1751 réponses à ce sujet

[Adanu]

Or maybe Vivienne is too intelligent and not so whiny to think a sheltered life of education and privilege is somehow akin to being imprisoned.

 

The Circle system needs reforming, but Kirkwall was the worst Circle.  And now a bunch of innocent people are dying because the mages are too childish to see why they've been put in the situation they have been.  

 

And this is different from the Chantry against the mages how? The mages are innocent from the start, it's the common folk, Chantry, and Templars who hate them.

 

When you kick, belittle, enslave, and degrade them, why for any reason should the mages care what you think?

 

If you want to stop the mage-templar war, give the mages respect and dignity. Until you do, I'm not surprised one iota they'll continue to fight you.

[Medhia_Nox]

@Adanu:  A mage who doesn't take responsibility for the burden they bare - is NOT innocent.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

As for Harrowings - if the Tevinter do them (and I "think" they do - but I'm not sure) then there's very likely a good reason Harrowings happen.  I personally believe they're essential - but I'm open to being proven wrong on this (and I don't believe any evidence at all has been provided so far - Hawke's children are special snowflakes)

I'm willing to be corrected on this, but I get the impression that Bethany drives this home by having the least amount of trouble in any Harrowing in Kirkwall's history. (I even read a parody fanfic of the game where Meredith actually has to send Orsino into the Fade to order her to stop showing off and finish the damn thing. Yes, I'm aware that doesn't actually happen.)

[wcholcombe]

I'm willing to be corrected on this, but I get the impression that Bethany drives this home by having the least amount of trouble in any Harrowing in Kirkwall's history. (I even read a parody fanfic of the game where Meredith actually has to send Orsino into the Fade to order her to stop showing off and finish the damn thing. Yes, I'm aware that doesn't actually happen.)

Seeing as Tevinter invented the circles, I would find it likely they also invented Harrowings.  Even the Chasind do a form of Harrowing by tying an apprentice to a tree and then feeding them dragonstone I believe. If they become possessed, their master simply slits their throat.

[Adanu]

@Adanu:  A mage who doesn't take responsibility for the burden the bare - is NOT innocent.

 

Responsibility has nothing to do with innocence, I don't get where you're getting that idea from.

 

No mage has any sort of responsibility to control themselves if they don't want to. It's only because of the opinions of others that they do.

[AshesEleven]

And this is different from the Chantry against the mages how? The mages are innocent from the start, it's the common folk, Chantry, and Templars who hate them.

 

When you kick, belittle, enslave, and degrade them, why for any reason should the mages care what you think?

 

If you want to stop the mage-templar war, give the mages respect and dignity. Until you do, I'm not surprised one iota they'll continue to fight you.

 

Mages deserve respect, and should not be treated like animals.  We can agree on this.  We can also agree that the Templars share a lot of the blame in regards to the war starting, as well.

 

But to say the mages (the aggressive ones) are innocent?  To say that the way to stop the war is to give mages respect and dignity?  No.  That's not how it works.  Every person needs to take responsibility for their actions.  The war ends when the two sides can come together, act like grown ups, and negotiate a compromise.  Until then, the mages and templars who continue to fight will all die before the Inquisition.    

[AshesEleven]

 

 

No mage has any sort of responsibility to control themselves if they don't want to. It's only because of the opinions of others that they do.

 

lol wut.

 

So your whole "everyone should respect mages" thing is completely undermined by the "mages can do whatever".  

[wcholcombe]

There's a natural bias toward encountering crazy demon-summoning mages for the same reason we meet more bandits than merchants, despite that ratio not being realistic either: conflict.

 

 

I'm willing to accept the Chantry's role if the Chantry accedes to my reforms: among them, allowing mages to enter the Chantry's government, so that we can have fair representation. Templars should be answerable to the Circles, not the Chantry; the Chantry's watchers can be Seekers if need be. As for the other two things you mentioned, it's involuntary Tranquility and unsupported lethal Harrowings that I want to abolish.

 

Under no circumstances should templars have any part in governance or negotiations. They're police, not politicians.

The natural bias is what I meant by slippery slope of using gameplay.  But gameplay also provides us with snowflakes who can't be possessed. Such as any of our pc mages or party mages.

 

My biggest issue with your reforms is the mages policing themselves.  Orsino would be a horrible 1st enchanter to run a circle independent of templar authority.  The reason I suggest a triumvirate of mage, templar, and someone else is that in the worst case of the mages and templars seeing only their perspective, the third party individual would hopefully make the right decision.  In a perfect world, a mage or a templar would do what was right irrespective of if it was punishing one of their own, but in the event that they start being partisan there is a 3rd voice to break the deadlock.  Now, picking this person would be interesting, I say grey warden because they are the only ones I could think of.  A local politician or whatever wouldn't work and the chantry would allow for the possibility of a mage hating zealot(hey I like the chantry but I see the potential for abuse), I guess the only other option besides a Warden might be a high ranking military officer....possibly.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

No mage has any sort of responsibility to control themselves if they don't want to. It's only because of the opinions of others that they do.

Yes they do. Everyone has the responsibility to control themselves, and mages have more of one.

[Adanu]

Yes they do. Everyone has the responsibility to control themselves, and mages have more of one.

 

We'll have to agree to disagree.

[wcholcombe]

Responsibility has nothing to do with innocence, I don't get where you're getting that idea from.

 

No mage has any sort of responsibility to control themselves if they don't want to. It's only because of the opinions of others that they do.

Really, so a mage raining fireballs down on peasants or meddling in summoning demons and getting possessed has no responsibility to the people who will suffer from their actions?

[Beerfish]

And this is different from the Chantry against the mages how? The mages are innocent from the start, it's the common folk, Chantry, and Templars who hate them.

 

When you kick, belittle, enslave, and degrade them, why for any reason should the mages care what you think?

 

If you want to stop the mage-templar war, give the mages respect and dignity. Until you do, I'm not surprised one iota they'll continue to fight you.

Innocent and highly dangerous can exists at the same time and that's what a lot of mages are.  Plain and simple.  If you can't see why the common folk who just watched their village and almost all the people in it killed because of an innocent mage (lets take redcliffe and connor as the example) then I am not sure what to tell you.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

A local politician or whatever wouldn't work and the chantry would allow for the possibility of a mage hating zealot(hey I like the chantry but I see the potential for abuse), I guess the only other option besides a Warden might be a high ranking military officer....possibly.

The Inquisitor? And his handpicked successor after him? And down the line?

 

(I know there's a potential for things to go wrong, and that they therefore essentially will, but this seems like it'd buy a few generations of peace.)

 

 

We'll have to agree to disagree.

Because doing otherwise would require each of us to examine our own opinions and worldviews?

[AshesEleven]

We'll have to agree to disagree.

 

I'm...confused?  In which world do you live in where people don't have to take responsibility for their actions?  I'm actually curious if this is a belief.  

[Adanu]

Innocent and highly dangerous can exists at the same time and that's what a lot of mages are.  Plain and simple.  If you can't see why the common folk who just watched their village and almost all the people in it killed because of an innocent mage (lets take redcliffe and connor as the example) then I am not sure what to tell you.

 

And when you apply that to everyone in the world and give no slack ever, don't be surprised when you get rebellion.

[wcholcombe]

The Inquisitor? And his handpicked successor after him? And down the line?

 

(I know there's a potential for things to go wrong, and that they therefore essentially will, but this seems like it'd buy a few generations of peace.)

Too many circles for that.  My idea would be based on an individual/position permanently attached to each circle.....Hmm maybe a dwarf from the merchant guild...........that could go badly though.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Too many circles for that.  My idea would be based on an individual/position permanently attached to each circle.....Hmm maybe a dwarf from the merchant guild...........that could go badly though.

Oh. I'd thought you'd meant to control the Circles as a whole. Personally I think the Inquisitor, and the various successors under the system I describe, should pick local men they believe to have the good of the Circle as a whole for the job. It strikes me as the system that would work the best for the longest time.

[Adanu]

I'm...confused?  In which world do you live in where people don't have to take responsibility for their actions?  I'm actually curious if this is a belief.  

 

Your belittling, and completely attacking tone against me does nothing to make me want to continue conversation with you.

 

I'll talk with you once you realize people have different opinions than you, and you can respect them.

[wcholcombe]

Oh. I'd thought you'd meant to control the Circles as a whole. Personally I think the Inquisitor, and the various successors under the system I describe, should pick local men they believe to have the good of the Circle as a whole for the job. It strikes me as the system that would work the best for the longest time.

It would depend on what the inquisition becomes.  That is how we first got the templars.

 

I like the warden idea, because the wardens aren't typically (I know there are exceptions) as anti mage or politically motivated or whatever as others.  They are just the most likely to be a neutral party. Heck, have the warden recruiter (like Blackwall or Duncan) for a country be assigned to this role for the circles in said country. That way there is an established relationship and the warden would have an opportunity to view the mages or templars he might wish to recruit.

[wcholcombe]

Your belittling, and completely attacking tone against me does nothing to make me want to continue conversation with you.

 

I'll talk with you once you realize people have different opinions than you, and you can respect them.

He isn't the only one totally confused by your idea that people aren't responsible for the consequences of their actions or behavior.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Your belittling, and completely attacking tone against me does nothing to make me want to continue conversation with you.

 

I'll talk with you once you realize people have different opinions than you, and you can respect them.

He doesn't see how anyone can or should have the opinion you have communicated, and frankly neither do I.

 

Let's compare your opinion as I understand it with a pro-mage I am able to understand. I'm able to communicate with Xilizhra despite her prioritizing mage freedom over the concerns of the rest of the population and my coming at it from the opposite side, because she and I are able to see that each is an important part of the equation and that some sort of balance is needed. You seem to be completely unconcerned with even the most legitimate concerns of the populace, unless either I'm horribly and unfairly misreading your opinion (I doubt it) or you've completely miscommunicated it.

[AshesEleven]

Your belittling, and completely attacking tone against me does nothing to make me want to continue conversation with you.

 

I'll talk with you once you realize people have different opinions than you, and you can respect them.

 

Ha!  You're right I sounded like a piece of s**t  

 

But that doesn't change the question...?  How can the mages *not* be responsible for their actions?  If a mage accepts a demon's deal and becomes an abomination or blood mage, how is he not responsible?  It makes no sense...

[Adanu]

He isn't the only one totally confused by your idea that people aren't responsible for the consequences of their actions or behavior.

That's hardly my problem, and not one I have any obligation to answer.

 

If you want me to answer you, some respect is in order.

[wcholcombe]

That's hardly my problem, and not one I have any obligation to answer.

 

If you want me to answer you, some respect is in order.

Show me where I have been disrespectful and I might consider continuing this conversation, otherwise good day.

[Adanu]

Ha!  You're right I sounded like a piece of s**t  

 

But that doesn't change the question...?  How can the mages *not* be responsible for their actions?  If a mage accepts a demon's deal and becomes an abomination or blood mage, how is he not responsible?  It makes no sense...

 

Apology accepted.

 

We probably have different defiinitions of words here. You say responsibility when I think owning your actions. People are 'responsibile for their actions' in the context that their actions affect others. If mages no longer care if they affect you, they no longer see themselves as having a responsibility to you.