was addressing that. It doesn't appear to be something that the player has to endorse with their character. I certainly don't imagine my character would want Cullen referring to him by that title, for example; perhaps your character may believe he (or she) is the Herald, in contrast. There's also Iakus' point about our general lack of knowledge about the title.

Well it still doubt that will change anything if peoples will see you as religious figure you won't do much with that even if you don't agree pretty much if warden did something nice for peoples half of those peoples were saying that maker send them.

[Uccio]

No, because blood magic won't be a specialization option for mages.

And that is exactly why I foresee a role for the pc as a chantry puppet and a religious zealot. That will suck so hard that even future generations are going to feel the pull.

[Shadow Fox]

And that is exactly why I foresee a role for the pc as a chantry puppet and a religious zealot. That will suck so hard that even future generations are going to feel the pull.

Reaver and Knight Enchanter say hello.

[Darkly Tranquil]

And that is exactly why I foresee a role for the pc as a chantry puppet and a religious zealot. That will suck so hard that even future generations are going to feel the pull.

I really hope not. That would be a "DA2 ending" level of player choice irrelevance. Not to mention it would make for a pretty illogical situation if a dwarf, Dalish Elf, or Qunari were the Chantry's new poster child; that would be awkward to explain.

[Shadow Fox]

I really hope not. That would be a "DA2 ending" level of player choice irrelevance. Not to mention it would make for a pretty illogical situation if a dwarf, Dalish Elf, or Qunari were the Chantry's new poster child; that would be awkward to explain.

Don't worry you won't be.

[Ieldra]

And that is exactly why I foresee a role for the pc as a chantry puppet and a religious zealot. That will suck so hard that even future generations are going to feel the pull.

I think the reasons given for the absence of blood magic are convincing - making the world reactive to this would be a lot of extra work just for one mage specialization. I understand if they thought that work would be better allocated elsewhere. Also, there's such a thing as gameplay/story segregation. They may try to minimize it, but it's got to be there nonetheless. The absence of a gameplay feature does not worry me. This is purely a roleplaying and story concern.

So...I'm not predicting there will be problems with regard to being unsympathetic towards the Chantry, but I keep the very real possibility in mind. Especially after ME3. It's a shame, really. Most things really do look good about DAI, and some absolutely thrilling, but I can't get really excited because of a bad precedence. One thing though: I'm very much convinced we won't have to play a religious zealot, just not that we can sufficiently downplay the religious angle put on us by others.

[Uccio]

Maybe, though I still don´t buy it. Reason for it is because no one actually knows you are a blood mage, only templars have that ablity (maybe?), and it is not like people know what kind of spell are included in blood magic. It can be case specific and usage specific (ala removed circle scene in DAO) where specific person or cast spell can trigger something. The pc doesn´t have a gigantic neon sign with a finger pointing at him saying "LOOK A BLOOD MAGE!!!!". Plus it would make a hell of a story with all its twitches that come with using blood magic.

[Ieldra]

@Ukki:
I can only say that as a GM of tabletop RPGs, I am wary to the point of paranoia to allow anything like mind-reading or mind manipulation of a kind you can't defend against by standard means. There's too much potential to destroy a story arc with such things, and I'm a consistency fanatic: if I allow something, I will accept the consequences of inventive player use. In terms of balance, the power of blood magic, if the game allowed it to be used as the lore suggests, is only offset by the dangers it poses to the user, both from spirits and from authorities. If neither can be implemented convincingly, then blood magic must be prevented from being used to, say, read everyone's minds in a conversation to get at their secrets, and if you can't do such things, there is little point in using blood magic in the first palce. Blood magic as a specialization that affects only combat is boring and may as well not exist.

[Uccio]

I wouldn´t say it doesn´t require a lot of thinking from devs storywise but then again such implementation only makes the story richer. Since we are talking the next most horrified thing (by mundanes) in DA universe after darkspawn. And because of such restriction player is left out a gigantic part of possibilies, both story and gameplay wise.

[AresKeith]

I wouldn´t say it doesn´t require a lot of thinking from devs storywise but then again such implementation only makes the story richer. Since we are talking the next most horrified thing (by mundanes) in DA universe after darkspawn. And because of such restriction player is left out a gigantic part of possibilies, both story and gameplay wise.

How about you try making a game like Dragon Age, and try to make every specialization have equal reactivity?