83 réponses à ce sujet

[HK-90210]

Mages have existed in Thedas long before any circle system. Still Thedas and its societies functioned just fine. And what is so wrong with mages ruling southern Thedas, compared to the current mundane nobility? How much the life of an average peasant would change? You are forgetting that southern mages have never lived in Tevinter. They are mostly andrastian with southern upbringing. The Imperium returned to its own ways because blood magic is a part of its society, andrastian or not.

 

Tevinter Magisters breaking into the Golden/Black City and unleashing the Darkspawn qualifies as 'just fine'?

 

The fact that southern mages have never lived in Tevinter does not relieve them of the temptation to use blood magic and deals with demons to achieve their own ends. We saw enough of that in the Ferelden Circle and Kirkwall in the first two games. The imperium returned to blood magic because mages being in charge is part of its culture, and a culture in which mages rule leaves it wide open to the corruption of demons and magic turned to evil ends. Andrastianism and living in the south does not make mages immune to this temptation.

[Lumix19]

Orlais does not have slavery, it has oppression. There is a difference.


And why you think that any group with special powers governing themselves is a good idea, I can't imagine. That's like saying the military should be autonomous and not under the authority of the civilian government. It's going to lead to serious trouble.

To give mages the ability to manage themselves autonomously is to invite men like Uldred and Jowan to gain power within the ranks of mages with no oversight. Now, instead of causing chaos and destruction while under the watch of the Templars, men and women who are specifically trained to handle(or at least contain) such situations, you're going to give the power over such situations to men and women just as vulnerable to such temptation?


It can't be argued that the power of mages will ever disappear under regulation. If their powers did, then there would be no need for regulation. That's a circular reasoning, and it's nothing close to what I'm saying. So I'm not sure who you're debating that with, but it isn't me. If mages are to be regulated(and I think they should), it must be permanent. Like it or not, mages will always have power and will never live a normal life. The power they wield and the demons that want to exploit it remove that possibility. It sucks, but there you have it.


The exact same thing can be argued for this "mages governing themselves" scenario. You're putting an awful lot of trust in the mages to watch over their own with diligence and integrity. Such trust is unwarranted and dangerous, in my view. Sooner or later, the mages will start to overlook things. And you'll either end up with a new Tevinter or open war between mages and anyone who stands against their ambitions.


I must heartily disagree.

In the first case, it is the commonfolk who suffer. Slaves, servants, anyone who is unfortunate enough to be born without the gift of magic or enough influence to be useful to those who are. Easily the vast majority of people living under the authority of such a government. Hands-down the worst form of government in Thedas, including the Qun.

In the second case, it is anyone who is unfortunate enough to be born a mage who will suffer. Easily a smaller population, and one that is decidedly more dangerous. Ideally their fate should not be that of a prisoner with no chance of parole, but if that is what it takes to ensure the safety of the common people, I think it's an easy choice to make. If your government is corrupt(the natural progression of most governmental authority, I would argue), I think that the least amount of people should live under that corruption and the most amount of people should be given protection by it.

Now don't start to peg me as one who hates mages and thinks that they should be locked up forever. I don't. I think the Circle has its problems and should be reformed. But to throw it out entirely is to put the mages in charge of themselves, and that is a scenario that I would never want to see happening if I lived in Thedas. This is because such a scenario depends on the mages living and acting altruistically and not carrying out selfish desires and ambitions. For good. The chances of such a scenario occurring in Thedas are incredibly remote, IMO.

If I were a commoner in Thedas, the last place I would want to live is a place where mages are in charge, corrupt or no. I'd prefer the Qun to such a place(and I say this as someone who reviles the Qun with a passion).

Umm no Orlais has literal slavery, if you're clapped in irons my a slaver you're deemed lucky to end up in Orlais and not Tevinter.
How is your military analogy anything like the mage situation? To me universities are a much better analogy.
What I got out of your argument was that you seemed to think that regulating mages to some higher authority somehow made the issue of magic go away. That's ridiculous, magic is just as easily abused by the Chantry as it is by mages themselves. And yes it does seem as if there is little difference between mage and Chantry governance. Except for the simple fact that the Chantry tried it's hand at ruling and where did that lead? Nowhere good.
You misunderstood by point about mage vs mundane governments. A mundane government is just as capable of commanding mages to use blood magic, to summon demons or even to breach the Fade as mages are of doing it themselves. Imagine a world where every Orlesian noble has a pet mage, would the Great Game look any different from Tevinter's politics? Look at the Circle's potential use in the war against Gaspard, it's not so difficult to imagine mages being used against any threat to the throne, and perhaps with any means. If a government is corrupt, the only people being offered protection are those in government themselves neither mages nor mundanes are safe. Look at Tevinter, even if you are a mage that's hardly the guarantee of a great life, you could just as easily be a slave as a magister.
The world is dependent on people in general acting altruistically, to presume that only mages suffer from selfish desires is ridiculous. As long as mages exist people will seek to exploit their powers, whether it is mages themselves, the Chantry, nobles whoever. As Solas says there will always be someone who thinks he justified to use magic, someone who thinks that his cause is worthy.

[Lumix19]

@Lumix19: But normal people aren't born with vast reservoirs of personal world shaking power.

And it's funny - people say, what's the difference between mage and a king. It takes a ruler with vast resources to match... a mage.

And then we say: "They're just like everyone else."

And no - I don't think mundane kings would have concocted the attempt to enter the Fade because mundanes don't experience the Fade directly. They experience it through dreams. It takes a mage to invent the invasion of a place only they can get to.

Because nobody who's not a mage knows about the Black City right? It's not like mages talk about their experiences in the Fade. And the invasion is physical, no need for a mage except to open the door.
A mundane king, especially those with an interest in magic, is just as capable of thinking up terrible and horrific things to do with magic. Even more so if they are ignorant about magic's limitations. How many people might be sacrificed in blood magic rituals to lengthen life? Emperor Remille I believe once tried to draw his dead mother from across the Fade using an enormous scrying pool, the very one you see in Inquisition. Imagine the devastation he might have wrought if he thought blood magic could have resurrected her? Don't underestimate the lengths that mundane men will go to, either in fits of madness or to satisfy their ambition. Pride is the sin that blackened the Golden City, not magic.

[Medhia_Nox]

@Lumix19:  I would agree with you if I didn't feel like you are taking an extreme stance.  

 

As for mundanes... I can tell you that I've experienced a demonic presence in the real world.  Are you going to believe me?  You can say: "Well you're not a mage."  But then you've admitted that you consider mages superior because of their capabilities (which means "not equal" to a mundane view).  You would trust a mage if he told you anything.  That's the problem I have with people who take the stance that magic can be regulated by the individual.  NOTHING should be regulated by an individual.  Human beings are self-interested creatures.  Self-governance is laughable.  Self-governance of a being who can unleash a storm of the century is even more so by vast degrees. 

 

Yes, mundanes know spirits/demons exist... especially now, because a mage elf gave a mage darkspawn a magical orb that he misused in his attempts to rebirth a kingdom of magical slavery. But, I don't recall any indications that mundanes have experienced the Golden City through dreams and even if they had... I've dreamed of plenty of buildings - I don't want to go to them.  Now, if I could have my full faculties in my dreams I might consider it. 

 

 

[HK-90210]

Umm no Orlais has literal slavery, if you're clapped in irons my a slaver you're deemed lucky to end up in Orlais and not Tevinter.

Slavery is illegal in everywhere but Tevinter. I will qualify, however, that some nobles in Orlais break those laws, and the rightful authorities do not enforce the laws aggainst it.To me, that more closely adheres to a system of corruption where people are free to ignore the law, something I abhore. I will concede, however, the slavery does exist in Orlais. It just isn't legal.
 

How is your military analogy anything like the mage situation? To me universities are a much better analogy.

The difference is the military actually has the power to cause widespread destruction and chaos, as the mages do. A university does not have that power.

 

 

What I got out of your argument was that you seemed to think that regulating mages to some higher authority somehow made the issue of magic go away. That's ridiculous, magic is just as easily abused by the Chantry as it is by mages themselves. And yes it does seem as if there is little difference between mage and Chantry governance. Except for the simple fact that the Chantry tried it's hand at ruling and where did that lead? Nowhere good.

I disagree. 9 centuries of mages NOT rampaging all over Thedas becoming abominations, using blood magic and sowing chaos seems to be a fairly good result for any organization. This is not to say that in that time the Circle system wasn't abused and misused by those in power. But the end result was a fairly peaceful one, given the history of Thedas before the Nevarran Accord.
 

You misunderstood by point about mage vs mundane governments. A mundane government is just as capable of commanding mages to use blood magic, to summon demons or even to breach the Fade as mages are of doing it themselves. Imagine a world where every Orlesian noble has a pet mage, would the Great Game look any different from Tevinter's politics? Look at the Circle's potential use in the war against Gaspard, it's not so difficult to imagine mages being used against any threat to the throne, and perhaps with any means. If a government is corrupt, the only people being offered protection are those in government themselves neither mages nor mundanes are safe. Look at Tevinter, even if you are a mage that's hardly the guarantee of a great life, you could just as easily be a slave as a magister.

Yes, mudane governments ARE just as capable of abusing magic. But the Circle system didn't allow this. Under the Circle system, not every Orlesian noble was able to get a 'pet mage', as mage's rights were respected in one sense: They were not slaves, and could not be owned. They were prisoners in a practical sense, but no mage could be taken from the Templars unless it was by force or influence, and always with the permission of the mage. The Circle system is not one that allows the kind of abuse you worry about. That is why, in all the years the Circle system operated in Southern Thedas, you never hear about an Olesian Emperor or a Ferelden King or any monarch pressing mages into using blood magic during war. The only ones to do that under the Circle system were the Grey Wardens, and that was always to face the Blight(until DA:I, of course).

You say "imagine mages being used against any threat to the throne, and perhaps with any means". Ok, I've imagined it. But that's all I can do. This scenario you speak of never happened under the Circle system. Know why? The Templars wouldn't allow it. The Templars held enough power over their charges that it didn't matter what the local ruler wanted. Unless a Blight was on their doorstep, Circle mages were not allowed to take part in armed conflict under the Circle system. So you're presenting something that has never happened under the Circle system to justify not having the Circle system.

Wheras the scenarios about mages being in power leading to blood magic and abominations? Those happened, and continue to happen, in Tevinter. There are dozens of citations for that. Name one case where the Circle allowed a local lord to use Circle mages for his own ends and ambitions.

 

 

The world is dependent on people in general acting altruistically, to presume that only mages suffer from selfish desires is ridiculous. As long as mages exist people will seek to exploit their powers, whether it is mages themselves, the Chantry, nobles whoever. As Solas says there will always be someone who thinks he justified to use magic, someone who thinks that his cause is worthy.

 

I agree. This is why I support the Circle system. In the Circle system, the powers of the Chantry(including the Templars) were balanced between, the local authorities(who could influence how Circles were run and what Templars could do in their countries) and the mages themselves(who were not slaves, nor fully prisonsers, and able to organize and assemble). Taking the first two out of the equation leads to mages running their own show. And that is something that history has shown to end badly.

 

Argue for a new balance of power all you want. I agree that mages in the Circles should be given more legal rights than they are given. But putting mages in charge entirely and allowing them to govern themselves? Bad idea.

[Guha sharan]

Based on what I've seen of Thedas, there are plenty of non-magical people who are also dangerous. Robbing, stabbing and looting just for the sake of robbing, stabbing and looting Yet, they don't put non-magical people in non-magical prisons until AFTER they do the robbing, stabbing and looting. Seems to be putting the cart before the horse, as it were.

Good luck getting an arcane horror or an abomination in prison

[Forsythia77]

Good luck getting an arcane horror or an abomination in prison

 

As stated in a subsequent post, those  people who do not pass their harrowing should remain in the tower as apprentices.  But once you pass your harrowing you have proven you are mentally strong enough to resist possession you should be able to live within the confines of normal society.  Now, whether or not those people decide to play nice within societal rules is neither here nor there, but once you pass you should be free to go about as a normal member of society who can get married and have babies or run a shop or whatever.

[Exile Isan]

I'd like to point out that an Arcane Horror is a mage corpse that's been possessed by a pride demon. Which could still happen with or without the Circle.

[Bacchus]

I think the general idea of the circles isn't bad, but the way it's been handled was doomed to failure eventually. The whole setup reminds of the Stanford prison experiment.

 

If you give one group power over another, they are bound to become more abusive over time, it doesn't matter if most of them are actually decent people. The templars originally weren't supposed to be solely the jailkeepers of the mages, but their guardians.

 

The templars shouldn't breathe down the necks of the mages all the time, relationships should be allowed and mages should be allowed to leave on a regular basis, to visit someone, do outdoor research or just make a holiday outside the circle once in a while. The templars should be rededicated to being a police force for the mages basically, which are called by the mages themselves when there is trouble with blood mages, abominations etc. (like a SWAT team basically), while the mages manage the circle themselves, left to their own devices, with the templars not patrolling through the corridors all the time.

But they should be stationed close to the circle tower, to be able to respond switftly and also to be able to defend the mages, if they are threatened by a mob with pitchforks and torches or something like that (because the corn has gone bad or whatever silly reason).

 

In DA:O and and DA2 I supported the mages, but in DA:I I'm leaning more towards the templars actually.