Well that's the thing. I am not a fan of Libertarian-ism, even though the Political Compass says I lean that way more than the latter.
Thing is, even though I do not want government to be overbearing to ridiculous levels (like the Qun) with things like imposing rules on what you do in your bedroom, I do still believe it needs to be a big and powerful entity that can come down on problems like a hammer. I reject the "Power corrupts" cliche. That lesson has been taught to us by a society that would also have us believe that "Free to be a peasant" is a good thing, too. Just look at all the people who decry universal healthcare as an infringement on their freedom. Yes, that's right, you will go bankrupt from an injury or illness that sends you to the hospital for a major procedure... BUT AT LEAST YOU'RE FREE TO!!
*edit* -- BTW, this is another reason why I feel the mage-freedom supporters have it wrong. Throwing away all the luxuries of the Circle, to live as a commoner in a feudal society? Brilliant!!
Exactly. I don't think the player is actually supposed to actually like either of the two different types of structures but I really like that they brought it up.
Off-topic but I have to say, I support mage freedom—at least more freedom than they're afforded—and always wanted a middle ground. The Circle is effective but it does seem like a prison sometimes, some more than others. I made it so that at the end of my playthroughs, Leliana was the Divine so she freed mages from the Circle and made the Chantry much more inclusive through diplomacy (the other option was violence is he was hardened, I believe). The mages formed the College of Enchanters which is a step in the right direction. But yes, I totally get what you're saying. It would have been another Emancipation Proclamation disaster—yay, they're free but where do they go now? They've lived there their entire lives so that's all they've ever known.





Retour en haut







