That was the boon she promised to the Warden, she doesnt try it if no one ask.Anora can try to free the Circle even in Origins. She always did the same thing as Alistair.
Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither! GOD, do I have to spell out everything for you stupid Templars? Freaking idiots....
- Benjamin Franklin
I believe the actual quote about freedom and security goes more along the lines of 'those who sacrifice essential liberty for temporary security neither deserve nor shall they receive either.' Probably not an exact quote but more in the vein of what Franklin would have said.
In every DA game I have been pro-mage and in my first DA:I playthrough I sided with the mages. I loved Wynne in DA:O so the fact that Vivienne was pro-circle did not automatically turn me off and I looked forward to hearing her views and in general interactions. When I first realised that she would truly be an amazing character was during a live stream when I heard her view on the mage rebellion. When asked "How did we get to this state?" she replies
"You my dear are far too wise not to have realised that many of our colleagues live with their eyes closed. Safe from the world inside their towers they thought only of the templars and their own resentment. Kirkwall gave the world a reason to remember it's fear of magic. A mage killed hundreds with a snap of their fingers. Across Thedas a new tangible fear of magic grew. Commoners and nobles alike called out to the Chantry for protection, but the malcontents in the towers thought nothing of this. They cared only for themselves and for their anger at the new templar restrictions. When a mage attempted to assassinate divine Justinia again the mages protested the investigation. The leadership choose to vote on independence based on the intolerable conditions imposed by the templars, sparing no thought to the fact that magic was more feared in the aftermath of these attacks than it had been since Tevinter's day. So long as they had their freedom, they could care little for riots, angry mobs or about putting mage against each other."
Then when asked "Did the mages have a cause to rebel?"
"In the aftermath of their terrorist attacks? Was that really the most opportune time to break away? By all means protest abuses by the templars, just don't do it in a way that says mages support wholesale murder. By voting when they did my colleagues all but declared war on the ordinary people of Thedas. A war in which we are outnumbered a hundred to one."
Hearing her point of view and learning about her experiences for the first time allowed me to realise that Kirkwall was not the rule but an extreme exception. Every circle was extremely different. As I have recently discovered having created a human mage inquisitor, the Ostwick Circle also had similar freedoms to the Montsimmard Circle, and who knows how many other Circles near Orlais had similar freedoms. When the entire situation is considered the mages' plight was bad, but in the face of the state of Thedas concerning the Elves, Qunari, Blight and general state of the world some of the circles were not the most horrible things out there. The mage rebellion caused far more problems than it could solve. Vivienne lost a lot and not only with regards to politics and status. She lost her friend Lydia from the Ostwick Circle and also through a conversation with Cole another friend perhaps? It also gives insight into her humanity and love to her fellow mages. Not to mention she still refers to them as colleagues and does not totally distance herself from them
Cole: Sour smell in the tower library. Rotten meat and ashes. Too quiet without the apprentices. Something crunches underfoot. Burned finger bones glitter in the ash like pearls. Ice in my veins. The archivist... what was her name?Vivienne: Get. Out.Cole: Why did they kill her? She was just like them!Vivienne: They helped her. Just like you did. Anyone who wouldn't fight for freedom was freed by fire and lightning. Stay out of my thoughts demon. My memories are my own.
Because of this an many other examples I think that Vivienne is not sugar coating her experiences but has realised that she and mages are not the greatest victims in the history of the world.
That an existing evil is not the greatest in existence doesn't nullify it, nor does it nullify the need to do something against it. Also, you do what can be done. I'd like to end slavery in Tevinter, but I don't get the opportunity to affect that problem. I do, however, get the opportuntity to affect the oppression of the mageborn.
In typical hyperbole, Vivienne says the rebel mages started a war against the non-mage population of Thedas. They didn't. They started a war against those who would keep them imprisoned, and if there was a dismissive attitude towards the plight of others here and there, can you blame them? Weren't they comfortable with the situation for hundreds of years?
That an existing evil is not the greatest in existence doesn't nullify it, nor does it nullify the need to do something against it. Also, you do what can be done.
That an existing evil is not the greatest in existence doesn't nullify it, nor does it nullify the need to do something against it.
Assuming the Circle was even an evil, what if removing this "evil" inflicts further harm on people who already live in worse conditions than the mages do?
Is it then justified?
In typical hyperbole, Vivienne says the rebel mages started a war against the non-mage population of Thedas. They didn't. They started a war against those who would keep them imprisoned, and if there was a dismissive attitude towards the plight of others here and there, can you blame them? Weren't they comfortable with the situation for hundreds of years?
Tevinter, Andraste, the Circle, the Templars, the rebellion, all of it are manifestations of the same tribal conflict that has always existed and always will exist so long as normal and mages share a living space.
We can and should discuss the details of it. How much security is needed, who should provide it, etc. But we must also acknowledge that, at the core, this is an attempt by mages to impose their will upon normals.
Vivienne is right. This was a declaration of war by mages against those without magic.
And yes, we most certainly can blame them. If they had started this war on the basis that non-mages are inferion creatures and mages have the right to do whatever they wish then, at least, we could not have expected anything else.
However, if you claim that mages can police each other without the need for Templars, and then when mages begin burning people for giggles, the central mage authority washes their hands off it, then we can use it as evidence against their arguments.
Furthermore, we can also accuse mages of being ignorant of the realities of Thedas and romanticizing the notion of freedom without realizing that, to most people, to be free means the freedom of poverty, the freedom of banditry, the freedom to lose and be used by others.
Assuming the Circle was even an evil, what if removing this "evil" inflicts further harm on people who already live in worse conditions than the mages do?
Is it then justified?
The problem is that the "inflicts" depends on the possible actions of any individual mage that might or might not take place while the circles are an evil that definitely took/is taking place.
That an existing evil is not the greatest in existence doesn't nullify it, nor does it nullify the need to do something against it. Also, you do what can be done. I'd like to end slavery in Tevinter, but I don't get the opportunity to affect that problem. I do, however, get the opportuntity to affect the oppression of the mageborn.
In typical hyperbole, Vivienne says the rebel mages started a war against the non-mage population of Thedas. They didn't. They started a war against those who would keep them imprisoned, and if there was a dismissive attitude towards the plight of others here and there, can you blame them? Weren't they comfortable with the situation for hundreds of years?
I never said it was nullified nor did I say it should be ignored. It's not what you do but how you do it and HOW the mages went about it was wrong. It caused far more problems than solutions. Look at how many mages died as a direct result of the action of Anders and the conclave decision. Mages are dangerous that is fact not opinion.
Typical hyperbole? Anders basically spurred the war and as a result tensions grew high. Mages also tried to assassinate the divine who was on their side. (Well they did not know that outright) The divine that was actively trying to improve conditions. Yes regrettably because of the attitude that most persons had toward magic and mages they were ill-treated but based on what we knew about Justinia they were trying to make things better. Vivienne time and time again acknowledges the plight of mages however she does not have a victim complex. Because of her experience she was able to see more of the world and realised that Kirkwall was not the norm but an exception. Mages being free was not going to change how the population reacted to them and it would have escalated to violence. Sera speaking to Dorian says:
Dorian: The way you talk about magic, you've never been on good terms with a mage?
Sera: The Inquisitor a couple others. They were a bit weird but all right. I knew a funny boy in Denerim; started fires with his eyes. Templars nabbed him right quick so he's better now I guess.
Dorian: Better?! Do you know what your Southern circles are like?
Sera: Meals and training? So he won't starve or get stomped by a mob? I've seen both
Dorian: *sighs* You're sadly right.
These things take time, and if they were to or expect society to change in one fell swoop it would have produced more chaos. Speaking with either Leliana or Cassandra reveals that if the other clerics knew what divine Justinia had planned they would have never selected her. She was a remarkable and progressive leader that was working toward the improvement of mage conditions.
Elves have it worse. The average population has hardships but mages sheltered in their circles believe that they are the greatest victims in the history of Thedas.
One thing I love about Bioware is how they approached the mage situation and more specifically the treatment in the circles. Over the other games and books they focused on the horrible circles and basically pushed us to believe every circle in Thedas was the same and that mages were victims everywhere. It was one sided for a while so to speak. But then in DA:I they throw us a curve ball. Montsimmard and Ostwick represented a new reality. Mages had permission to leave the circle at leisure [with permission]. A human mage Inquisitor was free to spend holidays with his/her family. And other circles probably had similar arrangements. Not to mention within problematic circles you could find Templars such as Cullen and Evangeline, persons from both sides realised the problems but were not sure exactly how to change them.
Vivienne mentioned that she received insults from Templars no more than she did from nobles and merchants in Val Royeux. Life was not perfect, but Thedas is a pretty shitty place. There is racism against Elves, Qunari, Dwarves, peasants. Mages however provide a very serious threat to the safety of all mage and non-mage alike. Just look at what one abomination [Connor] was able to do. I agree that conditions needed to be better however I believe there is a place for a circle or a similar organisation where mages can be taught, supported and protected. It's why I think for mages Vivienne is one of the best choices as divine. The Templars are controlled, mages have more freedom and they have a greater say in their own affairs. I think mages in the Chantry is an excellent idea.
The problem is that the "inflicts" depends on the possible actions of any individual mage that might or might not take place while the circles are an evil that definitely took/is taking place.
Increased number of mages amongst the population will inevitably lead to increased harm inflicted by magic even if the number of incidents remains the same as they are today due to the proximity to innocent people.
That is a fact and there is no way to avoid it.
Assuming the Circle was even an evil, what if removing this "evil" inflicts further harm on people who already live in worse conditions than the mages do?
Is it then justified?
Tevinter, Andraste, the Circle, the Templars, the rebellion, all of it are manifestations of the same tribal conflict that has always existed and always will exist so long as normal and mages share a living space.
We can and should discuss the details of it. How much security is needed, who should provide it, etc. But we must also acknowledge that, at the core, this is an attempt by mages to impose their will upon normals.
Vivienne is right. This was a declaration of war by mages against those without magic.
And yes, we most certainly can blame them. If they had started this war on the basis that non-mages are inferion creatures and mages have the right to do whatever they wish then, at least, we could not have expected anything else.
However, if you claim that mages can police each other without the need for Templars, and then when mages begin burning people for giggles, the central mage authority washes their hands off it, then we can use it as evidence against their arguments.
Furthermore, we can also accuse mages of being ignorant of the realities of Thedas and romanticizing the notion of freedom without realizing that, to most people, to be free means the freedom of poverty, the freedom of banditry, the freedom to lose and be used by others.
Since when did the mages declared the non-mages inferior? And maybe you should wait to see if free mages actually go around burning people before jumping to that assumption. Good lord, you are one paranoid guy JB.
A trait I gained after many years of watching people.Since when did the mages declared the non-mages inferior? And maybe you should wait to see if free mages actually go around burning people before jumping to that assumption. Good lord, you are one paranoid guy JB.
That an existing evil is not the greatest in existence doesn't nullify it, nor does it nullify the need to do something against it. Also, you do what can be done. I'd like to end slavery in Tevinter, but I don't get the opportunity to affect that problem. I do, however, get the opportuntity to affect the oppression of the mageborn.
In typical hyperbole, Vivienne says the rebel mages started a war against the non-mage population of Thedas. They didn't. They started a war against those who would keep them imprisoned, and if there was a dismissive attitude towards the plight of others here and there, can you blame them? Weren't they comfortable with the situation for hundreds of years?
And VIvienne has no problem with that, as such.
I don't think that's what Vivienne said the rebels started a war against Thedas' non-mages. . She said the rebels war validates the non-mages fear of magic. Vivienne is very much a political animal, and is big on PR, spin, and above all subtlty. She knows that a violent rebellion of the Circles at this stage (after the destruction of the Kirkwall Chantry by an abomination and the assassination attempt on Divine Justinia by a blood mage) would only set back people's view on mages and magic. Vivienne understands that it's hearts and minds that need to be changed, and that won't happen while mages and Templars are warring on one another.
Increased number of mages amongst the population will inevitably lead to increased harm inflicted by magic even if the number of incidents remains the same as they are today due to the proximity to innocent people.
That is a fact and there is no way to avoid it.
A)Prove it. B)Misery brought by lawless individuals and misery brought by the law system carries different weight.
One thing I love about Bioware is how they approached the mage situation and more specifically the treatment in the circles. Over the other games and books they focused on the horrible circles and basically pushed us to believe every circle in Thedas was the same and that mages were victims everywhere. It was one sided for a while so to speak. But then in DA:I they throw us a curve ball. Montsimmard and Ostwick represented a new reality. Mages had permission to leave the circle at leisure [with permission]. A human mage Inquisitor was free to spend holidays with his/her family. And other circles probably had similar arrangements. Not to mention within problematic circles you could find Templars such as Cullen and Evangeline, persons from both sides realised the problems but were not sure exactly how to change them.
It should be noted that the Circle in Ferelden wasn't as bad as all that either. (At least in game, after Gregoir had aged a bit from the comics.) Gregoir didn't let Anders run free, but Wynne asked Irving and Irving was free to say yes without asking Gregoir. Not to mention that he allowed Ines to wander without even an escort as she did her thing. Everyone talks about how the Templars are scary and seem less than human due to those admittedly creepy faceless helmets, but when you ask to walk through the main door out of the Tower the faceless mook guarding the door cracks jokes about it rather than sealing your power and socking you in the face. Not to mention the teachers trying to raise the apprentices' self-esteem and the fact that Gregoir defers on certain decisions if Irving doesn't agree with his choice. That's about as nice as the Circles can safely be.
It should be noted that the Circle in Ferelden wasn't as bad as all that either. (At least in game, after Gregoir had aged a bit from the comics.) Gregoir didn't let Anders run free, but Wynne asked Irving and Irving was free to say yes without asking Gregoir. Not to mention that he allowed Ines to wander without even an escort as he did her thing. Everyone talks about how the Templars are scary and seem less than human due to those admittedly creepy faceless helmets, but when you ask to walk through the main door out of the Tower the faceless mook guarding the door cracks jokes about it rather than sealing your power and socking you in the face. Not to mention the teachers trying to raise the apprentices' self-esteem and the fact that Gregoir defers on certain decisions if Irving doesn't agree with his choice. That's about as nice as nice as the Circles can safely be.
Ferelden revolted following Uldred. "Not that bad" wouldn't have pushed mages to summon demons out of desperation. Wynne likes to pretend the Circle is perfect but the only mage I've seen her help is Aneirin who became an apostate. Even Finn doesn't want to return, and he's a blood magic practicing apostate. They try to twist their lack of control to enforce uniform rules by calling it "leniency".
And VIvienne has no problem with that, as such.
I don't think that's what Vivienne said the rebels started a war against Thedas' non-mages. . She said the rebels war validates the non-mages fear of magic. Vivienne is very much a political animal, and is big on PR, spin, and above all subtlty. She knows that a violent rebellion of the Circles at this stage (after the destruction of the Kirkwall Chantry by an abomination and the assassination attempt on Divine Justinia by a blood mage) would only set back people's view on mages and magic. Vivienne understands that it's hearts and minds that need to be changed, and that won't happen while mages and Templars are warring on one another.
And the Chantry's unability to hold templar abuses accountable or the abuse of the Rite of Tranquilities and Annulments validates the mages' fears that mages will always be persecuted by non-mages unwilling to see them as anything but a monster to be controlled. What' s the point of trying diplomacy when they'll always view you as a threat? Even Vivienne tying to garner favor through the game knows that she won't always get the winning hand, any Bard knows the Game eventually targets them as well. So it's a short sighted solution. The only way to protect yourself and those persecuted is gaining power over your oppressors.
Ferelden revolted following Uldred. "Not that bad" wouldn't have pushed mages to summon demons out of desperation.
You wouldn't think so, but that is to all appearances what happened.
Wynne likes to pretend the Circle is perfect but the only mage I've seen her help is Aneirin who became an apostate.
I'm not talking about Wynne, for just that reason. I'm talking about the apprentice we watch struggle through a fire spell, and the kids who we watch being given a combination social-responsibility-lesson and pep-talk, and the teachers who run those lessons.
They try to twist their lack of control to enforce uniform rules by calling it "leniency".
What we perceive as the Templars being lenient is to some degree because they're actually lenient rather than because they lack control. If we watch Gregoir defer to Irving on several matters, we also watch Irving sadly wash his hands of a favored pupil if that favored pupil legitimately attempts to help Jowan escape. Gregoir restrains himself if Irving already told him of the plot and the PC's responsible ratting-out of his friend, but without that mitigating factor Irving just sits sadly on the sidelines and watches as Gregoir's bad-cop side goes off its leash.
You wouldn't think so, but that is to all appearances what happened.
I'm not talking about Wynne, for just that reason. I'm talking about the apprentice we watch struggle through a fire spell, and the kids who we watch being given a combination social-responsibility-lesson and pep-talk, and the teachers who run those lessons.
Kidnapping mages and incarcerating them in a gilded alkatraz like some religious elitist buffalo bill crazy. That apprentice you speak of can control his magic and have his freedom like Feynriel but people willfully ignore it to keep him in chains. Your "pep talks" are nothing but indoctination to convince the average mage that their persecution is normal and good. It's institutionalized abuse.
Kidnapping mages and incarcerating them in a gilded alkatraz like some religious elitist buffalo bill crazy. That apprentice you speak of can control his magic and have his freedom like Feynriel but people willfully ignore it to keep him in chains. Your "pep talks" are nothing but indoctination to convince the average mage that their persecution is normal and good. It's institutionalized abuse.
As I recall, the apprentice I speak of causes an explosion and lights himself on fire. Do I even need to explain why I think practice that can result in that should take place in a stone tower far from anyone who can't either block magic from hitting them or use magic to put out fires and knit together their own damaged flesh should any of that become necessary?
I agree that mages who have some reason to go outside the Tower and who can be trusted can be allowed to go on field trips. Why not? Wynne and Ines are allowed out into Amaranthine, and while I have some World States where the city wound up a smoking ruin shortly afterwards that's not either of their fault. I'd still rather they returned to the Circle after their business concluded, and maybe had Templars with them both as armed bodyguards and as an insurance policy to prevent the mage doing something they shouldn't. (Finn and Adrian are both examples of why, with Adrian being a particularly good example as she is an example of both peasant agitators and an irresponsible mage. Finn is a lesser example since I'm not sure to what extent he's the kind of mage that we absolutely can't have walking the streets.)
And your assessment of the pep talks misses one important thing that makes the Circle better than Alcatraz: morale. The kids are being taught that they have dignity and can help people, but need to control their powers. While this isn't our major difference of opinion or even directly related to it, I still think a lot of your arguments about mages in the Circle not having dignity have missed the fact that at least in the Ferelden Circle, mages aren't necessarily taught that they're monsters.
And the Chantry's unability to hold templar abuses accountable or the abuse of the Rite of Tranquilities and Annulments validates the mages' fears that mages will always be persecuted by non-mages unwilling to see them as anything but a monster to be controlled. What' s the point of trying diplomacy when they'll always view you as a threat? Even Vivienne tying to garner favor through the game knows that she won't always get the winning hand, any Bard knows the Game eventually targets them as well. So it's a short sighted solution. The only way to protect yourself and those persecuted is gaining power over your oppressors.
Dangerous line of reasoning. If mages will always be persecuted by non-mages, and the only way to protect yourself is to gain power over your "oppressors", you're halway to Tevinter right there.
At any rate, the Divine was interested in reforming the Circles. If Fiona hadn't hijacked the Conclave, and Adrien framed Rhys for murder, such peaceful reform may well have taken place.
Heck the whole Divine Conclave at the Temple of Sacred Ashes was an attempt to peacefully bring the conflict to an end.
Dangerous line of reasoning. If mages will always be persecuted by non-mages, and the only way to protect yourself is to gain power over your "oppressors", you're halway to Tevinter right there.
At any rate, the Divine was interested in reforming the Circles. If Fiona hadn't hijacked the Conclave, and Adrien framed Rhys for murder, such peaceful reform may well have taken place.
Heck the whole Divine Conclave at the Temple of Sacred Ashes was an attempt to peacefully bring the conflict to an end.
You assume I consider Tevinter worse than southern thedas.
The Divine trying to reform the Circles but is she actually succeeding with her Seekers ordering templars to murder her agents right under her nose? And in the end, her templars revolted against her. Kirkwall's Circle being annuled is the truth of what happens when the mages puts too much faith in those too little invested in their well being despite their good intentions. Fiona didn't do anything illegal, as Grand Enchanter it is her right to call to assembly and discuss with the College anything worth addressing. It wasn't illegal because the Chantry nor the Templars dictate what is worth addressing. If the templars actually did their jobs and investigated instead of immediatley punishing Rhys, justice would have been done but they didn't- even more evidence Templars are ill fit to judge mages.
The Divine Conclave would have only gone on more favorable terms for the mages had they revolted. Had they fell on their knees and submitted, their calls to assembly and pleas for reform fell on deaf ears. This is exactly what happened at the White Spire. They would be attacked and ignored. You know as well as I do that all your peaceful protests are just a means for the Templars and the Chantry to identify dissidents and malcontents and silence them with little trouble in their oppressive system. It's idiotic to put so much faith in those who willfully are determined to persecute you.
A trait I gained after many years of watching people.
And you both misread my post and seem unaware of events in the game.
First, Ieldra said that one couldn't blame the mages for dismissing the sufferings of others. I argued that we couldn't had their rebellion been founded on the ideals of mage supremacy which it was not. Rather, their arguments were that mages could be trusted in which case, dismissing the suffering of others is not acceptable because it defeats their own argument.
Second, did you miss the mage supremacists burning people in the Hinterlands? Did you also miss the Inquisition captain saying how the mage leadership had washed their hands off it?
Third, if you really think mages see people without magic as equals...well, I have bad news for you.
Apathy doesn't translate to supremacy however. People see mages not caring about the suffering of others as an problem, and yet we had an whole millenium of mages suffering and dying in their circles or in the open and the mundanes couldn't care less about it. So if that's the case, we just switch to mundane supremacy over the mages, wich is bad too.
Diss you miss the templars killing innocent civilians just because they assumed they were mages/mage sympathizers in the Hinterlands? And how about Ser Barris who didn't do squat about them? Ah, but of course, it's only bad when the mages do it, yeah?
I never said equal. Of course they are different, but being different doesn't equate to better or worse.
As I recall, the apprentice I speak of causes an explosion and lights himself on fire. Do I even need to explain why I think practice that can result in that should take place in a stone tower far from anyone who can't either block magic from hitting them or use magic to put out fires and knit together their own damaged flesh should any of that become necessary?
Apprentices can be taught to control their magic in a free setting with experienced teachers with out throwing them in a nice jail cell for the rest of their lives. This is an obvious truth Pro-Circle people don't want to aknowledge. The Circle is a big prison that non-mages throw mages into so they can forget about them but as First Enchanter Edmonde says, "You cannot squeeze people into a smaller and smaller box and hope they will disappear"
I agree that mages who have some reason to go outside the Tower and who can be trusted can be allowed to go on field trips. Why not? Wynne and Ines are allowed out into Amaranthine, and while I have some World States where the city wound up a smoking ruin shortly afterwards that's not either of their fault. I'd still rather they returned to the Circle after their business concluded, and maybe had Templars with them both as armed bodyguards and as an insurance policy to prevent the mage doing something they shouldn't. (Finn and Adrian are both examples of why, with Adrian being a particularly good example as she is an example of both peasant agitators and an irresponsible mage. Finn is a lesser example since I'm not sure to what extent he's the kind of mage that we absolutely can't have walking the streets.)
And your assessment of the pep talks misses one important thing that makes the Circle better than Alcatraz: morale. The kids are being taught that they have dignity and can help people, but need to control their powers. While this isn't our major difference of opinion or even directly related to it, I still think a lot of your arguments about mages in the Circle not having dignity have missed the fact that at least in the Ferelden Circle, mages aren't necessarily taught that they're monsters.
Ferelden produces mages like Connor and Keili. If those PTSD nutbags are the product of your "pep-talks" than you are willfully ignorant on the adverse effects of them rather than see the truth of it.
Ferelden produces mages like Connor and Keili. If those PTSD nutbags are the product of your "pep-talks" than you are willfully ignorant on the adverse effects of them rather than see the truth of it.
It's true. Ferelden produces children who care about their fathers and want to do anything they can to help.
What a horrible, horrible thing to produce.
It also produces trouble men and women, uncertain of their place or worth in the world.
Hold up.
EVERYWHERE produces those types of people.
A)Prove it.
All demographics have criminal individuals. There will always be mages who use their magic to hurt, either through their own volition or when possessed.
If you expose a greater number of people to a greater number of mages while reducing the reaction speed of the Templars due to them not being just down the hallway, logically the number of deaths caused by magic will increase.
B)Misery brought by lawless individuals and misery brought by the law system carries different weight.
Yes, the latter actually has a good reason to be.
Retour en haut
