1551 réponses à ce sujet

[Master Warder Z_]

German (and Japanese) sabateurs were not a major threat.You are making an argument based on the equivalence of mundanes and magic-

Retroactive agrugment isn't it though?

Yoshikawa sort of proved that ages ago neh?

[MisterJB]

Yes, you will be.

Really? Two Apostates who are always free regardless of the player's decisions and most people aren't even aware they exist is the same as placing a mage on the Sunburst throne?

[thesuperdarkone2]

 

Really? Two Apostates who are always free regardless of the player's decisions and most people aren't even aware they exist is the same as placing a mage on the Sunburst throne?

 

It's more that it's hard to take anything you say seriously now since you just admitted that you are a hypocrite in supporting other people having their children and lovers taken away to circles and never seeing them again while you don't want them to take away your mage lover and child away to a circle.

[Boost32]

Everyone is a hypocrite, specially when it involves people you care about.

[The Baconer]

Really? Two Apostates who are always free regardless of the player's decisions and most people aren't even aware they exist is the same as placing a mage on the Sunburst throne?

 

You wouldn't be setting that kind of example, but a different one. The same kind that Redcliffe would come to regret.

[Deztyn]

I know - I know - scaremongering amongst an mostly ignorant and probably illiterate population, in a country which doesn't have much of a tradition of academic research outside of certain schools of magic, means this is unlikely. I'm just annoyed we never see any mages attempt to limit risk, of all things. Danger is a fact of life but if risk can be limited to much more reasonable levels (say, abominations are about as common as public shootings) it would be harder for the likes of Meredith to see the necessity to restrain them.

Possession can be reversed, as we saw with Connor, but that is not possible in all cases. And even in some cases where it theoretically could still be done, they would still have to contain the abomination for long enough to prepare the ritual to send another mage into the fade, it's not guaranteed to work even then and opens up someone else for possession. Basically, it's too much of a risk.

The problem with researching demons and possession is that it usually results in the researchers becoming possessed themselves. We've seen references to this in multiple codex entries.

The author of the demon codex entries from Origins ended up seduced by a desire demon.

The Tevinters who attempted to map the fade ended up possessed.

Wilhem died while his research was going on and potentially left his family to be possessed.

Pharamond's attempts to reverse tranquility ended with the slaughter of everyone at Adamant.

Etc.

Given how much of an evil demons are made out to be, I struggle to see how so many mages are completely unaffected, undettered, and not even slighty worried by the ruling ideology which is absolutely everywhere (unless circles quietly have their own alternative views on such things - evidence of that would be nice, though).

When discussing what happened in Redcliffe, Connor's mage friend basically shrugs and says "it could have been any of us, don't worry about it." Much to Connor's horror.

I want to see mages who want to try normal things like learning how to cook or trying to barter but failing to understand the ettiquette or attempting to aspire for something beyond what has defined them so far: magic. I want to see mages who are driven by more than fear and have spent those long years locked up thinking about the politics of their situation and the parameters of debate that are used and whether those are flexible.

I want smart mages. And no, that doesn't mean more libraries.

I really wish we'd had the opportunity to see more of the fraternities. The Lucrosians sound a little bit like what you're looking for: Mages concerned with trade, acquiring wealth and political influence to better their lives and the Circles.

Of course there was. The Nintendo 64 came out.

Pfft.

Original Playstation.

Did the N64 have Final Fantasy?

No. No, it did not.

[MisterJB]

It's more that it's hard to take anything you say seriously now since you just admitted that you are a hypocrite in supporting other people having their children and lovers taken away to circles and never seeing them again while you don't want them to take away your mage lover and child away to a circle.

How could you accuse me of something so inhuman. I have always defended the Circles should allow visits.

Still not taking Morrigan and Kieran away from me. Even if I trusted the Templars with them, which I don't.

 

You wouldn't be setting that kind of example, but a different one. The same kind that Redcliffe would come to regret.

Pff, at age 10 Kieran, with nothing but an Eluvian, walked in the Fade with his physical body. It took the seven most powerful Magisters of the time, a mountain of lyrium and an army of slaves for Tevinter to accomplish that.

If Kieran became an Abomination, I'd expect him to destroy half the world.

Not that a kid who shares a body with an Old God is about to be possessed by some punk ass demon.

[prosthetic soul]

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

 

[Master Warder Z_]

It took the seven most powerful Magisters of the time, a mountain of lyrium and an army of slaves for Tevinter to accomplish that

And a mystical blood magic artifact

[The Baconer]

Pff, at age 10 Kieran, with nothing but an Eluvian, walked in the Fade with his physical body. It took the seven most powerful Magisters of the time, a mountain of lyrium and an army of slaves for Tevinter to accomplish that.

If Kieran became an Abomination, I'd expect him to destroy half the world.

 

Clearly, your stance has the general welfare of Thedas at heart, as long the policies stop short at "me and mine" of course.

 

You are essentially operating on the same logic as Isolde, only you'd risk so much more.

[Master Warder Z_]

Clearly, your stance has the general welfare of Thedas at heart, as long the policies stop short at "me and mine" of course.

You are essentially operating on the same logic as Isolde, only you'd risk so much more.

A good sword would likely help.

[thesuperdarkone2]

Clearly, your stance has the general welfare of Thedas at heart, as long the policies stop short at "me and mine" of course.

 

You are essentially operating on the same logic as Isolde, only you'd risk so much more.

I'm starting to wonder how many pro-circle supporters actually think that way. Oppressing people is okay so long as me and everyone I care about aren't affected. I wonder how many would still support the circles if they were one of the affected.

 

Thankfully, Leliana disbanded the circles and the templars are gone so Morrigan and Kieran are safe in my world.

[MisterJB]

Clearly, your stance has the general welfare of Thedas at heart, as long the policies stop short at "me and mine" of course.

 

You are essentially operating on the same logic as Isolde, only you'd risk so much more.

 

True.

Still, if you really wish to speak seriously, Morrigan is not Jowan. Kieran has been well trained. His nature even raises questions such as whether his connection to the Fade is the same as every other mage's and if he even can be possessed.

Plus, his nature and the nature of Morrigan's knowledge and upbringing would probably mean an instant Rite of Tranquility upon entry.
 

[The Baconer]

True.

Still, if you really wish to speak seriously, (...)

 

If you wish to operate within the absolute concepts of "all mages are dangerous" and "any mage can become an abomination", your justifications don't matter.

[MisterJB]

If you wish to operate within the absolute concepts of "all mages are dangerous" and "any mage can become an abomination", your justifications don't matter.

 

Obviously, we can't use such absolute concepts for Kieran is a very particular case. If Justice kept Anders safe from further possession, Urthemiel should be infinitely more effective.

Furthermore, I have never claimed individual mages of proven character and skill could not be granted greater freedoms, Wynne for instance. My issues were always with granting absolute freedom and equal rights to mages as a whole.
 

[The Baconer]

Obviously, we can't use such absolute concepts for Kieran is a very particular case.

 

Why would we not? Does his particular case render him not as potentially dangerous as a regular mage?

 

 

If Justice kept Anders safe from further possession, Urthemiel should be infinitely more effective.

 

Yes... Justice kept Anders safe from possession by the quality of being an already present entity capable of possession.

 

I find it curious that you would so fervently support a system whose function is justified by a utilitarian ideal, yet when it is your turn to make the most basic compromise mandated by said system, your willingness to participate immediately disintegrates. The biggest red flag was probably "[...] Even if I trusted the Templars with them, which I don't", which implies that you are aware of a possible deficiency in the Circle system's operation, yet you cannot be bothered to take issue as long as it exists in a way you can afford to ignore.

[diaspora2k5]

Why would we not? Does his particular case render him not as potentially dangerous as a regular mage?

 

 

 

Yes... Justice kept Anders safe from possession by the quality of being an already present entity capable of possession.

 

I find it curious that you would so fervently support a system whose function is justified by a utilitarian ideal, yet when it is your turn to make the most basic compromise mandated by said system, your willingness to participate immediately disintegrates. The biggest red flag was probably "[...] Even if I trusted the Templars with them, which I don't", which implies that you are aware of a possible deficiency in the Circle system's operation, yet you cannot be bothered to take issue as long as it exists in a way you can afford to ignore.

Yeah, based off of what we learn about spirits of wisdom being easily twisted by people into pride demons, and the like it wouldn't surprise me if Anders/Justice was never really Anders or Justice but instead just a Rage Demon Abomination. Frankly the Rivalry conversations with "Anders" already strongly supports this idea I think.

 

Either way, I think there needs to be a circle, just not one necessarily governed by Templars and non-mages. Vivienne's "solution" as a divine is an interesting one as it combines the leadership of a magi with the enforcement of templars rather than having mage circles effectively led by and governed by templars and other non-mages.

 

edit: Templars do need better oversight though; from what I can tell, there isn't a whole lot stopping them from being rape-y.

[MisterJB]

Why would we not? Does his particular case render him not as potentially dangerous as a regular mage?

 

 

 

Yes... Justice kept Anders safe from possession by the quality of being an already present entity capable of possession.

 

In terms of possession, I imagine he was no as dangerous as a regular mage due to already sharing his body with another soul.

In terms of mages maliciously harming others, he was probably more dangerous than any other mage.

 

Of course, now that the soul has been removed, he is probably no different than any other ten year old mage. Maybe more prone to possession due to demons wanting to see if there is still any of the god's power left.

 

I find it curious that you would so fervently support a system whose function is justified by a utilitarian ideal, yet when it is your turn to make the most basic compromise mandated by said system, your willingness to participate immediately disintegrates. The biggest red flag was probably "[...] Even if I trusted the Templars with them, which I don't", which implies that you are aware of a possible deficiency in the Circle system's operation, yet you cannot be bothered to take issue as long as it exists in a way you can afford to ignore.

First, that was obviously just an attempt at rilling up darkone.

 

Second, I have always defended greater accountability for the Templars and harsh punishments to those guilty of crimes. I do take issue with people like Alrik.

 

Does that mean I would actually, if it was a choice, have the Warden step aside and allow Morrigan and Kieran to be taken to the Circle? Well...no.
 

 

[Iakus]

Which is major problem of the Circle system. There needs to be an agreed upon standard what what's allowed in a Circle. Without that we get extreme differences like Kirkwall and Dairsmuid. 

 

Not a bad idea

 

 

True, but most trained mages are strong enough to never get possessed in the first place. Which begs the question why said trained mages can't permanently leave after they've finished their training and get jobs or positions that benefit Thedas. Cullen says it best with his ideas about mage hospitals and military service.

But all it takes is one mistake, and an entire town can die.  A mage is never truly "safe" from possession.

[dragonflight288]

On Vivienne: I do like Vivienne for the reasons I've kind of hinted at. She's clearly thought the issue through and has considered different arguments and points of view when she argues her case. She speaks primarily from her own experience rather than taking into consideration the variety of experiences of mages in southern Thedas, however. Meaning, she misses the point: of course the restrictions aren't fair or fun or really very nice at all for a respectable quantity of mages. If you start from the premise 'the restrictions on mages are fair', you're fighting an uphill battle.

 

The better question is whether restrictions are necessary for a functioning society. I think it is also a more interesting question.

 

My answer to that question is simple.

 

No, it's not necessary. And there's proof.

 

There are several different approaches to mages learning magic outside of the Chantry's and the Circle's approach, and they have a far more successful rating and don't result in genocide. 

 

The Seers of Rivain, until the Chantry declared the Right of Annulment on them. The Avaar, who willfully allow themselves to be possessed and then learn magic directly from the spirit, and then have a ritual to unpossess themselves outside of the Chantry's own experience, the mages of the Tal Vashoth as my Qunari Inquisitor learned from, and the Dalish and their keepers.

 

Some are more successful than others, and how I measures success is a person, living breathing person with emotions, who is born with magic, is able to learn to control their powers so they are not a threat to anyone and can live freely among others without fear. 

 

Now, I'm not sure how the Tal Vashoth trained my Inquisitor, but his dialogue pretty much implies it's very different from what the Qunari practice....especially since he was allowed to practice his magic, and was the mage of a Mercenary Company. 

 

As such, with cultural and ethical precedents already set, I think I can safely say that it is proven that the Circle, while offering sanctuary for mages from the prejudiced masses (no thanks to the Chantry) but severely restricts them in nearly all ways, to the point of keeping them from developing like well-rounded adults and their capacity to interact with the world once in it because of their separation from it, (Cassandra's "deal with it" to the mage regardless of alliance or conscripted as the argument changes slightly but amounts to that mage not knowing how to deal with the consequences of independence, and what it means to rely on themselves.) With this precedents, the systematic corruption from the templars and seekers, and the mistreatment of mages by the system designed to protect them but fails miserably, I think it is proven that the Circle, while a great idea in theory, has dissolved into something that is otherwise not necessary as there are better paths.

[GranfalloonMembr]

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.

 

 

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.

 

Thanks. After arguing with the other people, that's good to hear.

 

I don't know whether the issues raised in this series remind me of stuff I care passionately about in real life, or whether the stories have been written in such a way that I care passionately about these people who don't even exist. All I know is that I feel really strongly about this stuff.

 

I'm somebody who's been a fan of X-Men stories for 3/4 of his life approximately--stories which were intended as aesops about racism and other forms of prejudice being wrong. Perhaps unintentionally, in these stories the people who were hated and feared by ordinary humans didn't just look different, but they actually were more powerful, and the anti-mutant characters would say so in their arguments.

 

"Can we really afford to give people this powerful the benefit of the doubt?"

 

The answer in all of those stories was that you should give them the benefit the doubt. Collective punishment of an entire group because of the actions of a tiny fraction of that group is wrong. I can't think of a way to explain why that is to the people who disagree. I feel like I shouldn't have to explain it to the people who disagree. It should be obvious.

 

Some guy said I was "fleeing" earlier. Well, I was glancing at the latest posts in this thread and I think I caught a glimpse of one that actually tried to justify the internment of Japanese Americans in WWII because they were potential threats just like the mages, and that made me think "What is the bloody point of trying to debate people like that? Nothing I say will convince them to reconsider their point of view. It's just an exercise in futility and frustration." That's the kind of thing where you're either cool with punishing people for something they can't change or you aren't. You either agree with it or you don't.

 

You may have seen this xkcd comic before. I have been that guy way more often than I should have. Sometimes it's best to just let the people who are wrong be wrong.

 

Doing cruel things to innocent people in the name of keeping other innocent people safe is wrong. That is why people are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty in the American justice system, and are supposed to go free if they are not proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. (Admittedly it doesn't always work out that way, with people getting wrongfully convicted or convicted on circumstantial evidence, but that's how it's supposed to work.) Even the chance of sending an innocent person to prison isn't worth it, so you let them go, even if they might be a criminal.

 

I realize that maybe I should have directed these points to the people who worship at the altar of Vivienne, but I can't deal with those people right now. If you're innocent and no threat to anybody, you shouldn't be made to suffer. I have no patience for people who say that innocent people who are no threat to anybody should endure imprisonment because of a possibility that they will become a threat one day. I have no patience for people who call the Circles luxurious accomodations when even Vivienne says that conditions varied from Circle to Circle. And, like you say, a gilded cage is still a cage.

[dragonflight288]

Obviously, we can't use such absolute concepts for Kieran is a very particular case. 

 

Wait a minute, the child possibly bearing the remnants of an old god's soul, having it removed by an elven god and now is probably emotionally damaged as he feels lonely without it, a mage, and the son of an apostate, doesn't count as "potentially dangerous?"

 

And I noticed you didn't include Morrigan as an exception either. 

 

If I shared your beliefs, I'd say that Kieran would probably deserve to be in a Circle, watched 24/7, and possibly tranquilized or killed considering the circumstances of his birth, just to be safe, and Morrigan is clearly a dangerous apostate, especially to her enemies, and practices magics not condoned by the Circle, as such, by the Chantry definition, is a maleficar and thus must be sentenced to death without trial by Chantry law and Templar practice. 

 

Thankfully, I see all mages as people and thus feel the need to treat all mages with dignity unless they behave in such a way to lose that privilege, or if they end up in such a situation where their will and magic is so weak and visited by demons nightly that the risk of possession is greater than most mages thus action would have to be taken, and likely with their consent, or the consent of their families. 

 

EDIT: After posting this, I realized the tone may be construed as hostile, and that is not my intent, rather I meant good-humored poking because of the many debates MisterJB and I have engaged in over the years. 

Modifié par dragonflight288, 11 août 2015 - 05:37 .

[thesuperdarkone2]

Thanks. After arguing with the other people, that's good to hear.

 

I don't know whether the issues raised in this series remind me of stuff I care passionately about in real life, or whether the stories have been written in such a way that I care passionately about these people who don't even exist. All I know is that I feel really strongly about this stuff.

 

I'm somebody who's been a fan of X-Men stories for 3/4 of his life approximately--stories which were intended as aesops about racism and other forms of prejudice being wrong. Perhaps unintentionally, in these stories the people who were hated and feared by ordinary humans didn't just look different, but they actually were more powerful, and the anti-mutant characters would say so in their arguments.

 

"Can we really afford to give people this powerful the benefit of the doubt?"

 

The answer in all of those stories was that you should give them the benefit the doubt. Collective punishment of an entire group because of the actions of a tiny fraction of that group is wrong. I can't think of a way to explain why that is to the people who disagree. I feel like I shouldn't have to explain it to the people who disagree. It should be obvious.

 

Some guy said I was "fleeing" earlier. Well, I was glancing at the latest posts in this thread and I think I caught a glimpse of one that actually tried to justify the internment of Japanese Americans in WWII because they were potential threats just like the mages, and that made me think "What is the bloody point of trying to debate people like that? Nothing I say will convince them to reconsider their point of view. It's just an exercise in futility and frustration." That's the kind of thing where you're either cool with punishing people for something they can't change or you aren't. You either agree with it or you don't.

 

You may have seen this xkcd comic before. I have been that guy way more often than I should have. Sometimes it's best to just let the people who are wrong be wrong.

 

Doing cruel things to innocent people in the name of keeping other innocent people safe is wrong. That is why people are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty in the American justice system, and are supposed to go free if they are not proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. (Admittedly it doesn't always work out that way, with people getting wrongfully convicted or convicted on circumstantial evidence, but that's how it's supposed to work.) Even the chance of sending an innocent person to prison isn't worth it, so you let them go, even if they might be a criminal.

 

I realize that maybe I should have directed these points to the people who worship at the altar of Vivienne, but I can't deal with those people right now. If you're innocent and no threat to anybody, you shouldn't be made to suffer. I have no patience for people who say that innocent people who are no threat to anybody should endure imprisonment because of a possibility that they will become a threat one day. I have no patience for people who call the Circles luxurious accomodations when even Vivienne says that conditions varied from Circle to Circle. And, like you say, a gilded cage is still a cage.

What's funny is that the argument that mages shouldn't want to leave the circle due to having nicer living conditions is the exact same argument that Dorian uses to support slavery. Why be free and miserable when you can be comfortable and safe in slavery/imprisonment?

 

P.S. If you really want to know why Warder is such a lunatic, I can PM you.

[Deztyn]

For the record, I am all for throwing Morrigan and her demonspawn in a Circle. And not one of those nice liberal circles either. I'd send 'em to Kirkwall.

[Illegitimus]

 

Or just trying to have a stable society.

"All men are the work of our Maker's hands

From the highest kings to the lowest slaves.

He who brings harm without provocation

to the least of His children

Is hated and accursed by the Maker."

 

Is a very nice sentiment but it doesn't really apply to the real world.

 

Sure it does.  "Y'all shouldn't commit assault and murder on people who haven't done anything to incur your wrath" is a perfectly reasonable guideline.