262 réponses à ce sujet

[Iakus]

Even with the College's existence, mages in southern Thedas aren't going to start inheriting titles...  And it's the noble families that like to keep their mage children around and have the magic kept secret.   It's unlikely that those noble families are going to get to keep their son/daughter at home and have it publicly known they're being trained in magic. The young mage is still going to have to leave their family and go to wherever the College is located.  And that mage isn't going to get to leave unless the College decides to let them...

 

So, essentially, every mage is getting condemned to life imprisonment, either way.  The question is does one prefer mage jailers or Templar jailers.

 

Unless they get the okay from their First Enchanter.  Then they can walk right out of their jail...

 

I'd say that having a mage Divine would do a lot to call into question the logic of not allowing mages to inherit titles

[goofyomnivore]

Vivienne wants segregation. Which is a way to deal with the problem. It has more or less worked for 1000 years. But is it the best way? I don't think so.

 

If you begin to integrate mages and magic as a positive asset to society. The commonfolk will see the economic and social benefits of magic and mages. Random peasants won't  so easily witch hunt, and mages won't be paranoid of being witch hunted. If you give a mage freedom, property, family, business, or whatever it will be much harder for them to turn to demons because they actually have quite a bit to lose. Some are going to be batpoo crazy tho regardless. That is why the Templars and College of Magi need to exist to help/separate those troubled individuals from society.

 

Just my .02. I think lots of the problems with mages is they don't have much to lose in the current system, so they are more prone to stupid risks and choices.

[Iakus]

Vivienne wants segregation. Which is a way to deal with the problem. It has more or less worked for 1000 years. But is it the best way? I don't think so.

 

If you begin to integrate mages and magic as a positive asset to society. The commonfolk will see the economic and social benefits of magic and mages. Random peasants won't  so easily witch hunt, and mages won't be paranoid of being witch hunted. If you give a mage freedom, property, family, business, or whatever it will be much harder for them to turn to demons because they actually have quite a bit to lose. Some are going to be batpoo crazy tho regardless. That is why the Templars and College of Magi need to exist to help/separate those troubled individuals from society.

 

Just my .02. I think lots of the problems with mages is they don't have much to lose in the current system, so they are more prone to stupid risks and choices.

Mages do have a path to integrating with society.  It can certainly be argued that it has not been used enough, especially in some Circles.  But if a First Enchanter determines that a mage has enough control of their gift as to not be a threat to themselves and others, they can be give leave for a mage to live outside the Circle.  Vivienne herself has benefited from this.  

 

And by implication, she extends this privilege further as Divine.

[Dai Grepher]

I'm not sure what this argument is about but you can accomplish the same thing with poison you know or really any kind of trap.

 

Magic originates form the Fade via a mage's thoughts. Poison originates from multiple compounds gathered and refined over time. Magic is applied with a gesture. Poison is applied through close contact with the target or consumables. Again, much more difficult to apply poison and not get caught.

[In Exile]

Wait, Vivienne's a mage, why isn't she at risk of experiencing these things?

Heck she stayed loyal to the Chantry when the whole civil war thing went down. You'd think that would put her at more risk, as she's a mage within reach.

Her views on the circle are not based on an "ideal" it based on her own personal experience. This is the life she lived within the Circle system, and she doesn't see why other mages can't experience it too. Heck from the sound of things, with her as Divine, she makes it easier for the other mages to life that life too.

She did everything in her power to abandon the trappings of the circle. She left the Ostwick Circle for Val Royeaux and the White Spire, which had greater status and prestige. She left the white spire as soon as she could (despite her duties as first enchanter, which we see from Irving are crucial to counterbalance the templars) to become a mistress to a noble and a part of the royal court.

Her whole life is about working within the system to advance herself, but she is very much against the system. But as I said repeatedly: its not that she doesn't get circle life as some abstract. It's that by the time the political issue of "intolerable treatment" comes up as a response to the templar crackdown she is NOT at the Circle.

To give an example, say I'm an immigrant to NA. If my former country starts to crackdown on people, I have no moral authority or standing to critique people for rebelling because even though I'm from that place I was never subject to the crackdown.

[Iakus]

She did everything in her power to abandon the trappings of the circle. She left the Ostwick Circle for Val Royeaux and the White Spire, which had greater status and prestige. She left the white spire as soon as she could (despite her duties as first enchanter, which we see from Irving are crucial to counterbalance the templars) to become a mistress to a noble and a part of the royal court.

Her whole life is about working within the system to advance herself, but she is very much against the system. But as I said repeatedly: its not that she doesn't get circle life as some abstract. It's that by the time the political issue of "intolerable treatment" comes up as a response to the templar crackdown she is NOT at the Circle.

To give an example, say I'm an immigrant to NA. If my former country starts to crackdown on people, I have no moral authority or standing to critique people for rebelling because even though I'm from that place I was never subject to the crackdown.

Except she is still part of the Circle.  She's a First Enchanter, as you pointed out.  She doesn't just work within the system, she's part of the system.   Even if she does divide her time with the Orlesian court. 

 

Notice that her Circle was the only one that didn't break away.  Maybe the mages there were okay with how she ran it?  maybe she was able to keep the Templars in line and the mages happy?  

[In Exile]

Except she is still part of the Circle. She's a First Enchanter, as you pointed out. She doesn't just work within the system, she's part of the system. Even if she does divide her time with the Orlesian court.

Notice that her Circle was the only one that didn't break away. Maybe the mages there were okay with how she ran it? maybe she was able to keep the Templars in line and the mages happy?

It's hard to say she's part of the Circle when she is in its most privileged position and does not live there. There is being in the Circle and being part of it but let's set this point aside.

As others are fond of pointing out, the Circle is not some monolithic entity whereby everyone is treated the same. I don't recall any evidence that the White Spire did not rebell wholesale, but let's grant that part of it.

There's no evidence as to what exactly happened following Kirkwall at her Circle. Let's suppose she is the greatest political mastermind of our generation and - without living there - wholly insulated every mage under her charge from a crackdown. That STILL gives her exactly 0 moral standing to critique other mages for rebelling against a crackdown she was not subjected to herself.

[PsychoBlonde]

I tried, but in the end I found that I just couldn't care who became Divine, so I decided to play the Inquisitor that way and let the game decide without any interference from me.

 

The fundamental truth of the situation is that Mage Freedom in Southern Thedas is a lie.  The only way Mages could really be free is if the entire social system were reformed to establish a rights-respecting, SECULAR government that secured freedom for EVERYONE.  As it stands, "free" mages are simply Mages With Privileges, classing them as Associate Nobles of a sort.  Hence why Mage Freedom is DANGEROUS and a "Road to Tevinter".  Because the vast majority of the population is NOT free.

 

Freedom for me and not for thee is and always has been a trap.  But fixing THIS situation is not within the scope of the game, so ultimately it doesn't matter which version of privilege wins out in the short term.

 

The game didn't allow it, but my headcanon was basically that the Inquisitor announced "a plague on both your houses" to all the struggling power groups, washed her hands, and put up a big sign outside Skyhold declaring "these are the appropriate Rights of all persons" and announcing that the Inquisition undertakes to guarantee the free exercise of those rights for anyone wishing to join.

 

Yeah, go ahead, do your Circle nonsense.  Meanwhile, Imma steal all your competent and creative people RIGHT OUT FROM UNDER YOU.  It was never established whether the Inquisition owes fealty to Ferelden or Orlais or whether it was an independent polity beholden to neither crown, so I figure I'd just declare Independence while neither country is in much of a position to dicker over it.  Ferelden has no heir and I intentionally left Celene, Gaspard, AND Briala alive, so Orlais isn't going to stabilize, either.

 

Pretty soon both of those countries are going to wake up and realize that their social system has decayed away without anyone being the wiser, while the Inquisition, with its credo of Freedom and Justice For All has become nigh unstoppable.

 

Oopsie.

[Iakus]

It's hard to say she's part of the Circle when she is in its most privileged position and does not live there. There is being in the Circle and being part of it but let's set this point aside.

As others are fond of pointing out, the Circle is not some monolithic entity whereby everyone is treated the same. I don't recall any evidence that the White Spire did not rebell wholesale, but let's grant that part of it.

There's no evidence as to what exactly happened following Kirkwall at her Circle. Let's suppose she is the greatest political mastermind of our generation and - without living there - wholly insulated every mage under her charge from a crackdown. That STILL gives her exactly 0 moral standing to critique other mages for rebelling against a crackdown she was not subjected to herself.

She's at least as much a part of the Circle as Fiona, the Grand Enchanter is.

 

And no, the Circle is not a monolithic entity.  Vivienne herself says as much. Though it's quite likely Vivienne was at White Spire when Lambert went nuts, as there was a conclave of First Enchanters at the time.  Plus she is familiar with Cole as the Ghost of the White Spire.

 

And Vivienne does not deny there are abuses of power among the Templars.  Nor does she say that mages shouldn't protest them.  As Divine, she keeps the Templars firmly in hand, after all.  What she does deny is that armed rebellion will do any good in the long run.  It just reinforces people's fear of mages.  Especially after Anders' stunt in Kirkwall.  Vivienne is a master of manipulation and playing the Game.  She knows how to get bloodless victories. 

[Iakus]

I tried, but in the end I found that I just couldn't care who became Divine, so I decided to play the Inquisitor that way and let the game decide without any interference from me.

 

The fundamental truth of the situation is that Mage Freedom in Southern Thedas is a lie.  The only way Mages could really be free is if the entire social system were reformed to establish a rights-respecting, SECULAR government that secured freedom for EVERYONE.  As it stands, "free" mages are simply Mages With Privileges, classing them as Associate Nobles of a sort.  Hence why Mage Freedom is DANGEROUS and a "Road to Tevinter".  Because the vast majority of the population is NOT free.

 

Freedom for me and not for thee is and always has been a trap.  But fixing THIS situation is not within the scope of the game, so ultimately it doesn't matter which version of privilege wins out in the short term.

 

The game didn't allow it, but my headcanon was basically that the Inquisitor announced "a plague on both your houses" to all the struggling power groups, washed her hands, and put up a big sign outside Skyhold declaring "these are the appropriate Rights of all persons" and announcing that the Inquisition undertakes to guarantee the free exercise of those rights for anyone wishing to join.

 

Yeah, go ahead, do your Circle nonsense.  Meanwhile, Imma steal all your competent and creative people RIGHT OUT FROM UNDER YOU.  It was never established whether the Inquisition owes fealty to Ferelden or Orlais or whether it was an independent polity beholden to neither crown, so I figure I'd just declare Independence while neither country is in much of a position to dicker over it.  Ferelden has no heir and I intentionally left Celene, Gaspard, AND Briala alive, so Orlais isn't going to stabilize, either.

 

Pretty soon both of those countries are going to wake up and realize that their social system has decayed away without anyone being the wiser, while the Inquisition, with its credo of Freedom and Justice For All has become nigh unstoppable.

 

Oopsie.

The Inquisition appears to be the Thedas equivalent of the White Star Fleet.  Serving all of Thedas but not really answering to anyone but their own leadership.

 

but the whole mage question is a difficult one to answer, as mages truly are Blessed With Suck in Thedas.  They can do a lot of damage, even without intending to.  

[Qun00]

What I basically meant was that if you try to rush change it will definitely backfire.

But sticking with the current system forever out of fear isn't the answer. It should be only a temporary solution.

[In Exile]

She's at least as much a part of the Circle as Fiona, the Grand Enchanter is.

And no, the Circle is not a monolithic entity. Vivienne herself says as much. Though it's quite likely Vivienne was at White Spire when Lambert went nuts, as there was a conclave of First Enchanters at the time. Plus she is familiar with Cole as the Ghost of the White Spire.

And Vivienne does not deny there are abuses of power among the Templars. Nor does she say that mages shouldn't protest them. As Divine, she keeps the Templars firmly in hand, after all. What she does deny is that armed rebellion will do any good in the long run. It just reinforces people's fear of mages. Especially after Anders' stunt in Kirkwall. Vivienne is a master of manipulation and playing the Game. She knows how to get bloodless victories.

That's still not getting at the heart of my criticism of her as a hypocrite. She talks about the "malcontents" who were so caught up in their suffering that they did not think about the more general politics of how things looked to the rest of mundane Thedas.

This is not about what Vivienne denies or does not deny about the Circles; her white washing of templar conduct is quite a separate issue. This is about her moral authority to actually critique the rebellion for rebelling, based on her lacking any of the actual experiences that led the decision to rebell.

She takes the position that things were not that bad. She does not have any basis for that claim. She describes the rebels as "malcontents" and justifies the templars restrictions of liberty. She was not subject to them, being part of her own privileged class. I do not disagree with some of her political critiques of her rebellion. But her critique is not fundamentally political (they picked a bad time). It is that their cause is not righteous. Which she lacks standing to say.

[Patient.Zero]

For everyone arguing that mages are just people, you seem to be forgetting that people can be pretty awful. 

 

The way I see it Leliana is essentially a hippie version of Magneto, who believes that the people of Thedas should get over themselves an accept the mages just as they are because it's the right thing to do. In a sense she is right. People should not be persecuted for being born a certain way, but you also should not ignore the fact that said people are different. It's like meeting a person who says things like "I don't see colour." Thats all well and good but it doesn't change the fact that the person they're talking to is of a different ethnicity. I get that its well intentioned, but instead of pretending that nothing is different you should instead acknowledge that difference and choose to accept it. I think that sometimes Leliana can be rather idealistic. It's not exactly a fatal flaw, it's just my option of her. Nice gal who's kinda idealistic. 

 

Cassandra and Vivienne are basically different aspects of Professer X. Cassandra is the more familiar "Oh your different? Well here's a special school for you reach your full potential! Safely please!" While Vivienne is more "Listen up kid your different. This is what you have to do in order to not be a danger to yourself and others, go to this school. Go now."Both of them realize that things need to be better for mages but they also take into account the fact that these people have superpowers and they should be treated as such (you can't put The Flash in the olympics and expect a fair race). The difference between them is how they go about trying to improve the lives of said mages. Vivienne wants things her way or the highway, and Cassandra tries to do things democratically. 

 

Whoever you inadvertently chose to be the Divine there are good and bad results in equal. There is not "right" way to play the game after all. The majority the endings hinge on your relationship with the women in question (along with of course whether you decide to ally or conscript the mages.)

[megageeklizzy]

Vivienne is a character that respect the good design of, but hate as a person.  She's well written and everything;she backs up everything she says, has motives, and is multifaceted, but I disagree with her about almost everything.

[Patient.Zero]

This is not about what Vivienne denies or does not deny about the Circles; her white washing of templar conduct is quite a separate issue. This is about her moral authority to actually critique the rebellion for rebelling, based on her lacking any of the actual experiences that led the decision to rebell.

She takes the position that things were not that bad. She does not have any basis for that claim. She describes the rebels as "malcontents" and justifies the templars restrictions of liberty. She was not subject to them, being part of her own privileged class. I do not disagree with some of her political critiques of her rebellion. But her critique is not fundamentally political (they picked a bad time). It is that their cause is not righteous. Which she lacks standing to say.

 

I've never had something stolen from me, but I can safely say that stealing is wrong. 

I've never cheated on someone, but I can safely say the cheating on someone is wrong. 

I've never been murdered, but I can safely say that murder is wrong.

I've never been an abused circle tower mage in a place where magic and people who use it are probably pretty high ranked on a lot of people's  "the top ten things I'm afraid of" lists, but I can safely say that starting a rebellion would not create a good public image for said mages in said land. 

 

Disclaimer: That is not to say that "my" abuse should have been allowed, just that the starting of a rebellion would not work to endear me into the hearts of Thedas's people   

[Qun00]

I tried, but in the end I found that I just couldn't care who became Divine, so I decided to play the Inquisitor that way and let the game decide without any interference from me.
 
The fundamental truth of the situation is that Mage Freedom in Southern Thedas is a lie.  The only way Mages could really be free is if the entire social system were reformed to establish a rights-respecting, SECULAR government that secured freedom for EVERYONE.  As it stands, "free" mages are simply Mages With Privileges, classing them as Associate Nobles of a sort.  Hence why Mage Freedom is DANGEROUS and a "Road to Tevinter".  Because the vast majority of the population is NOT free.
 
Freedom for me and not for thee is and always has been a trap.  But fixing THIS situation is not within the scope of the game, so ultimately it doesn't matter which version of privilege wins out in the short term.
 
The game didn't allow it, but my headcanon was basically that the Inquisitor announced "a plague on both your houses" to all the struggling power groups, washed her hands, and put up a big sign outside Skyhold declaring "these are the appropriate Rights of all persons" and announcing that the Inquisition undertakes to guarantee the free exercise of those rights for anyone wishing to join.
 
Yeah, go ahead, do your Circle nonsense.  Meanwhile, Imma steal all your competent and creative people RIGHT OUT FROM UNDER YOU.  It was never established whether the Inquisition owes fealty to Ferelden or Orlais or whether it was an independent polity beholden to neither crown, so I figure I'd just declare Independence while neither country is in much of a position to dicker over it.  Ferelden has no heir and I intentionally left Celene, Gaspard, AND Briala alive, so Orlais isn't going to stabilize, either.
 
Pretty soon both of those countries are going to wake up and realize that their social system has decayed away without anyone being the wiser, while the Inquisition, with its credo of Freedom and Justice For All has become nigh unstoppable.
 
Oopsie.

I'm pretty sure Vivienne uses a sarcastic tone whenever she mentions their struggle in the Circles.

[Akkos]

Slight Reminder about the circles who give mages permission.

 

the First Enchanter of Kirkwall circle was an Elf = Second class citizen with no authority to give mages permission and thus allowed the templars rule forced on them.

 

First Enchanter of Fereldan Circle was an old man, weak and reasonable touch, but too weak. Old Spire First Enchanter was a weak man too.

 

Dairsmund First enchanter was old and weak woman, too permisive...mages allowed to merge with spirits and so far away from the chantry's watch.

 

I don't know any more. Vivienne is the first strong-willed mage to demostrate and show us what a circle mage is capable of. I'm willing to put her in power "as higher as I can" with all my heart and soul. And shut-down any stupid pro-mage/spirit/abomination and terrorist movement going on..

[teh DRUMPf!!]

The way I see it Leliana is essentially a hippie version of Magneto

 

I wondered why I was so opposed to her policies. Now it all makes sense!   

[The Hierophant]

[DuskWanderer]

The officers, including Denam, were complicit. The Templars in Kirkwall started taking it when they of all people know best what it does. Then there's Red Templar Knight codex.

 

 

Which ones, mr. Facts?

 

The codexes contradict you on that case. 

 

You meet a number of the mages in Redcliffe. Grand Enchanter Fiona herself was complicit with the alliance, even if she wasn't happy with it. You also meet that one extremely vocal mage in the tavern. You can also here the random chatter of the people. THe only one who seems to disapprove is Connor. 

[The Baconer]

The codexes contradict you on that case.

 

No, they don't.

 

 

You meet a number of the mages in Redcliffe. Grand Enchanter Fiona herself was complicit with the alliance, even if she wasn't happy with it. You also meet that one extremely vocal mage in the tavern. You can also here the random chatter of the people. THe only one who seems to disapprove is Connor. 

 

There are 4 mages about Redcliffe who will voice their opinions regarding the arrangement. Linnea favors the idea of going to Tevinter, while Connor, Talwyn, and another elven mage (you can find him later in the dungeons praying to the Maker) are against it.

[Iakus]

That's still not getting at the heart of my criticism of her as a hypocrite. She talks about the "malcontents" who were so caught up in their suffering that they did not think about the more general politics of how things looked to the rest of mundane Thedas.

This is not about what Vivienne denies or does not deny about the Circles; her white washing of templar conduct is quite a separate issue. This is about her moral authority to actually critique the rebellion for rebelling, based on her lacking any of the actual experiences that led the decision to rebell.

She takes the position that things were not that bad. She does not have any basis for that claim. She describes the rebels as "malcontents" and justifies the templars restrictions of liberty. She was not subject to them, being part of her own privileged class. I do not disagree with some of her political critiques of her rebellion. But her critique is not fundamentally political (they picked a bad time). It is that their cause is not righteous. Which she lacks standing to say.

She doesn't take the position that things "aren't that bad"  She takes the position that the Circles serve a legitimate purpose.  She knows that the Circles can be better, because she has experienced it firsthand.   SHe also knows that there are abuses that need to be addressed

 

"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 upon the ordinary people of Thedas"

[fizzypop]

You could say this about men. I mean plenty of great men out there, but statistically they are responsible for more crimes than women. Yet we don't lock them up from society. So should we? This isn't meant to be answered. This is just to show how that argument is nonsense. You can say this about just about anything. Just because something COULD happen doesn't mean you lock people up. There is a reason we punish AFTER the fact.

If you take this and stick it in any IRL situation, you see the fatal flaw in it.

[Patient.Zero]

You could say this about men. I mean plenty of great men out there, but statistically they are responsible for more crimes than women. Yet we don't lock them up from society. So should we? This isn't meant to be answered. This is just to show how that argument is nonsense. You can say this about just about anything. Just because something COULD happen doesn't mean you lock people up. There is a reason we punish AFTER the fact.

If you take this and stick it in any IRL situation, you see the fatal flaw in it.

 

But men don't have superpowers. I do see what your saying but in this instance the the situation is a bit more complex. If men also had the ability to literally distort/shape reality (like for instance bending time, shooting fireballs, calling upon the spirit of the thing they just killed to do their bidding, creating a swords out of thin air, creating a green lantern fist out of thin are, transforming into a mother flippin' dragon, getting possessed by a spectral being composed entirely of rage, using the blood of a willing or unwilling subject to amplify the effect of things previously mentioned, ripping a hole in our current reality, etc.) then yes, perhaps IRL we might need to treat men a little differently. I'm not saying the mages need to be locked up, we just need to accept that they are in fact different and sometimes that means they need to be treated differently NOT persecuted though, just created accordingly. 

 

People in general are pretty awful. Maybe not you or I, but in the same way that men are statically responsible for the majority of crimes, people are responsible for a lot of horrible things. Allowing unchecked reality distorting powers on top of that is not a good idea. 

[Adanu]

Actually a high approval Vivienne does enact reforms that give the mages more responsibilities and freedoms. So I believe she is the best choice for progress. The freedoms she grants are not radical, they are gradual and prudent. She keeps order, yet makes the lives of mages easier than it was, thus keeping every rational person satisfied. The malcontents have their new rebellion crushed before it can start. I think that the other ladies, even in their best case scenarios, create a situation that can easily turn bad in the near future.

 

Every rational person? Way to insult.