*****This post contains spoilers about Last Flight!*****
Thanks @lil yonce for pointing me towards several sources I didn't recall or didn't read in the first place.
What this is about:
This is an attempt to collect all the available lore about blood magic in one place, and to derive from it possibilities for a unifying theory. It is also an attempt to analyze the way blood magic has been presented by Bioware and received by different kinds of players, as influenced by a certain level of applicability and the appeal to some basic intuitions, which shapes the perception of in-world characters and players alike independently from what the lore actually says.
Since I do not have access to all of the published material - particulary I'm missing one comic that wasn't available in digital form when I last looked, as well as the animated film - I would appreciate it if those who know them post any relevant lore in this thread, so that I can include it in this post.
Problems with facts and interpretation:
As most of the lore, almost all material relevant to the topic is presented in form of in-world documents. That means it is colored by characters' preconceptions and ideologies. Also, deriving lore from single events in books is problematic since we never know how much of a character's experience is specific to that one event, and how representative it is intended to be. Yet, we have no choice but to use all that and count it relevant, since we have no other sources. Ideally, out-of-world documents like World of Thedas should provide us with a basis, but unfortunately the only aspect World of Thedas, vol I (from here on abbreviated as WoTI) adds to blood magic lore beyond DAO's material is, while not exactly contradictory, at least incongruous with *all* other material including that presented in the latest DA novel, "Last Flight". To add to the confusion, I can't escape the impression that the way Bioware wants blood magic to be perceived by the players has changed since DAO.
So, the state of the lore is somewhat confusing at the moment, and ultimately any unífying theory will eventually run into the problem "Which part of the material can I reasonably disregard, as opposed to another part". Thus, there can be no interpretation of the lore which remains uninfluenced by players' preconceptions and personal ideologies. How much those influence the reception is most evident in several posts that claim blood magic "should" work - or even "should've worked" a certain way.
I do not pretend to be immune to this effect, but I will attempt to separate facts from interpretation in this post. This is important, too, because applicability is something ultimately added by the player, and yet always influences how we speak about things.
Part I: Dragon Age: Origins
The Evidence:
The basic elements of blood magic lore come from the DAO Codex, particularly the entries "Maleficarum" and "Blood Magic: The Forbidden School". Since they are so important, I will quote the relevant paragraphs in full:
"The ancient Tevinters did not originally consider blood magic a school of its own. Rather, they saw it as a means to achieve greater power in any school of magic. The name, of course, refers to the fact that magic of this type uses life, specifically in the form of blood, instead of mana. It was common practice, at one time, for a magister to keep a number of slaves on hand so that, should he undertake the working of a spell that was physically beyond his abilities, he could use the blood of his slaves to bolster the casting.
Over time, however, the Imperium discovered types of spells that could only be worked by blood. Although lyrium will allow a mage to send his conscious mind into the Fade, blood would allow him to find the sleeping minds of others, view their dreams, and even influence or dominate their thoughts. Just as treacherous, blood magic allows the Veil to be opened completely so that demons may physically pass through it into our world." -- from "Blood Magic: The Forbidden School"
"For she has said to us, "Magic exists to serve man, and never to rule over him." Therefore, I say to you, they who work magic which dominates the minds and hearts of others, they have transgressed the Makers law.
Also, Our Lady said to us, "Those who bring harm without provocation to the least of His children are hated and accursed by the Maker." And so it is made clear to me, as it should be to us all: That magic which fuels itself by harming others, by the letting of blood, is hated by the Maker." -- from "Maleficarum"
While playing the game, we encounter blood magic at several other times. Those who started the game as a mage will encounter it in the mage origin first when finding evidence that certain books have been removed from the public libary and ask Irving about it. It isn't mentioned explicitly, but you get the blood magic Codex entry in the same context, and it's clear those books are about blood magic. Subsequently, Jowan uses blood magic to defend Lily and himself against the templars who have come to take her to the feared prison of Aeonar and make him tranquil.
Everyone else will encounter it first, most likely, when we meet Jowan in the dungeon of Redcliffe Castle and the subsequent events, possibly involving a voluntary life sacrifice (Isolde) in order to save Connor from possession. In the same line of events, a mage Warden can learn blood magic from the demon who is possessing Connor, with different possible prices to pay (including none and letting the demon continue to possess Connor) depending on the Warden's Coercion skill.
The last significant encounter is with Caladrius, the Tevinter mage we can either fight or accept a bribe from to let him go, in Denerims Alienage. This presents us with the only on-screen involuntary blood sacrifice as Caladrius kills his underlings in order to heal himself.
If the DLC "Warden's Keep" is installed, we encounter Avernus, who is almost certainly a blood mage since he has summoned demons in the past and researches into the Taint and the Joining. Notable here is the fact that apparently he has been doing this for a few hundred years and neither went insane nor ended up possessed.
There are several other minor references which do not add to the lore. We fight blood mages in "The Last Request", "Thy Brother's Killer", but there's actually litte "blood-magicky" in those encounters except that the backstory identifies them as such. Another encounter does not involve blood magic but it still relevant, as we encounter Jowan again if we let him go in "Jowan's Intentions". I do not know if there is an official version where this quest isn't bugged, but I'm still going to use it as evidence since the quest always appears on the Chanter's Board and the quest log if you let Jowan go, the encounter just doesn't trigger, so evidence suggests this is a bug rather than a cut. I've been using a mod to debug it. We find Jowan helping a number of refugees getting away from the Blight. He's been using his magic to help, as the people tell you.
There are also several Codex entries not directly referring to blood magic which may be relevant to the topic: "Apostates" says this: "No matter how a mage has become apostate, the Chantry treats them alike: Templars begin a systematic hunt to bring the apostate to justice. In almost all cases, "justice" is execution. If there is some overriding reason the mage should live, the Rite of Tranquility is employed instead" (DAA has contradictory evidence in Anders' story, but he is not a blood mage so this is irrelevant here) and "Templars" has this: "When the templars are sent to eliminate a possible blood mage, there is no reasoning with them."
Interpretation:
My main observation here is that first impressions matter, and those who played mages in their first playthrough get a drastically different first impression of blood magic than everyone else. The Codex defines blood magic as the practice of powering magic by life in form of blood. This includes those spells which can only be cast that way like mind control, yet those spells, while they can be used to define a "school of blood magic", nonetheless do not define the term as such. Meanwhile, maleficarum are identified as those who use magic to influence other's minds and emotions, and those who fuel their magic by harming others. The mage origin most pronouncedly hits us in the face with the fact that those definitions are not identical, since Jowan is clearly a blood mage but never does any mind control or blood sacrifice. This is supported in subsequent events by Isolde's sacrifice being voluntary, so while Jowan now technically fits the definition of a maleficar, there is little to condemn him in that regard (he used poison, not blood magic, on Arl Eamon). The Chantry's summary ban of blood magic and indiscriminate killing of those who practice it thus acquires an aura of unfair persecution. Enforcing this impression for the historically knowledgable player is the fact that the term "maleficarum" is actually a Medieval Latin word used in the title of the infamous "Malleus Maleficarum" of 1487 AD, which historians consider a key factor contributing to the witch hunts in late medieval and early modern Europe (note that the book was actually condemned by the Church, but remained influential nonetheless). I consider it plainly impossible that Bioware's writers were unaware of this connection and its effect and conclude that at this time, the aura of unfair persecution was invoked intentionally as a part of the mage origin.
On the other side of the equation, we have the example of Isolde - if you let Jowan kill her in order to make it possible to enter the Fade - and Caladrius' killing of his slaves, which makes a ban reasonable on pragmatic grounds, yet this turns the "blood magic problem" into something akin to the modern "gun control problem". There is still nothing intrinsically bad about it.
For many, the most suspicious fact is that the Warden can learn blood magic only from a demon in DAO. For those who didn't play a mage in their first game this has resulted in the interpretation that it can *only* be learned from demons, and while the fact that Jowan learns it from books (as well as the Warden can in DAA - see the DAA section) proves this wrong, this first impression is as hard to dislodge as the aura of unfair persecution a mage player gets from playing the mage origin.
Furthermore, there is one more effect to consider: if for you, there *was* an aura of unfair persecution in DAO's presentation of blood magic, that raises the question of why this persecution exists. I couldn't but make the connection to the unfair persecution of certain kinds of medical research in late medieval and early modern Europe, involving practices our medical specialists now use every day without making anything of it. The ideology behind that we would now classify as superstition, and I saw - and still see - the same kind of superstition on Thedas, turning prosecution on reasonable pragmatic grounds into unfair persecution.
Meanwhile, while this superstition is not a dominant meme anymore in western culture, the basic intuitions it was based on still exist because they're part of humanity's genetic heritage: the plain fact that certain things are disgusting and there is an intuition that connects the disgusting with the evil, or at least the immoral. This may sound preposterous but I can back this up with considerable evidence if need be. I'd rather not since this goes beyond the scope of this topic. Anyway, just consider how many stereotypical story villains distinguish themselves by being ugly and doing bad things in a particularly repulsive way beyond any necessity. Most notable example: the Reaper minions of Mass Effect.
So, a part of players' reception of blood magic as presented in the games and the books is fueled by such basic intuitions, and the secondary effect of their reaction to it if they're aware of it.
Which means the lore, its possible interpretations and the effect of the presentation on players' reception result in a rather complex picture. Perhaps one of the most complex ones in DA lore. And that's just from ONE game. Most notably absent from the lore at this point is DA2's suggestion that blood magic *always* involves the actual help of a demon (see the DA2 section) and the claim that it's dangerous to the user beyond the temptation that exists for a blood mage to become a maleficar (I'll get to that in the Last Flight section). Absent is also WoTI's claim that blood magic raises more power the more pain is caused to the one whose blood is drawn. I'll get to that later as well.
Part Ia: Dragon Age: Awakening
As far as I'm aware of, DAA does not add anything significant to blood magic lore except one fact: we can buy a tome that unlocks the Blood Magic specialization at the Crown and Lion in the City of Amaranthine. Most players may be unaware of this since the book is not available if the specialization is already unlocked. I certainly was unaware of it before I started my research for this post. Anyway, it reinforces that blood magic does not require the help of a demon to learn.
Part II: Dragon Age 2:
The Evidence:
The Codex entries on blood magic and maleficarum in DA2 are identical copies of DAOs. However, several other Codex entries have parts pertaining to blood magic. Notable is "Forbidden Knowledge", which hints that blood magic may originate with a few probably demonic entities known as "The Forbidden Ones". "Dumat, the Dragon of Silence" presents the Chantry's counterclaim that it was taught to Archon Thalsian by Dumat.
[I recall someone's claim that blood magic was the oldest form of magic. If anyone has the source for that I'd be glad to see it. It may be from one of the comics]
Meanwhile, the story presents us with a plethora of blood mages, all either evil, or insane, or both. Several of Hawke's optional lines in Merril's companion suggest that blood magic always involves the actual help of a demon. Since this is rather suggestive but adds little fact, I'll deal with that kind of thing in the interpretation section.
The DA2 Codex has also this to add about the blood magic specialization, which is a separate entry from "blood magic":
"Nothing inspires as much wild-eyed terror as the Blood Mage. Mages of this type take the raw energy of life and twist it to their own purposes. They can corrupt and control, and sustain their power by consuming the health of others, willing or not. The effects can be vile, but this specialization isn't limited to madmen and monsters. Many see it as the only form of magic that is truly free, because it's tied to the physical, not favors to spirits or demons. It remains an undeniably violent and self-destructive discipline, however, the Blood Mage must be careful. The temptation to take just a little more is always there."
The important fact is that blood magic - as a means to power spells with life essence in form of blood - is tied to the physical. See the Last Flight section below for the conclusions I think we can draw from this.
Interpretation:
The dominant aspect of DA2 is this: there are a lot of blood mages, and they're almost all evil or insane or both. This certainly has had an effect on players' perception, even though the lore hasn't changed significantly from DAO's version. "The Enigma of Kirkwall" provides a somewhat plausible reason why there are so many blood mages in Kirkwall but no explanation of their dominant mental and moral disposition. That one of those blood mages is the one who kills Leandra doesn't help the impression.
On the other side of the equation, there is one friendly and helpful NPC blood mage: Alain helps Hawke in "Best Served Cold" as he removes the effect paralyzing Hawke's sibling, revealing himself as a blood mage.
Apart from that, the most important question about blood magic lore in DA2 is this: are we supposed to accept the implicit claim that learning blood magic, if not actually practicing it, always requires the actual help of a demon as a fact of the lore, or simply as something you can express a belief in? Note that the basic lore as presented in the Codex hasn't changed since DAO, nor is any explanation offered that may contradict DAO's evidence that it can be learned from books, so I think I'm justified in saying it's the latter. This is reinforced by Last Flight. I'll get to that. However, the way blood magic is presented here is *very* suggestive, so I'm asking myself: what am I supposed to believe as part of this story? What are supposed to be fixed elements of the world's lore that I can't reasonably challenge, and where am I supposed - or even encouraged - to make up my own mind about things? I really do not know.
Regardless of that, what I actually *will* accept and not challenge given that there may be evidence for an alternative interpretation that's more to my taste, that's a different question. Take it as my version of "How blood magic 'should' work".
If we accept that at least learning blood magic always involves the help of a demon, there is the follow-up question: exactly how problematic is that? The mage Warden could deal with a demon with no ill effects. On the other hand, the Warden is a badass and few other people are.
At this point, nothing has changed the "blood magic problem" to be regarded as anything else than yet another instance of a "gun control problem". The main problem lies in the temptation it presents to its user to use blood sacrifice, and the insidious effects of possible mind control. It's certainly enough to justify some extreme measures in-world as well as the extreme fear people in general have of it. As in any such case, however, the question remains: how much should we, as players, simply accept Thedas' dominant memes about blood magic into our own thinking, and how much can our characters reasonably challenge them if we, as players, are inclined to do that? As we will see, the considerable amount of new information in "The Last Flight" does not make the answer any easier...
Part IIa: DA2 Legacy
DA2 Legacy gives us Malcolm Hawke....who uses blood magic to contain demons and seal Corypheus' prison. Hawke can then use their own blood to unseal the prison(s). The important thing to note here is that the same kind of magic which is used to summon demons can also be used to contain them, which appears plausible and raises the question of whether the Chantry deprives us of a powerful tool *against* demons by the summary ban on blood magic.
Part III: Last Flight:
The Evidence:
There are several pieces of important new information in this book. When Isseya recognizes Calin as a blood mage, she does it by seeing that Calin does not touch the Fade while casting spells. When Isseya mind-controls the griffons, demons are screaming in her mental ears for the whole time she maintains the spell. Lastly, a discussion about the events near the end of the book hints that blood magic may extract a hidden price from its users because of its demonic origins. Characters appear to believe that blood magic has demonic origins.
Interpretation:
My main observation here is that the facts "blood magic can be recognized by the mage not touching the Fade" and "Demons are screaming in your ears while you maintain a blood magic spell" are contradictory. If you don't touch the Fade, demons can't contact you. I conclude - lately in accordance with David Gaider's statement quoted by lil yonce at the top of page 2 of this thread - that there are two kinds of blood magic: blood magic as a source of power, which since it is a physical source, enables you to cast spells without touching the Fade and can enhance the power of any spell, and blood magic as a school of magic, namely a set of thematically connected spells that deal with demonology and mind control.
It appears implausible that the former kind is demonic in origin, while it is perfectly plausible that the latter one is. Demons, after all, very likely want to be summoned and they naturally have the ability to read your deepest desires and influence your mind (evidence in DA2's Night Terrors quest), even while it's implausible that they can read your thoughts, since then it would be impossible to outwit them as the Warden can do in DAO.
This revelation (I see it as a revelation rather than a hypothesis since it's been confirmed by David Gaider) cuts through a lot of confusion in the lore. Claims like the demonic origin of blood magic and that it makes you more vulnerable to possession make sense if they apply only to the school of blood magic and not to the practice of powering spells with blood. The latter is problematic because of the possible temptation it presents to use blood sacrifice to power your spells, but on the other hand, it doesn't require contact with the Fade so you're should be perfectly safe from demons while you're doing it, unless the spell you cast with it requires contact with the Fade. Demonology spells naturally require such contact, as do any spells that contact the minds of others.
However, the claim that blood magic spells make you more vulnerable to possession needs to be explored further, since it does not appear plausible to me that blood magic spells automatically result in permanent changes in the user's mental disposition. Rather, this may refer to the way that certain spells, while maintained, appear to bring you closer to demons as they either become closer to demons' natural abilities or attempt to deal directly with them. If this is the case, then experience should be able to mitigate this effect. The description of what happens while Isseya maintains her mind control spells support this latter interpretation.
The other piece of information is a little more problematic. Blood magic (I assume this would refer to "blood magic the school of magic"), it is said by a character in the discussion about the events near the end of the book, may have a hidden price attached to it, and it's true danger may be that mages use it while not understanding how it works. This is impossible to evaluate since the lore says little about the detailed mechanics of any magic, so it's a claim in empty space. It is also a catch-all argument that can be used to discourage anything, since we never know, about anything, that it does not carry a hidden price, and we never know, about anything, that we understand it enough to use it safely. All experience can tell us is that it is *probably* safe. Lastly, the assumption that everything carries a price is already ideologically loaded, and fundamentally questionable except in a thermodynamic sense.
Having said that, it actually *is* plausible, if blood magic spells are demonic in origin, that demons would attach some well-hidden side effect to the knowledge they give to humans, which may benefit them at some later time. However, the proper reaction to this possibility is.....to do more research. Whether you ban blood magic for pragmatic reasons or not, ignorance is bad, and worse when it comes to demons. The Litany of Adralla wouldn't exist if such research had not been done, and the summary ban on blood magic has the unfortunate and very dangerous side effect of cementing our ignorance.
[I've heard people claim that it is confirmed by Word of God [i.e. author's or developer's statement for those who don't know the term] that blood magic knowledge taught by demons is, in fact, deliberately incomplete. I would like to see the source of that claim before I add it here].
Part IV: World of Thedas, vol I:
WoTI adds one element to blood magic lore: the claim that the more violent and painful a bloodletting is, the more power is raised.
Interpretation:
This is a quandary. One one hand, it is one of the rare out-of-world sources and really should be taken as it is. On the other hand, it is completely incongruous with every presentation, every piece of other lore and every story told in-world about the subject. It would change the complete tapestry of primary and secondary evidence. For instance, Last Flight describes in detail Isseya's state of mind while casting and maintaining the spell that mind-controls the griffons, and this spell is described as extremely powerful, yet no mention is *ever* made of exceptional pain or violence. Also, no story about Tevinter *ever* mentions that slaves are tortured for magical power, even though this would be a powerful propaganda tool for the Chantry. The absence of evidence that should be there in Last Flight is particularly compelling since it's the latest publication and deals with the subject of blood magic in some depth. I conclude then, official source or not, that this element is being silently retconned by being ignored.
Conclusions:
(1) Blood magic may refer to two different things:
(i) Blood magic as the practice of powering spells with blood, possibly as a representation of "life essence". Spells powered this way do not require touching the Fade, unless the spell itself deals with something that requires such contact. Mages who cast regular spells powered with their own blood are not in danger of possession as they usually are while touching the Fade. It is possible, ironically, that a solution of the "mage problem" may involve....having them use more blood magic.
It is unclear at this time if blood sacrifice (using others' blood) requires touching the Fade. Life on Thedas appears to have a non-physical component. It's probably more appropriate to call it "life essence" rather than "soul", since it's quantifiable and does not carry identity. Touching another's life essence may or may not require touching the Fade. Also, it is unclear how much danger mages face in their dreams. In DA2 we hear that "all mages are at the mercy of their sleeping minds", and there are several stories about mages who have nightmares likely caused by the presence of demons (DA2 Codex about Tranquility and Feynriel's story), yet we don't know if mages can actually get possessed within dreams. Feynriel's story appears to suggest that they can, but he's a Dreamer and such especially vulnerable. Thus we cannot say at this time if restricting yourself to standard magic powered through your own blood would make you completely safe from possession, but it's a possibility.
The problem this kind of blood magic faces lies in the temptation it presents to use blood sacrifice instead of your own blood, but not more than that. This kind of blood magic is not demonic in origin but apparently tied to the physical realm only (source: DA2 Codex about the blood magic specialization, see above in the DA2 section for details).
(ii) Blood magic as a school of magic, a set of thematically connected spells dealing with mental influences, manipulation of life essence and demonology. This technically includes spells like the one that creates phylacteries and the Gray Wardens' Joining ritual. The knowledge about this is possibly demonic in origin although the fact that this is widely believed by NPCs is not compelling as evidence. We can, for now, assume it is true, but it could be retconned without creating any contradictions in the lore.
Specific blood magic spells that deal with demons directly or mimic demonic abilities make you more vulnerable to possession by bringing you closer to demons, making their mental voices (which you always hear while using magic) louder and more insistent, heightening the temptation at moments of high passion or danger. There is no evidence that this increased vulnerability extends beyond the period the spell is maintained.
While it is possible that specific blood magic spells, if they are demonic in origin, carry hidden side effects, no evidence has been presented in support of this claim. However, the fact that we can plausibly expect demons to do something like this is reason to be suspicious.
(2) Blood magic of either kind can be learned from books though it is still possible that the ultimate origin of the knowledge about blood magic spells in the book, if any, is demonic.
(3) Blood magic of either kind does not require the active help of a demon, though some blood magic spells may require it.
So much for that. Additions, corrections etc. are welcome.
==========================================================================================================
I'll include my categorization of blood magic from page 9 here:
What exactly is a blood magic spell?
My answer is this:
The school of blood magic - as opposed to the practice of powering spells in general through blood - is a set of thematically connected spells that deal with demonology, mind and emotion control and the manipulation of life essence. Spells of this school are called blood magic spells, and one of their common characteristics is that according to current knowledge, they all require life essence in form of blood in some capacity.
Non-blood magic spells are powered by energy the mage draws from the Fade. Blood can substitute for that, removing the need for the mage to touch the Fade in order to cast spells. Blood can also be used to boost all kinds of spells. Powering or boosting a spell that does not require blood by blood does not make it a blood magic spell.
Blood magic spells need to be powered at least partly with blood. To which extent is unclear and may differ between spells. The expression "to be powered" includes using blood as a component, since the blood is needed for the spell to work and it is expended in the process.
Lyrium can be used to boost all kinds of spells, but can't substitute for the blood if that is required by the spell. Thus, boosting a blood magic spell with lyrium does not change its nature as a blood magic spell.
Known blood magic spells and rituals include demon summoning, mind control, opening the Veil, demonic containment (as seen in DA2 Legacy) and generally wards keyed to a specific person, creation of phylacteries and the Grey Wardens' Joining ritual as well as several of the games' damaging spells that attack someone's blood or cause damage through magical bloodletting.
Addendum:
If there is a need to separate out spells that need to be powered by blood rather than also using it in some other capacity, I propose this:
Blood magic spells in the narrow sense are those spells which you cannot infuse with energy drawn from the Fade to power them, but must use life essence in form of blood instead.
Since we have confirmation from David Gaider that all spells in the broader definition are considered some form of blood magic, this would lead to another subdivision.
Retour en haut
and thats what i read i dont really agree with it at times but its a source that has merit
