359 réponses à ce sujet

[TheJediSaint]

Hopefully they will allow that position.  More options for roleplaying are welcome, as distasteful as they may be.

Agreed.  There should also be consequences to the choices the player makes.

[Ieldra]

For me - the very eagerness to be a mage is a danger.

 

I say "No" - because I think I might actually make a competent DA mage.  

 

It has less to do with if I could "hack it" and more to do with the notion that self-control leaves less room for pridefulness and I think actively wanting to be constantly tested and openly welcoming the possibility that demons might carve me out and use me for great devastation... is already wrong thinking.

You wouldn't actually welcome it, would you? Accepting something as an unavoidable downside is not the same thing. Otherwise, I see the point of suspecting overconfidence when evaluating one's own ability to deal with the demonic contact. A part of that, however, lies in the lack of knowledge of the mechanics of demonic contact and the details of the mental disciplines used to deal with it. I am reasonably confident in some skills I have. If I had a mage's training, I might become reasonably confident in resisting the demons.

[BlueMagitek]

Agreed.  There should also be consequences to the choices the player makes.

 

Oh, of course.  I'm very much a fan of that happening.  Want to be an extremist Dalish elf who kills every human he can to avoid the Quickening?  Cool, game is now significantly harder without human allies.  Extremist Mage?  Enjoy the very little support from the Andrastians. Extremist Andrastian?  Goodbye Dalish & non Loyalist mages.

 

It would have been pretty cool if, after Lothering, your Warden had the option to "ditch" the group, take the choice to avoid the Warden's destiny of saving Ferelden, and you get an alternate ending where the Darkspawn DLC happened.

[Tevinter Soldier]

personally I can't see the war ending with a player choice.

One side or the other must win and it must be cannon.

 

Else dragon age 4 would be bloody hard to write. there would be dramatically different world states depending on each player.

not just the small details.

 

even assuming you just had 2 endings "good" endings

Ending 1: mages are back under templar control (the system before the collapse)

Ending 2: mages are self controlled and templars serve under first enchanters.

 

the results would be dramatically difference templars at least would have to be scripted to show a hell of a lot more respect to mages, mages would be coming and going from towers. Lyrium trade be controlled by the Mages.

 

and this is before we start asking question about how this affects the chantry.

Unless they give you a pathetic choice that has no real meaning i don't see how they could do it, it would be almost two entirely different games.

Hopefully bioware has taken the "this is how it is" route rather than an "illusion of choice"

[raging_monkey]

personally I can't see the war ending with a player choice.
One side or the other must win and it must be cannon.
 
Else dragon age 4 would be bloody hard to write. there would be dramatically different world states depending on each player.
not just the small details.
 
even assuming you just had 2 endings "good" endings
Ending 1: mages are back under templar control (the system before the collapse)
Ending 2: mages are self controlled and templars serve under first enchanters.
 
the results would be dramatically difference templars at least would have to be scripted to show a hell of a lot more respect to mages, mages would be coming and going from towers. Lyrium trade be controlled by the Mages.
 
and this is before we start asking question about how this affects the chantry.
Unless they give you a pathetic choice that has no real meaning i don't see how they could do it, it would be almost two entirely different games.
Hopefully bioware has taken the "this is how it is" route rather than an "illusion of choice"

illusion of choice is their speciality... that and making awsome stories

[Tevinter Soldier]

illusion of choice is their speciality... that and making awesome stories

 

but you can't do the illusion of choice for the big stuff.

take anders.......give the player control of stopping the big boom and Inquisition loses it's entire prologue.

 

The big stuff is set in stone. give the player a choice that results in a big boom anyway would just ****** people off.

Your choices should matter, if this means you can't control everything so be it. 

[Magister Caedus]

personally I can't see the war ending with a player choice.

One side or the other must win and it must be cannon.

 

Else dragon age 4 would be bloody hard to write. there would be dramatically different world states depending on each player.

not just the small details.

 

even assuming you just had 2 endings "good" endings

Ending 1: mages are back under templar control (the system before the collapse)

Ending 2: mages are self controlled and templars serve under first enchanters.

 

the results would be dramatically difference templars at least would have to be scripted to show a hell of a lot more respect to mages, mages would be coming and going from towers. Lyrium trade be controlled by the Mages.

 

and this is before we start asking question about how this affects the chantry.

Unless they give you a pathetic choice that has no real meaning i don't see how they could do it, it would be almost two entirely different games.

Hopefully bioware has taken the "this is how it is" route rather than an "illusion of choice"

I feel like it would be much easier for them to just limit the outcomes, unless DA4 took place somewhere remote enough to be removed from the conflict entirely - resulting in little more than some different dialogue. Like, say... Rivain, or Tevinter.

 

This will be my theory on locations for DA4 if a major choice is included.

[Vox Draco]

What is the problem with mages? There already is a proven and working concept to keep mages in check, without tranquilizing them, chaining them, subduing them...

 

Let's just found Thedas' Unseen University, a place for all the mages to gather and learn how NOT to use their magic, where they can endlessly debate about where magic derives from while trying their utmost to avoid having to interact with students (which are far too busy with drinking-contests anyway). Also make sure they have proper feast at least five times a day (only hungry mages are dangerous mages!) and free them off taxes.

 

Really, the Discworld had Mage-Wars already, with Wizards fighting against the gods and all that...but now the mages are all mostly happy and content (and a bit insane)...and it will be my heroine's foremost agenda to bring Thedas this "Final Solution - humanistic style" !

[Medhia_Nox]

@Ieldra:  We are both absolutely in agreement that education of mages is necessary.  For you, I think it's more out of a spirit of discovery.  For myself, it is out of a necessity for preparedness.  

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about being comfortable with who you are as a mage.  If I were born a mage (and my mindset was my current one) I would absolutely have no problems being a mage.  I wouldn't be troubled about what it means before Maker or Man.  

 

But currently as a mundane who knows terrifyingly little about Thedosian magic - I cannot responsibly say that I would "want" to open myself up to possibility possession and/or torment.  

 

And I'm not saying people could not both be fascinated and cautious - that exists too, but I am naturally wary of fascination for two reasons 1) Naivety 2) Corruption.  I'm not talking evil... corruption is ill intent masked, even to the self, as something more innocent.  

 

People can convince themselves of a great man things - and I am certain that the vast majority of possessed do not welcome possession knowingly.

 

So while I wouldn't immediately dismiss a mage on the basis that they were excited about being a mage - I would be wary, at least at first, of any mage who took that stance until I could better ascertain "why" they were excited.

[In Exile]

Ask yourself this: would you want to be a mage in Thedas? Doesn't matter where.

I don't know about others, but I would at least hesitate before I say yes. At least. The claim that mages are superior rings hollow in a world where Malcolm Hawke can say he wouldn't wish his magic on anyone else and that comes across as a plausible position to take.

As for firearms, the combination "powder keg + fireball" does not appear very appealing to me. It works for the qunari dreadnoughts because their ships can remain out of range of enemy mages' fireballs and because most of Thedas' nations don't have (enough) mages in their employ, but that wouldn't work so well in land combat, and with the right type of ship, even that advantage can be countered to some degree. There is a reason why Tevinter has held out against the Qunari. IMO, for firearms to become the great equalizer against magic, you'd need an industrial revolution and mass produced firearms and ammo that can be used at very long ranges. Probably late 19th century technology.

 

It's like being a mutant in the X-men. It sucks to be one, but most of them are still superior to base humans, in the sense that their human with some extra abilities. 

[bootyislovebootyislife]

My Qunari rogue is gonna be a Mage Supremacist.

 

1. For the lols.

 

2. So i can worship the booty god that is Dorian and make him king of the World, with Vivienne being my Thedas' Jesus

[Stronglav]

I will ask another question:can there be peace between Chantry and mages?

[raging_monkey]

I will ask another question:can there be peace between Chantry and mages?

yes... an sadly. Only when one side dominates the other is there peace(tense and strained all through the 9 hells but peace)

[Doominike]

I wouldn't go with supremacy per se, more like meritocracy maybe. I kinda agree with Fassbender Magneto about it but not to the point of ruling the world probably. I'll just wreck the shits of anyone who messes with me (namely, in this case, the templars and the chantry, and eventually the qun) until they leave me alone. Or are all dead, depending on my characters

[Potato Cat]

I feel like it would be much easier for them to just limit the outcomes, unless DA4 took place somewhere remote enough to be removed from the conflict entirely - resulting in little more than some different dialogue. Like, say... Rivain, or Tevinter.
 
This will be my theory on locations for DA4 if a major choice is included.

Yes, this is my theory too. The Inquisitor can only end the war in Orlais and Ferelden after all, and while I think the war will be over by DA4, they can set a canon, while still having the Inquisitor's choice affect the world. For example, the north of Thedas could be united by a Divine the Mothers of Rivain, Nevarra, the Anderfels and Free Marches elected who puts mages in these areas back into the Circle system. But, in the case of pro-mage extremist Inquisitor, mages can be might be more restless, or in the case of a pro-Templar extremist, mages might be more submissive and grateful.

[Asdrubael Vect]

 the north of Thedas could be united by a Divine the Mothers of Rivain, Nevarra, the Anderfels and Free Marches elected who puts mages in these areas back into the Circle system. But, in the case of pro-mage extremist Inquisitor, mages can be might be more restless, or in the case of a pro-Templar extremist, mages might be more submissive and grateful.

not understand what do you mean by that?

 

Tevinter Divine(maybe you mean Archon and Senat because they have the power there) with Non-andrastian Apostages Witchers, with pro Tevinter necromances and with Grey Wardens will put rebellion mages opressed by their enemy as Orlais empire Orlais Cahntry and Templars back to Orlais Chantry Circle?

 

if this is what you mean so this is not making any sense...no-one will never do such thing and Orlais Empire(not all of them because many will want mages by their side to have power to controll empire what have  war for the trone) Templars with maybe Starhaven under Sebastian would be alone in this war against those rebeliion mages

[nightscrawl]

I did not read most of the thread.

 

If we go with your example of the X-Men universe, I find mutant supremacy to be untenable. There are way too many non-mutants to possibly kill, enslave, or control them all. Even as powerful as (some of the) mutants are, there is not really a way to maintain that kind of society. This would also depend on the fact of every single mutant also sharing this ideology, which we know is not the case. Also, if you want to maintain society at its current level with electrical power, internet, grocery stores, Amazon.com, and other luxuries that we've all (including the mutants!) become spoiled by you need all of the non-mutants to maintain that.

 

This is something to think about when watching/reading vampire stories where the vamps refer to humans as "just meat," "cattle," or any other reductionist term. This so-called meat is responsible for the modern society that the vampires live in and take advantage of, including the $1000 suits they wear and luxury cars they drive. It is NOT like humans and cows. Cows haven't done anything for us except eat grass and provide sustenance; important on its own merits certainly, but not significant overall.

 

Now, to bring it back to the mage vs. mundane. Thedas has a much smaller population and the mages don't actually need anyone to maintain a society in the same way that we (in the real, modern world) would. They could certainly live in a self-sustaining commune cut off from the rest of the world and be perfectly happy. In fact, I'm sure there are some mages that would love to do just that. Those mages don't believe in mage supremacy, they just want to be left alone.

 

But then you do have the power hungry mages, just as you have power hungry mundanes. For these it's not necessarily about mage supremacy as a general principle, but more about personal power with mage superiority as one of the supporting arguments. Tarohne makes statements along these lines in DA2.

 

So, to answer the question, it's certainly a more plausible goal with Thedas than with the X-Men universe. However I then have to go back to my previous statement about it being reliant on all (or almost all) of the mages sharing this same ideology. There are some mages, like Wynne, that would fight these others, and there are also mundanes that would accept help from these types of friendly mages. As long as those are also a part of the equation, the mages won't be able to control anything.

 

The ONLY hope is for some sort of peaceful co-existence.

[Ieldra]

I will ask another question:can there be peace between Chantry and mages?

This is a variant of the same question. Ultimately the problem is whether the mageborn and the non-mageborn can co-exist in peace in a state where no side is dominated by the other. If they can, that's by default the preferable position, and any supremacism ideology is hard to justify. If, on the other hand, you find the argument that such co-existence is not possible compelling, then supremacism becomes the default position, since naturally everyone wants to avoid being dominated by others, and thus would want "their" faction to rule. 

 

Inextricably bound up with this is the question of whether the mageborn would automatically dominate in a society where their powers are only limited by laws that bind everyone in the same way, i.e. laws that make no distinction between magical and non-magical means - if doing something is illegal, it doesn't matter if you used magic or not, or if it was theoretically possible to do the same by any other means. The more reliably magic can be used for mundane tasks, the more the probability shifts in favor of the statement that the mageborn would ultimately dominate, which means that the non-mageborn could only hold their ground by coercion. That, in turn, will most likely mean that peaceful co-existence with no domination is impossible, since independently from the question whether equality should be forced by the law in a situation where innate abilities result in natural inequality, the mageborn are recognizable as a distinct faction, and as such will collectively and justifiedly be seen as a threat to the welfare of the non-mageborn.   

 

Compare, as a contrast, the situation in the real world: for almost all socially relevant abilities, genetic differences have a significant effect only in the top percentile of the ability spectrum. That means that  - disregarding the effects of prejudice - more than 99% of all socially relevant achievement is only gated by background and education, not by genetic predisposition. Were this different - were there, for instance, significant differences by ethnicity - this would result in economic and cultural domination of the genetically privileged side(s) even if the law applied equally to all and there was no prejudice. Our philosophy of equality works, in practice, because in spite of our individual differences, we are naturally equal enough where it counts. Put the mageborn into the mix - or the X-men - and things become difficult.   

[Ieldra]

@nightscrawl:

You're talking about the practicality of a magocracy. Well, we do have the Imperium, and it is unclear how much its culture of slavery or the tacit acceptance of blood sacrifice contribute to its obvious functionality and power as a political entity.

 

Ultimately for those mageborn who just want to be left alone, the question is "If the mageborn have only power in accordance with their numbers, will the non-mageborn inevitably make laws that disadvantage them". So far, it has always been that way: either the mageborn are interned or enslaved, or they are culturally or politically dominant. Isolation is an unsatisfactory solution because mageborn children are born to non-mageborn parents and vice versa.  The comparison with real-world situations is difficult if the mageborn are naturally superior at some socially and economically relevant tasks, which makes it likely that people will support laws to "even the odds" because unlike these real-world situations, it is not even theoretically possible to bring the disadvantaged up to the others. 

[nightscrawl]

@nightscrawl:
You're talking about the practicality of a magocracy. Well, we do have the Imperium, and it is unclear how much its culture of slavery or the tacit acceptance of blood sacrifice contribute to its obvious functionality and power as a political entity.

That is how I interpreted your original post of "... about the plausibility of a political position based on the assumption that war is inevitable, and about the changed philosophical landscape resulting from such an assumption."

I didn't include current, long lived institutions like the Tevinter Imperium because you talked about the climate of non-Imperium Thedas and how that would change as a result of a mage/templar war. The Imperium already has a permissive system in place and isn't really in any danger when it comes to this war.

 

Ultimately for those mageborn who just want to be left alone, the question is "If the mageborn have only power in accordance with their numbers, will the non-mageborn inevitably make laws that disadvantage them". So far, it has always been that way: either the mageborn are interned or enslaved, or they are culturally or politically dominant. Isolation is an unsatisfactory solution because mageborn children are born to non-mageborn parents and vice versa.  The comparison with real-world situations is difficult if the mageborn are naturally superior at some socially and economically relevant tasks, which makes it likely that people will support laws to "even the odds" because unlike these real-world situations, it is not even theoretically possible to bring the disadvantaged up to the others.

My point in using real world examples was to show that an isolationist society could sustain itself in Thedas, whereas one could not in the real world. The political, governmental, and materialistic structure of the real world makes that very difficult. There are fringe groups that try to exist "off the grid," but even those folks need the existence of the outside world for things like gasoline to run generators. Sure, you can make your own bullets with the right tools, but gunpower is harder to come by; it's a lot more convenient to just go to Cabela's and buy some. Because Thedas is so primitive compared to our own world a group of people, mage or non-mage it makes no difference, could decide to start a community in the middle of nowhere (near a water source), and develop quite nicely, just as we did in our pioneering days.

If say a group of mages form some commune in the woods, then pair off and have children, one would expect that those same mages would raise those children with a more compassionate view toward mages and magic, just as Carver was raised, but without the additional fear of templars. Then they could form their own laws, absent from the scruples of the Chantry, that benefit everyone in the society. If a mage or non-mage breaks those laws, which include abuses of magic, they can be made to leave. I don't really see this as an impossible situation.

I both agree and disagree with Fenris when it comes to this issue. I do believe that a society structured like the Imperium is problematic. But he says himself that "The attitude toward magic is different in Tevinter. Magisters came from wealthy families, bloodlines that had nurtured magical talent for countless generations. The Chantry was not trying to control poor peasants but the scions of the greatest houses in the Imperium." With that mindset they were doomed from the start. You already had entitled individuals who felt that they could, and should be able to, get away with anything, and that is what ended up happening. How is that any different from non-mage aristocracy that do the same thing, like Vaughn from the city elf origin? But the same is not the case for most other mages in Thedas who ARE poor peasants; they will have a different mindset from the outset.

 

I've said this numerous times on these forums: the single biggest hurdle is the Chantry itself, and with regards to the templars specifically as the military arm of a religious organization. If the religious component were removed I strongly believe that there would be a lot fewer problems. [Note that I don't say that problems would be eliminated.]

 

Threads like this always talk in absolutes, as if we haven't been presented with moderate, well-meaning characters, both templar and mage, who could make it work. I think it is unfair to ignore these people, or to say that they are so rare as to be insignificant. Cullen himself says that the image of the poor enslaved mage is a powerful one, and that people are as likely to slam the door in their [a passing templar's] face as offer them a bed. That is a significant statement and tells me that the entirety of the populace is NOT against the mages.

[Ieldra]

I've said this numerous times on these forums: the single biggest hurdle is the Chantry itself, and with regards to the templars specifically as the military arm of a religious organization. If the religious component were removed I strongly believe that there would be a lot fewer problems. [Note that I don't say that problems would be eliminated.]
 
Threads like this always talk in absolutes, as if we haven't been presented with moderate, well-meaning characters, both templar and mage, who could make it work. I think it is unfair to ignore these people, or to say that they are so rare as to be insignificant. Cullen himself says that the image of the poor enslaved mage is a powerful one, and that people are as likely to slam the door in their [a passing templar's] face as offer them a bed. That is a significant statement and tells me that the entirety of the populace is NOT against the mages.

I agree that the religious component is the most problematic, both for the mageborn who might accept reasonable limitations while they're learning more easily if not for an ideology that makes them people "we can never be friends with" (Cullen), and for the non-mage population who gets socialized on stories like the tale of the Golden City, altogether with an interpretation that transfers the blames for the Blights to mages in general by association.

As for the absolutes: I think you're completely wrong with your assertion. The moderate solutions come up in every topic that deals with the problem. The question is whether they can work or not. You have presented some very long-term ways to make one work and I usually play from the default assumption that they can work, but significant arguments have been presented for the opposite so that I can't take that as a given. Mage supremacism is not my position, but I am exploring the possibility of roleplaying my Tal Vashoth mage that way.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Let's say that you can be of a mage supremacist mindset in the game. Why should BioWare be inclined to reward such behavior in your character?

[The Ascendant]

My PC's of previous games have never felt any shame in being a mage. Obviously being one in Inquisition will be interesting both gameplay and story wise. As we are primarily dealing with demons from the Fade, who else has better experience with them. Let's not forget about story wise. How will people react to a mage being in charge of a powerful international organization. I imagine most Chantry supporters will be suspicious of us.  

[Ieldra]

How will people react to a mage being in charge of a powerful international organization. I imagine most Chantry supporters will be suspicious of us.  

As evidenced by the informants they've placed in our ranks. Our spymaster is known as the "left hand of the Divine", our military advisor is a templar and we have a Seeker as a companion. The first two have mysteriously appeared at a convenient time to fill vacant posts in the Inquisition. As a mage I'm going to be rather suspicious of that setup.

[Super Drone]

As evidenced by the informants they've placed in our ranks. Our spymaster is known as the "left hand of the Divine", our military advisor is a templar and we have a Seeker as a companion. The first two have mysteriously appeared at a convenient time to fill vacant posts in the Inquisition. As a mage I'm going to be rather suspicious of that setup.

 

I'm pretty sure they were both there first.

 

The PC doesn't scrape together his buddies and found the Inquistion from scratch. The Divine's agents formed a proto-Inquisition already before  you show up.

 

Which is why I roll my eyes when ya'll talk about making them into a Pro-Tevinter army or whatever. They are there to deal with the Breach, not serve your personal vendettas. You get to direct them, but they aren't your mindless slaves.