1551 réponses à ce sujet

[Master Warder Z_]

 

He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither.

 

Ha!

 

I got another quote for you.

 

The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood.

[Dean_the_Young]

 

She was insulted by what he said, so she manipulated him into initiating a confrontation wherein something bad would happen to him, and then gave the Inquisitor the option of any punishment, including murder.

 

She could have said no to killing him.

 

Or the Inquisitor could have not indicated they were blood-thirsty, even as Vivienne is making a political ploy for the greater good.

 

Vivienne set him up to be made a fool. 'Bad' might be accurate, but it's not particularly meaningful or relevant. It's the Inquisitor's proof of character that Vivienne responds to- and the Inquisitor is uniquely (as in- there is no alternative) set to save the world.

 

 

 

 

 

 

He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither.

 

 

You know, I've never heard this from anyone who didn't have a remarkable amount of security already.

 

I notice you use the internet. And talk about video games in your spare time. How's the first world comfort zone feeling?

 

 

He who would sacrifice somebody else's freedom for their own security definitely deserves neither.

 

 

 

And I've never heard this from someone who didn't violate it in practice or in acceptance of other people's sacrifices. Possibly because so few english posters post from Somalia or the Sahara.

 

You, uh, do live in a country, correct? Places with things called 'laws'?
 

 

 

I will not waste time talking to anybody who believes otherwise, as you appear to.

 

 

 

Translation: "I want the last word, so let me dismiss you with haughty moral superiority before I flee."

[MisterJB]

People hurt people. Human, Dwarf, Elf, Mage, it makes no difference. Remember the whole Civil War during the Blight thing? Celene's "cleansing" of the Alienage? The Exalted Marches that destroyed the Elves homeland? Twice.

 

Then the Circle is fine because people hurt people.

Or are there different degrees of people hurting people? Restrictive system is bad but world war is cool and mob justice are cool?
 

 

 

 

]Would you make her Divine? :>

 

Of course not, she is a mage.

I won't be setting a precedent.

 

He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither.

 He who would sacrifice somebody else's freedom for their own security definitely deserves neither.

 I will not waste time talking to anybody who believes otherwise, as you appear to.

Well, if you are just looking for someone to parrot your own viewpoint in a different voice, you are in the wrong place. People debate here.

Oh, and we sacrifice everyone's freedom every day so society can exist. That is the whole point of the legal system.

 

[GranfalloonMembr]

How is referencing recent events a low blow if it's accurate? Trauma doesn't negate truth.
 

 

So what you're saying is those mages couldn't be trusted to live a lifetime of not turning into abominations or trying to conquer all of Thedas or whatever? Only some decades, at best?

 

That's, ahem, a very compelling argument for not leaving them free and unrestricted all their lives, considering that after a few good decades they nearly sacked southern Thedas.

 

As to the first part of your post, it would be like if right after 9/11 happened, somebody said "I told you that we needed to be tougher on terrorism and if we had then this would never have happened. But no, you didn't listen."

 

You do not smugly say "I told you so" in the aftermath of a tragedy that has claimed so many lives.

 

As to the second part, if Corypheus hadn't shown up they would have been fine. They have been fine for not just decades, but centuries I think; I haven't compulsively memorized the codex so I don't know exactly when and if anything like that ever happened before. If any one of those mages went crazy, the others would be there to deal with the situation before it got out of control.

[thesuperdarkone2]

There are always only two exceptions to the Circle.
Morrigan and Kieran. They can do whatever they want, I don't care. Don't touch my family.

Do you realize how much of a hypocrite this makes you? It's okay for everyone else to have their children and lovers taken to the circle but not yours?

[Master Warder Z_]

Oh, and we sacrifice everyone's freedom every day so society can exist. That is the whole point of the legal system.

 

Pretty much

[Illyria]

Vivienne is like a resident on a hill wondering why people who live in the valley complain about flooding. After all, she doesn't have any trouble with the rains flooding her house, so why would others complain?

 

That she gets to live on high ground while almost everyone else has to stay below flood level is completely irrelevant. After all, she used to live in the valley, and occasionally gets checked in on by guards who ensure valley folk cannot leave, so she gets to speak as though she is still a resident there. That she doesn't live there anymore is completely irrelevant. That she got to leave because she got more privileges and luxuries to begin with than most valley folk could ever hope for (since most guards would never let them even think of setting foot out of the valley the way they let her) is completely irrelevant.

 

When Vivienne volunteers to go back to living in the Circles she so advocates, to give up all her special privileges and luxuries that most mages don't get (her noble lover's mansion, unsupervised court appearances and lavish parties, involvement in politics and "unofficial" noble status), and to live in the same conditions with the same types of supervision that most Circle mages live with (e.g. forced to live like a prisoner in a tower, completely at the mercy of less-than-noble Templars 24/7), then I'll take her dismissal of mages who complain of abuses and conditions in the Circle seriously.

 

What you wrote reminded me of an early Vivienne line after the Inquisitor asks her what it was like to be forced to live in the Tower and she replies that she has a wing at her lover's house and a suite at the palace 'I have never been forced to live anywhere.'

 

That is my main problem with Vivienne's views (and, it seems, the main problem of a lot of people in this thread).  Not only has she never lived in Kirkwall she's spent the last decade+ living the life of a noble.  She was pretty young when she met her lover - she's barely lived in the Circle.  Oh, she goes back to the Circle but she can leave whenever she likes.  Other mages can't.  And a prison where you're given an education and good meals and even allowed to go out if you ask nicely is still a prison.

 

All right JB, that quote right there? Perfectly illustrates what is wrong with Vivienne.

 

Which is not to say that she's wrong about the possibility of "normal" people responding to the indiscriminate fighting in the Hinterlands with renewed anti-mage sentiment. Like you say, she does make a good point here and there. Even I can admit that, much as I despise the ******.

 

But look at how she phrases it: "[M]y stupid brethren will kill and be killed by frightened people defending their families from monsters."

 

She is placing all the blame--all of it--on the rebelling mages.

 

This whole "fear of mages" thing reminds me of the "fear of mutants" thing that has been a staple of the X-Men comics for decades. And, much like in X-Men, there are people trying to find mutants whose powers are manifesting so that they can help those mutants learn how to control their powers and thus not be a threat to others or to themselves.

 

Here's a difference: Professor Xavier (as much of a jerk as he could be at times) never forced anybody to join any of his teams or to accept his teaching. He didn't need to, for one thing, because every mutant he discovered either voluntarily accepted (Cyclops) or had already learned to use their powers on their own and didn't need his help (Dazzler). The Templars do force everybody into a Circle, whether the individual warrants that restriction or not. Bethany was never a threat to anybody, for example, but they still force her into the Kirkwall Circle.

 

Here's another difference, specific to Vivienne: in the X-books, particularly during Claremont's run, we would see lots of persecution of mutants by ordinary humans. This was usually chalked up to prejudice, i.e. "They saw what Magneto did and they think all mutants are like that, which is stupid, but there you have it. So it's up to us to show them that they're wrong, by being heroes." But with Vivienne, when mages are persecuted, she blames it on the mages. The "stupid" mages. For being uppity, for not working within a system that had always been unfair to them, for daring to fight back in Kirkwall and then everywhere else.

 

I don't agree with the way Anders touched it off, but it's my opinion that the Mage Rebellion needed to happen, because mages weren't getting a fair shake and deserved better. Even in DA2, when you look at the various mages who resort to blood magic or who turn into abominations, what's usually the cause? The mages in question have been given a reason to fear, or to be angry, or to become desperate. There is one mage, during "The Last Straw", who only succumbs to temptation and turns into an abomination when she is surrounded by templars about to hack her to pieces. If mages were treated better, that wouldn't happen. Even Anders only went off the deep end after he spent years trying to make things better for mages without doing anything terrible and wound up nothing to show for it except lots of frustration. If Meredith hadn't been clamping down so hard, Anders never would have had reason--real or imagined--to do what he did. Not even with Justice/Vengeance trying to convince him.

 

I haven't finished the game, and I guess I'll need to do that really fast so that I don't get any more spoiled than I already am. But I'm going to say this: if Solas does something bad before it's all said and done (which I saw a hint of in an earlier post, and I hope I'm wrong about that because I really like Solas), it doesn't change the fact that Solas lived his entire life outside of a Circle, taught himself magic, is usually one of the most calm and restrained people I know, and has spent extremely long periods of time in the Fade without succumbing to possession. So whatever Solas does or doesn't do, up to this point he has been living proof that an apostate can live outside of a Circle without being a danger to others. So is Dorian, for that matter. Dorian, from all I have seen, has perfect control. I cannot imagine any circumstance in which Dorian would turn into an abomination or anything like that.

 

As somebody pointed out earlier, when Vivienne says that mages should be grateful for the power they have, it's really ridiculous. Especially when, in what is the very same conversation if I'm not mistaken, she talks about how most mages' powers manifest when they accidentally set people on fire or something--why the hell should a mage be grateful for that "gift"? Particularly when it results in templars coming to drag them away from their families and everybody they know in chains (literally in chains, in the case of Anders), and when they end up imprisoned for the next several years at least?

 

Continuing the X-Men comparison, there are mutants who--like mages--need to be careful they don't kill somebody by mistake, even after they get a handle on their powers. Rogue immediately comes to mind, and there were some stories back in the day about how Storm needed to avoid getting really angry since her emotional state was reflected by the weather outside. But neither of those characters had "handlers" like the templars, ready to put them down at the first sign of trouble. Nor should they have.

 

A correction: Dorian isn't a apostate. He's been through the Tevinter circle system and even underwent a Harrowing.  His time in the Circle was one with complete freedom, though.

 

I really like your comparision to X-Men.

[Dean_the_Young]

The existence of the Seers in Rivain as a revered tradition more than implies that the Rivaini have been doing this symbiotic possession thing for a long time and they know what they are doing and it apparently works well enough. They're not stupid. 

 

Uh... let's just remember that 'have not wiped themselves out' is not a particularly compelling argument of 'well enough.'

 

The Rivaini witches are a minority rural actor in their own lands. Devs have called them analogous to natural disasters- except in this case the natural disasters are quasi-deliberate.

 

As long as population growth averagers above replacement, anyone will 'know what they are doing' and 'works well enough.' The stone age lasted for how long again?

[ShadowLordXII]

 

 

Perhaps if you accurately reflected her perspective and reasons, rather than straw manned them, you'd find more need.

 

I'm not strawmanning the Iron Lady. I'm just seeing the entire picture and it doesn't make Viv's perspective as valid as she believes.

 

I didn't say that the Dales were guiltless, but the Chantry was pressuring the realm and depriving an entire people of their culture and land was unnecessarily harsh. Not to mention whitewashing Shartan out of the Chant...that's cold and uncalled for.

 

Mages "can" be walking time bombs, but they aren't necessarily a time bomb. We've seen many mages who use their powers responsibly and properly while many of those who went nuts did so due to pressures and abuses thrown on them by the Chantry-created system.

[Master Warder Z_]

Not only has she never lived in Kirkwall .

 

Neither had the majority of the circle.

[Ninna]

It depends on the kind of mage you are, and how you play your cards, but most of mages don't have freedom.
 

The Ferelden circle was supposed to be the most liberal of them and the mages weren't even allowed to go outside after Anders escaped a few (dozen) times. Then again, Finn and Ines could apparently go on long, unsupervised field trips. You'd think they'd spare a templar or two.

But according to World of Thedas 2, the outdoor exercises granted to SOME of the mages in the Ferelden circle happened after Irving pushed for them because he felt sorry for Anders. Which means that before Anders, they were not allowed to go outside (page 162).

When Anders used that opportunity to escape, Irving took the "privilege" back. So it was because of Anders they had the chance to go to the outside in the first place. 

 

[Master Warder Z_]

I didn't say that the Dales were guiltless, but the Chantry was pressuring the realm and depriving an entire people of their culture and land was unnecessarily harsh.

 

Not really, it happens a lot in war.

[GranfalloonMembr]

 

Oh, and we sacrifice everyone's freedom every day so society can exist. That is the whole point of the legal system.

 

The legal system in real life waits for somebody to commit a crime first. Locking people up because they might, perhaps commit a crime doesn't fly.

[Illyria]

Neither had the majority of the circle.

 

Your point?

 

Viv talks about how wonderful the Circle can be but only lived (and barely lived) in two very liberal Circles.

[thesuperdarkone2]

Your point?

Viv talks about how wonderful the Circle can be but only lived (and barely lived) in two very liberal Circles.

I wonder what Vivienne would have been like if she was in kirkwalls circle

[Master Warder Z_]

Your point?

 

That the harshest circle, the rallying cry for the rebellion, well one of them wasn't a universal experience despite many seeming to think it was.

 

So my point since you asked? Simple: The circles were unique experiences all their own depending upon the region, their policies and practices differed immensely. So evidence of Kirkwall being harsh doesn't apply to any non mage of Kirkwall,

[Illyria]

That the harshest circle, the rallying cry for the rebellion, well one of them wasn't a universal experience despite many seeming to think it was.

 

So my point since you asked? Simple: The circles were unique experiences all their own depending upon the region, their policies and practices differed immensely. So evidence of Kirkwall being harsh doesn't apply to any non mage of Kirkwall,

 

And a prison is still a prison no matter how nice it may be.

[Dean_the_Young]

 

As to the first part of your post, it would be like if right after 9/11 happened, somebody said "I told you that we needed to be tougher on terrorism and if we had then this would never have happened. But no, you didn't listen."

 

Actually, it'd be more like 'I told you we needed to take Osama bin Laden seriously. But no, you didn't listen."

 

Which would be completely right. Guy was forshadowing it for years. No one cared. That might have been the right call- or rather, the appropriate risk to assume- but it was an assumed risk.

 

 

 

 

You do not smugly say "I told you so" in the aftermath of a tragedy that has claimed so many lives.

 

 

Sure you do- if you not only rightly said so before hand, but the 'tragedy' was both sensibly predictable and predicted. It's called 'being right.'

 

That's the job of Serious People. We're supposed to be responsible before, and after, crisis by pointing out why they happened. If you refuse to listen or consider facts just because you find it distasteful, then it is entirely the job of people with better perspective to go 'we told you so.'

 

Smugness is not advised- but that's a PR issue. Not a content issue.

 

 

As to the second part, if Corypheus hadn't shown up they would have been fine. They have been fine for not just decades, but centuries I think; I haven't compulsively memorized the codex so I don't know exactly when and if anything like that ever happened before. If any one of those mages went crazy, the others would be there to deal with the situation before it got out of control.

 

 

Breaking news- things go fine until things go unexpectedly go wrong. More at eleven.

 

The point of a system isn't to function when things are going right without challengers or issue: it's to function when things go wrong and in unexpected ways. Sometimes that doesn't work- sometimes a system works against itself- but the worst argument that can be made for a system is 'well, it'd be just fine if no one messed with it.'
 

[Master Warder Z_]

And a prison is still a prison no matter how nice it may be.

 

 

I'm sure, well since I've given my position there isn't any need for continuance.

[Deztyn]

I'm going to respond to other things when I have more time(maybe).

But first!

As to the first part of your post, it would be like if right after 9/11 happened, somebody said "I told you that we needed to be tougher on terrorism and if we had then this would never have happened. But no, you didn't listen."

You do not smugly say "I told you so" in the aftermath of a tragedy that has claimed so many lives.

LOLOLOL!

Clearly someone is too young to remember what the US was like immediately post 9/11.

[MisterJB]

Do you realize how much of a hypocrite this makes you? It's okay for everyone else to have their children and lovers taken to the circle but not yours?

 

Yes.

 

[Dean_the_Young]

I'm not strawmanning the Iron Lady. I'm just seeing the entire picture and it doesn't make Viv's perspective as valid as she believes.

 

You place opinions for Vivienne that she does not have and present them as her own. That is a strawman fallacy.

 

 

I didn't say that the Dales were guiltless, but the Chantry was pressuring the realm and depriving an entire people of their culture and land was unnecessarily harsh. Not to mention whitewashing Shartan out of the Chant...that's cold and uncalled for.

 

 

Of course it was called for- the elven nation movement that Shartan was identified with just lost a major decade-long war. Shartan would have been an obvious symbol for rallying and resistance, all the more subversive because it could have clung to the legitimacy of the occupational authority to work against the authority.

 

It might not have been justified, or ethical, but there was definitely reason to call for it.

 

As for 'pressuring the realm'- unless you mean pressuring the kingdoms to take in alienage elves who surrendered, the only pressuring the Chantry forced upon the Dales was attempting to protect missionaries. The Chantry helped Orlais smash the Dales because the Dales launched an unprovoked invasion of such a massive scale that the capital of Andrastianism was briefly sacked.

 

 

 

Mages "can" be walking time bombs, but they aren't necessarily a time bomb. We've seen many mages who use their powers responsibly and properly while many of those who went nuts did so due to pressures and abuses thrown on them by the Chantry-created system.

 

 

The questionable adjective is 'time', not 'bomb.' All mages are potential WMD-scale events in the making- and their triggers do not even need to be predictable, or even deliberate. No one approaches WMDs from a perspective of 'well, look how many don't go off accidentally.'

 

 

The key point of all abominations is something that exists independent of the Chantry- 'stress.' The Chantry system influence the most relevant types, but it does not imply that stress would not exist without it. It's like saying removing paint would remove a wall.

 

Practically every abomination incident we've had could happen in similar contexts without any circle system at all: sick relatives, marital issues, power plays, and self-interest. Saying that, say, Connor wouldn't have become an abomination in DAO if there was no stigma and his mother hadn't hidden him from training misses a point. Isolde's actions were a requirement for Connor's specific context... but they weren't the reason for Connor's own action. Connor didn't massacre a town because he thought 'eh, damn Chantry'- he massacred a town because a nice lady came in his dream and offered to help a sick father.

 

Fathers get sick all the time- and the Chantry-created system isn't to blame for what that can do when mages are involved.

[MisterJB]

 

The legal system in real life waits for somebody to commit a crime first. Locking people up because they might, perhaps commit a crime doesn't fly.

 

No, it doesn't. Our freedoms are limited everyday because we might commit a crime and this happens from the moment we are born.

There are ways to limit someone's freedom beyond incarceration. You just don't notice it because you grew assuming that what we in the modern West have is ultimate freedom.
 

[Dean_the_Young]

 

The legal system in real life waits for somebody to commit a crime first. Locking people up because they might, perhaps commit a crime doesn't fly.

 

*Cough*Quarantine*Cough*

[Master Warder Z_]

*Cough*Quarantine*Cough*

The Interment of Japanese, Italian and German Americans without due process clearly in violation of the 6th Amendment comes to mind or if you want more modern?

The NSA's little spying program from a few years back