And that is bad because?
Extremist have caused wars, dictatorships, have also caused untold death and misery for everyone who don't follow their views, etc.
People like Anders and Alrik are extremists in bad way if you want examples.
And that is bad because?
Extremist have caused wars, dictatorships, have also caused untold death and misery for everyone who don't follow their views, etc.
People like Anders and Alrik are extremists in bad way if you want examples.
Not to mention, typically extremists are closed minded individuals. They only see a situation one way rather than seeing the larger picture.
Extremist have caused wars, dictatorships, have also caused untold death and misery for everyone who don't follow their views, etc.
People like Anders and Alrik are extremists in bad way if you want examples.
Part of what makes Dragon Age so good is that easy answers are not often on the table. Bhelen seems like a godsend for the Dwarves and maybe he is but the Assembly, oligarchy that it is, is still a check on the power of an absolutist monarch. We had best hope Bhelen's sucessor is someone every bit as talented at administration as he is or he might do something WORSE than not help the Casteless like purge them completely.
Likewise, there's no "easy" way to fix the problem of mages and elves in the setting.
Fereldan COULD have been a "good kingdom" but we see the Howes and Vaughns as well as the Couslands--and most nobles who fall inbetween.
Extremist have caused wars, dictatorships, have also caused untold death and misery for everyone who don't follow their views, etc.
People like Anders and Alrik are extremists in bad way if you want examples.
And yet it not always was bad.Pretty much arlik despite being sadist was providing protection for non-mages same for meredith in fact most of templars can be seen as extremists.Arlik solution would be bad mages and yet would save many non-mages so take your pick if that was bad or not but in terms of safety that would work.
.
And yet it not always was bad.Pretty much arlik despite being sadist was providing protection for non-mages same for meredith in fact most of templars can be seen as extremists.Arlik solution would be bad mages and yet would save many non-mages so take your pick if that was bad or not but in terms of safety that would work..
Genocide is a very effective solution up until the point people object.
And yet it not always was bad.Pretty much arlik despite being sadist was providing protection for non-mages same for meredith in fact most of templars can be seen as extremists.Arlik solution would be bad mages and yet would save many non-mages so take your pick if that was bad or not but in terms of safety that would work.
.
*sighs*
Yeah, it's sad.
I mean, I normally support genocide as a solution to all problems.
Klingons, Daleks, Borg, Xenos, Tau, Elves, Humans.
But the Tranquil are just....so....Neutral.
You can never trust Neutrals.
You never know where they stand.

Genocide is a very effective solution up until the point people object.
Hmm? Genocide is already in use by circles and nations either on mages because it is seen as necessity and by that is accepted and on elves simple because population don't like them and well mages aren't very popular.
*sighs*
Well if you prefer see world in black and white your pick...
Hmm? Genocide is already in use by circles and nations either on mages because it is seen as necessity and by that is accepted and on elves simple because population don't like them and well mages aren't very popular.
I actually don't disagree with your point. Merely point out from a social contract standpoint that this would mean mages have no reason not to eradicate normals as a moral solution to their problems.
The Non-Mage public good is best served by exterminating magic.
So the Mage public good is best served by exterminating Muggles.
It's very Heinlein.
Well if you prefer see world in black and white your pick...
I'm not the one who sees the world in black and white...
I actually don't disagree with your point. Merely point out from a social contract standpoint that this would mean mages have no reason not to eradicate normals as a moral solution to their problems.
Well i never said it was moral solution i said was simple it solution for non-mages on problems that non-mages have with mages.If mages could wipeout non-mages and function without them it would be beneficial for mages.
I'm not the one who sees the world in black and white...
i wish that was true.
Mage Jesus Warden has this to say: "Throughout history, people have doubled-down on extremism and hardline stances on the assumption this is somehow the stronger stance. That mercy is a weakness and pity only invites attack. That ruthlessness is strength and friendship is a lie. Throughout history, these individuals have alienated every one of their allies and found themselves isolated from the world. The moment you turn every single one of a group into an enemy, the moment that there is no chance of reconcilliation or friendship, is the moment you turn not only every single person of that group into an implacable foe but let your allies know there is no reasoning with you. In the end, the hardest man in the world is as hard as iron but he will fall beneath the tidal wave of history." *
* Steals from a horror fantasy novel he's written for Permuted Press.
i wish that was true.
You just see what you wish to see.
You just see what you wish to see.
If that was true all my problems wouldn't exist. ![]()
Whenever I played as a mage in DA2, I always sided with the Templars. That will not change in DAI. And my main femquisitor will be a mage
When I play the other classes, its usually 50/50
TKS can stay. People like him show me what true extremist really look like. To see how far you can fall.....
I still think it is hilarious that he switched sides so drastically all that time ago.
If that was true all my problems wouldn't exist.
Everyone have problems, some are even born with problems.
I still think it is hilarious that he switched sides so drastically all that time ago.
Hmm? i m always on my side even now im not on templars side.
Everyone have problems, some are even born with problems.
Of course but no one wish to have them. ![]()
Of course but no one wish to have them.
And that's why you have them.
And that's why you have them.
Eee no? You have them because there are a certain reasons that create that problem. ![]()
"Mages vs. Templars" is a false choice, as Knight-Commander Meredith makes clear. It should be sane people everywhere against people driven mad by the thirst for magical power.
I never understood why there was so much emphasis on vigilantly watching mages. It's not as though abominations are inconspicuous. Demonic possession is a disease with an exceedingly brief incubation period and VERY obvious symptoms. Just seek-out and quarantine the infected instead of imprisoning entire high-risk populations, while entirely ignoring others (e.g. red lyrium aficionados).
It's far more efficient to treat the infection at it's core, rather than just the symptoms. The circle is a prevention system, your way is damage control.
It's no good trying to lock a mage up after they have succumbed to demonic possession, after they have possibly already killed scores of innocents. Why do that when you can prevent such a scenario altogether?
It's far more efficient to treat the infection at it's core, rather than just the symptoms. The circle is a prevention system, your way is damage control.
It's no good trying to lock a mage up after they have succumbed to demonic possession, after they have possibly already killed scores of innocents. Why do that when you can prevent such a scenario altogether?
For me, the answer is, "I'm all for preventing demonic possession but if that requires locking up the innocent. Then [censored] that."
Yeah, it's a risk but life is a risk.
And I'll take my chances.