Aller au contenu

Photo

Tell "Mages should be free" to someone who actually agrees?


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
53 réponses à ce sujet

#1
Kulyok

Kulyok
  • Members
  • 749 messages

The epilogue is based in part on the opinions we express during the game. (That, and the quest outcomes, but the opinions matter, too).

 

I believe mages should be free. I strongly believe mages should be free. Heck, I play a mage.

 

But I don't get to say this without reprecussions. Ever. In the entire game.

 

Why? Simple. I can only tell it:

- to Cassandra, and get disapproval;

- to Vivienne, and get a lot of disapproval;

- to some random mages in Redcliffe, and get disapproval from members of my party.

 

Please, if you want our characters to express their opinions(and you want it to matter for the epilogue), give us a safe environment to express them. An operation on the War Table, or an option to tell it to Solas or Leliana, where they would heartily agree, we'll get approval, and things would be happier all around.

 

Because, seriously, there're few companion conversations and I don't want to miss a single one, so, no, I don't want disapproval, especially from Vivienne - it's hard enough to get her to friend status as it is. So I'll just quietly free the mages and stand over there, thank you. Quietly.


  • Asdrubael Vect, DArkwarrior26, shedevil3001 et 5 autres aiment ceci

#2
kyles3

kyles3
  • Members
  • 1 984 messages

But what's cool is if you earn their approval in other ways you can still have the high-approval conversations and have them recognize the views you've expressed in those conversations. It's annoying to see certain party members disapprove of every damned thing you say or do, for sure, but there's some nuance to the way this was done and I like it.


  • Bann Duncan et Shandyr aiment ceci

#3
Xhaiden

Xhaiden
  • Members
  • 532 messages

"A safe environment to express them"

 

Er, this is an RPG. Its kind of absurd to say you want to role play but only up until the point the game reacts to your decisions. If you're going to take an unpopular position its going to be unpopular. The party is a diverse cast of characters with differing beliefs and opinions. Any major decision or stance you take is likely going to ****** off someone. You can't please everyone all of the time especially when it comes to major social or political positions. 

 

Welcome to life. >.>


  • earymir, Spirit Keeper, Annos Basin et 1 autre aiment ceci

#4
Vidas Secas

Vidas Secas
  • Members
  • 96 messages

just lie to them and say the truth to the people people



#5
Sartoz

Sartoz
  • Members
  • 4 502 messages

The epilogue is based in part on the opinions we express during the game. (That, and the quest outcomes, but the opinions matter, too).

 

I believe mages should be free. I strongly believe mages should be free. Heck, I play a mage.

 

But I don't get to say this without reprecussions. Ever. In the entire game.

 

Why? Simple. I can only tell it:

- to Cassandra, and get disapproval;

- to Vivienne, and get a lot of disapproval;

- to some random mages in Redcliffe, and get disapproval from members of my party.

 

Please, if you want our characters to express their opinions(and you want it to matter for the epilogue), give us a safe environment to express them. An operation on the War Table, or an option to tell it to Solas or Leliana, where they would heartily agree, we'll get approval, and things would be happier all around.

 

Because, seriously, there're few companion conversations and I don't want to miss a single one, so, no, I don't want disapproval, especially from Vivienne - it's hard enough to get her to friend status as it is. So I'll just quietly free the mages and stand over there, thank you. Quietly.

The guys in the Bio  Writers Pit apparantly have a consensus on mage approval or lack of. So, I agree whole heartedly that mages sould be free like any other person. But, there is a need for an organization to handle rogue mages.. a policing force, if you will. To me, you can't have one without the other.

 

Viv is Viv. She likes power and uses it to keep herself at the top. She fears the "great unwashed".  She likes the way things were, the structure, the feel of safety. .. the templars between her and the mobs... no loss if she gets killed...



#6
Sartoz

Sartoz
  • Members
  • 4 502 messages

But what's cool is if you earn their approval in other ways you can still have the high-approval conversations and have them recognize the views you've expressed in those conversations. It's annoying to see certain party members disapprove of every damned thing you say or do, for sure, but there's some nuance to the way this was done and I like it.

It's annoying and you like it?

Seeing that unless your Inquisitor acts like a total ass,  your companion's approval is meaningless.



#7
XxPrincess(x)ThreatxX

XxPrincess(x)ThreatxX
  • Members
  • 2 518 messages
Why would anyone agree that mages should be totally free? their a danger to everyone around them, especially if untrained

#8
BeyondTheStars

BeyondTheStars
  • Members
  • 35 messages

Danger always exists. Non-magic users are not less criminals, when they choose so. Everyone should have same rights, chances, freedoms, not punished for having a gift or not having it. The Magisters are bad, those who are (most of them I guess), because they are bad, not because they are mages. Evil has nothing to do with magic. Evil is evil, magic is magic. When both these met, it's a problem, but NOT because the magic.

 

Mages having an academy, or many schools, where to learn from young age, that's fine - not prisons, not being separated from families like criminals, and forbidden from any social positions (priesthood, leadership). With power comes responsibility, and abusing power is evil.

 

The Dragon Age world has magic. They should cherish that gift, it's priceless. Or they will slowly kill out all mages, and their world will become plain and colorless like ours. Evil will still exist, as you all know: we have plenty of that, and not because our leaders are "blood" mages (or maybe they are... who knows)


  • DArkwarrior26, shedevil3001 et Tex aiment ceci

#9
Nerevar-as

Nerevar-as
  • Members
  • 5 375 messages

Why would anyone agree that mages should be totally free? their a danger to everyone around them, especially if untrained

So is a group of bandits, and 99.5% of nobles are worse than any abomination, but weapon control or authority overwatch doesn´t seem to be a top priority anywhere in Thedas. Is the point that they are dangerous in a way that is not possible to everybody that makes those closed to it afraid. Also, a mage´s power is his/her own, not about having a lot of drones to order around.

 

Of course they need training and policing, but that´s no reason to have them caged, make them as feared as possible, or forbid them a family. The surprising thing is it took almost 1000 years for the situation to explode. And templars are lucky mages have so little creative minds. Using magic for indirect attacks would end fights very quickly.Take the Hinterlands, how would you dispel a rockslide?



#10
Guest_Juromaro_*

Guest_Juromaro_*
  • Guests

Why would anyone agree that mages should be totally free? their a danger to everyone around them, especially if untrained

 

 

Solas, Morrigan, Mage Hawke, Mage Warden, Avernus, and many other mages would disagree.

 

 

Sure some kids might set fire to their homes in their sleep, most do not(if they did there would be alot of burned out buildings around).

 

 

A mage is no more dangerous than anything else with power.


  • RenAdaar et Tex aiment ceci

#11
Sartoz

Sartoz
  • Members
  • 4 502 messages

Why would anyone agree that mages should be totally free? their a danger to everyone around them, especially if untrained

Ahh.. you like being kidnapped from your family and jailed for the rest of your life because you MAY do something in the future?

 

Hell, with that attitude,  kill them, young, old,.. whatever. More cost effective... start a pogrom.. .. hell kill the mothers and fathers for having a mage childdren...that will teach them......


  • shedevil3001, whistlerymes et Tex aiment ceci

#12
Damican

Damican
  • Members
  • 52 messages

As for disapproval, you can't make everyone happy. So, you have to pick carefully when talking to certain companions. I mean, do you really think that Cassandra wants to hear that mages should roam around, when magic was the cause of explosion? I think not.



#13
SwobyJ

SwobyJ
  • Members
  • 7 370 messages

Your 'safe environment' is the game itself. It is pixels disagreeing with you.

 

I'm not even being facetious. The game is a place you can express what you think, get disagreements about it, but still move on. Others here are correct that you can disagree with NPCs all you want but it is likely that by the end of the game, especially if you did all their sidequesty stuff in a friendly way, they're still on your side.

 

There's that tightrope between simulation, game, and reality. Bioware isn't going to give you outright yes-men, while they also want the game to be a safe space for most opinions, while they also want to show you the consequences of disagreeing with others, especially if those others are meant to be defined characters with strong stances.

 

You want freedom? Know that freedom comes with accountability. Always. From other people, from systems, from the universe, from yourself. You allowed yourself to get flustered that Cassandra doesn't agree with you and disapproves of your own stance.


  • LadyJaneGrey aime ceci

#14
Guest_Roly Voly_*

Guest_Roly Voly_*
  • Guests

Welcome to life. >.>

 Sums it up perfectly.



#15
SwobyJ

SwobyJ
  • Members
  • 7 370 messages

Ahh.. you like being kidnapped from your family and jailed for the rest of your life because you MAY do something in the future?

 

Hell, with that attitude,  kill them, young, old,.. whatever. More cost effective... start a pogrom.. .. hell kill the mothers and fathers for having a mage childdren...that will teach them......

 

A mage can cause a mini-nuke. That's all fine and all, but they also are open to demonic corruption that makes them that nuke out of their own volition.

 

Its like if someone could destroy a city. Big deal, most of us could find a way to do it if we tried hard enough IRL. But then again, we don't have people that could snap at any moment, as just one person, and do it, whether they even wanted to or not.

 

People are widely wary of mages themselves, but not terrified. They are terrified of demons, who prey on mages and make them into a huge danger. Where the Veil is 'solid', and the threat of demonic possession is minimal, mages may walk around nearly as free as anyone else (though with watchers/guards), whether that be in the more Orlesian system or elsewhere.

 

Everyone is jailed if you want to get down to it. Citizenship, religion, conscription, all ways that restrict movement and action. But not always, or at least it can be loosened. Not all Circles were freakin death camps. Ferelden's Circle Tower was in the middle, The Free Marches' Gallows was the most restrictive and abusive in the world, Rivain's was super lax until outside Templar and Chantry authority freaked out about it, and Orlais' Circles outright allow mages to walk outside freely and operate more like a collage with Templar security guards. The Libertarians were housed there, and the Seekers worked with mages to assist apostates and track down Templars that abused their authority. It was VERY fair until recent events.

 

Many, mages and non-mages alike, don't really hate the idea of the Circles, because the threat of demonic possession and mage superiority complexes (and both feeding on each other) is very very real. But most would agree that the system is imperfect, and that change is necessary and inevitable. You can decide whether you prefer Circle reform of one sort or another, or an embracing of the Colleges in one form or another. The Circle path (one way or another) means that the mistakes of the past may occur again. The College path (one way or another) means that new mage problems will pop up more often. But the current way doesn't work well enough for the Thedas now and the Thedas of the future.

 

 

In a world without demons, or at least demons to this extent as Thedas deals with, preemptive mage control would be automatically extreme. But they're there. This is a world where you could be living peacefully and literally in the same day, your brother in your home is possessed by a pride demon and kills 100s of your town without any warning except that your brother maybe cast a single tiny spell once and you saw him do it.

 

The elven paradigm was different because the Veil didn't even exist, at least in any recognizable form. It wasn't so black and white, and spirits therefore did not operate so black and white either. The Veil both protects the world from the further extents of magical danger, but also amplifies the problems when it does occur. Like the Templars/Circles themselves, as we see in Kirkwall (the Veil was thin but if Templars were not so control freaky anyway, it could have been okay, etc).

 

 

 

EDIT: BTW, if anyone wants to completely support how Rivain does things, I highly suggest you wait and see. They may be just people like anyone else, and operate safely enough, but I almost guarantee that the practices that hedge mages and others in Rivain employ WILL creep you out, as may the cultural acceptance of these practices. Frequent communion with spirits in a world that is Veiled = openness to both positive Spirits AND negative Demons, and I wouldn't be surprised at all to see that Rivain has mortals but pawns (at least to some extent) of these hedge mages and their spirits. That doesn't mean that things are all terrible, and in fact Rivain may be a nice place overall, but it will not necessarily be the paradise that it sounds like on paper. Both Qunari and Rivain lands give off a feeling to me of 'great community, sucky for individualism or safety'. Just as anyone who doesn't fit the Qun way is dealt with badly, we may find that anyone who doesn't fit the Rivain friendliness to magic/spirits may be dealt with badly as well, and we may find there was a better reason for the Templars to annul the Circle there than we originally thought. NOTHING in Thedas is purely good.

Just speculation, but still..


  • AshenEndymion et oZ0NED_0UTo aiment ceci

#16
herkles

herkles
  • Members
  • 1 902 messages

wait till we get to tevinter, then mages are both free and in control.  Though I do agree with what SwobyJ stated. :)



#17
SwobyJ

SwobyJ
  • Members
  • 7 370 messages

wait till we get to tevinter, then mages are both free and in control.  Though I do agree with what SwobyJ stated. :)

 

I hope Bioware confirms the next game will be Tevinter focused (the City-focus like DA2 was, though hopefully done better - compared to the Land-focus of DAO and especially DAI).

 

There's many stories to tell. And Tevinter perspective may be interesting. We know that Chantry/White Divine lands have their problems, but we live in them and are softened about them compared to seeing things elsewhere. I'd like the perspective flip to occur, especially if we get to be so wowed by the power of magic in Tevinter that we get more blinded about the slavery abuses that occur there.

 

Reminds me of that 'indentured servant' quest in ME2.

 

 

For the record, I am pro-Mage freedom overall. I'm very very pro-Magic itself, outright. My party is Solas, Cole, and any Warrior, and I'm a Mage (I'd bring Dorian, and I do replace Solas with him sometimes, but 2 mages is enough in a party). But I'm not a fool about what mages as a demographic do when given literally-as-much freedom as non-mages. There's a reason why even the most pro-gun lands still don't allow one to carry bombs and rockets and such on them, at the very least in 'secure areas'. A mage may typically be just as strong as anyone else, but then suddenly they leap up in danger 1000x.

 

ALSO: I do wonder what Bioware will do with Rogues though. Warriors we get - they are a definite 'strong' class type, in combat and story, and that will maintain. Mages are often weak or maybe just as strong as others, but then jump up in power. What might happen in a much more Magical and dare I say Fade-less Thedas? Might the creative and cunning minds of the Rogues end up the most surprisingly powerful and dangerous in Thedas, beyond even Mages? I wonder...



#18
Guest_starlitegirl_*

Guest_starlitegirl_*
  • Guests

Consider who you are dealing with and nod and tell them what they want to hear. You are in control. Fact is their disapproval doesn't matter. They like to believe it does but you are the inquisitor. I tell them what they want to hear because they aren't open minded and that's how you have to deal with people that aren't open minded. No different that the real world. Then you go and do what you want and stick it to them for not being open minded enough to at least see that mages are people too.


  • SwobyJ aime ceci

#19
DaemionMoadrin

DaemionMoadrin
  • Members
  • 5 855 messages

My Warden was a mage and asked for Ferelden's Circle to be free.

My Champion was a mage and sided with the mages in Kirkwall.

My Inquisitor advocates giving mages the choice to live in Circles and to police themselves. He also sided with the mages in Redcliff.

 

I don't give a damn about my companions. What does it matter if Vivi disagrees with me? I don't even take her along in my party. I am not going to change my views just to please some people.

 

Btw... it would be nice if I could see my current approval rating with someone ... am I supposed to write it down myself and then guess how many points slightly and greatly are? :P


  • shedevil3001, RenAdaar et President of Boom aiment ceci

#20
Weltall

Weltall
  • Members
  • 131 messages

Chancing disapproval is the cost of sticking to your convictions.


  • kyles3 aime ceci

#21
Aurok

Aurok
  • Members
  • 468 messages

I hated the X approves/disapproves messages while you're having a conversation with someone else entirely. So distracting, and made me feel like every decision I made was a wrong one. It's especially irritating when they aren't even present.



#22
robertmarilyn

robertmarilyn
  • Members
  • 1 560 messages

I wanted mages to be free and I told everybody. It was worth it because I was able have an unhardened Leliana become divine and didn't take a chance on Viv becoming divine by telling her something she wanted to hear. I still ended up with everybody liking me. I may not have been Viv's best friend (can't stand her) but still got to do her quest and meet her semi-in-laws. I like playing to my character's beliefs and you can do it and still have friends.  :)



#23
Kulyok

Kulyok
  • Members
  • 749 messages

The problem is, DAO completionists were able to get 100% approval with everyone(gifts, gift DLC).

 

DA2 didn't give the same - you had to watch your walkthroughs and carefully take companions on certain quests(or avoid it) to get Carver into "blue/friend" zone to get friendly dialogues with him in Legacy/by the end of the game. And, yep, it was annoying.

 

DA3 takes middle ground: you can easily get some companions to maximum, but not others. Blackwall approves each time you kill darkspawn with him, Dorian approves each time you kill Venatori with him, Sera approves at finding Red Jenny caches, Solas approves at multiple artifacts and just asking about the weather, Varric has 12 approval gains at the red lyrium deposits.

 

But Cole, Vivienne and Cassandra don't have such luxury - Cassandra only has five great approvals at killing five renegades, Cole doesn't have a quest with multiple approvals at all(apart from slight approvals when you notice odd things, and normal quest/becoming human approvals), and Vivienne only gives you slight approvals at finding three tomes, and there's a wyvern quest. Which means that each time they disapprove, you've got a good chance losing content with them - for good.

 

I know what I'm talking about - I take pains each time to get "I'm glad the Maker sent you" line after Cassandra-Varric spat, and I'm still not sure if Vivienne "introducing you to some people" conversation is her last one, despite completing all her quests and being as polite to her as possible.

 

So, it's either "give us a quest for each companion which would max his approval, much like Solas'(whose approval overflows by half-game for me, despite siding with the Wardens, not killing Kirkwall mages and making Cole human), or let us steer our epilogue without companion disapproval". Honestly, I'd have expected to talk to Solas or Morrigan or anyone understanding about how I want to free the mages, and I was disappointed I could only express my view to pro-Chantry characters, much as I love Cassandra.



#24
Efvie

Efvie
  • Members
  • 510 messages

A mage can cause a mini-nuke. That's all fine and all, but they also are open to demonic corruption that makes them that nuke out of their own volition.

 

Its like if someone could destroy a city. Big deal, most of us could find a way to do it if we tried hard enough IRL. But then again, we don't have people that could snap at any moment, as just one person, and do it, whether they even wanted to or not.

 

DA mages flat-out are not that powerful. There are some exceptions but the worst that even Orsino could do is turn into a big demon that could have been taken out by at the very most a couple dozen people. (Anders didn’t blow up the chantry with magic alone, it was enhanced gunpowder—enough of which is a ‘mini-nuke’ on its own, if non-qunari get their hands on it.)

 

Obviously it’s a tragedy if a mage goes on a rampage, or gets possessed, but it’s far from a vast disaster.

Plus it’s consistently clear that the more restrictive and oppressive the control over mages, the more problems it creates. In addition to conscious rebellion, it fosters the fears and other emotions that make them susceptible to possession.

 

So yes, I think there is an argument to be made for freedom. Whether it’s convincing enough I don’t know.

 

 

And more to the point, I think it’s perfectly fine to have the companions disagree with you on things…



#25
pengwin21

pengwin21
  • Members
  • 377 messages

DA mages flat-out are not that powerful. There are some exceptions but the worst that even Orsino could do is turn into a big demon that could have been taken out by at the very most a couple dozen people. (Anders didn’t blow up the chantry with magic alone, it was enhanced gunpowder—enough of which is a ‘mini-nuke’ on its own, if non-qunari get their hands on it.)

 

Obviously it’s a tragedy if a mage goes on a rampage, or gets possessed, but it’s far from a vast disaster.

Plus it’s consistently clear that the more restrictive and oppressive the control over mages, the more problems it creates. In addition to conscious rebellion, it fosters the fears and other emotions that make them susceptible to possession.

 

So yes, I think there is an argument to be made for freedom. Whether it’s convincing enough I don’t know.

 

 

And more to the point, I think it’s perfectly fine to have the companions disagree with you on things…

 

 

Maybe Orsino could be taken by a couple dozen templars, a couple dozen normal citizens with swords would be destroyed. The codex entries indicate that normal millitia and such don't hold up well against abominations and demons. 

 

You can support mage freedom by allying with the mages in the Redcliffe mission. You'll get disapproval- but you get disapproval for conscripting them too. Makes more sense to me that companions would still approve/disapprove even when not present.


  • kyles3 aime ceci