To get serious for a bit -mwahahahahhahaha-, it's not about being free, if non-mages are truly free, or if one can even be truly free.
It's something else.
Different institutionalised consequences for people based on different intrinsic characteristics is an abominable concept.
Reread my post Exile i don't disagree. Though Loghain and Florianne would be even worse if they had magic.
My point is that mages are fallible like the common people of Thedas. Difference being that they have literal power, not an abstract notion of it like authority. You'd have to compare the devastation a monarch/noble/official with an army at their disposal could cause in order to equal the work of a single mage like Conner, Zathrian, Baroness or Avernus. Corypheus, the Architect, and Solas trumps them all.
To further clarify my op i take issue with low tier reality warpers being human like everyone else because that means they're also fallible, and fallible people with the power to alter the frabric of reality with their minds is not a good thing. I personally view "being human" as an excuse that sets the bar low for accountability.
Mages are only a group because that is what the Chantry and the Circle have instilled in the populace, that they are marked by magic so they are a mage. Ask a mage where they're from and they won't say Ferelden, or Rivain or Orlais, they'll say the Circle. By segregating mages you're creating the very society you fear. If you integrate mages you might not have that, you'll have Antivans who happen to be mages, not mages who happen to be from Antiva. Arguing that mages will protect their own interest just because of magic is like saying all elves should be best friends just because they're elves. And as Sera shows that is not the case, in fact she despises "elfy" things.
It has never been like that. Tevinter set up a distinction between mages and normals and what they could be long before there was a Chantry. So have the Dalish and Rivain. And in all those societies where mages are supposedly integrated, they are the rulers.
What reason is there to believe the same won't happen everywhere else? You don't place the Flash in a race and call it fair.
Also being ruled by a Templar is not the same, it comes with possible abuses, constant surveillance and involvement in wars that have nothing to do with you. The templars and Chantry have not proven that they are better suited to directing the path of mages and magic, in fact you could argue that you couldn't get any worse. So perhaps it's time to let mages try their hand and see whether they can do a better job. Ruled by someone who does have their best interests in mind and is like them.
And have mages not proven how abusive they can be? Nothing the Templars have ever done even comes close to Tevinter.
And yet, you were just arguing how there is no difference between being rules by nobles or by mages.
Also, remember than Wynne thought war with Gaspard was an opportunity for the Circle to gain leverage by supporting the winning side.
And have mages not proven how abusive they can be? Nothing the Templars have ever done even comes close to Tevinter.
And yet, you were just arguing how there is no difference between being rules by nobles or by mages.
Also, remember than Wynne thought war with Gaspard was an opportunity for the Circle to gain leverage by supporting the winning side.
Kirkwall easily matches the excesses of Tevinter. And Orlesian nobility have no problem with slaughtering commoners for frivolous reasons, they just don't always have the same kinds of frivolous reasons.
Kirkwall easily matches the excesses of Tevinter. And Orlesian nobility have no problem with slaughtering commoners for frivolous reasons, they just don't always have the same kinds of frivolous reasons.
Sire,
I interviewed the surviving slave this morning. She was horror-struck, but managed to tell me her chilling story.
The Overseer lined seventeen slaves up, one behind the other, at the lip of the quarry. The second slave in line was ordered to push the man in front over the edge. The third slave pushed the second, the fourth the third, and on it went.
Workers in the quarry heard the screams, the crack of bone against rock, and then the survivor's anguished cries as the Overseer's dragonlings feasted on the sixteen helpless bodies splayed upon the quarry's basin. The woman who told me this story was the seventeenth in line, spared only because no one stood behind her.
Sire, I recommend we stop this ugly practice. Effective as it may be in motivating workers, it's also bringing our mine notoriety as a death trap. Stories of the "bone pit" swirl throughout Kirkwall. The Veil is thin enough here, and above that pit it is practically ready to sunder. We risk more than simple rebellion should the overseer be allowed to continue.
—A letter from Prefex Santarius, 35 Ancient
Prefex Santarius,
The output of the Maharian Quarry is up almost a third this season, and the Overseer has received a commendation from the archon himself. You will speak of your findings to no one.
—A response from Magister Quillan, 35 Ancient
When have the Templars done something even remotely close?
It has never been like that. Tevinter set up a distinction between mages and normals and what they could be long before there was a Chantry. So have the Dalish and Rivain. And in all those societies where mages are supposedly integrated, they are the rulers.
What reason is there to believe the same won't happen everywhere else? You don't place the Flash in a race and call it fair.
And have mages not proven how abusive they can be? Nothing the Templars have ever done even comes close to Tevinter.
And yet, you were just arguing how there is no difference between being rules by nobles or by mages.
Also, remember than Wynne thought war with Gaspard was an opportunity for the Circle to gain leverage by supporting the winning side.
Perhaps, but if the Chantry really wanted to prevent that distinction they didn't do a good job. Their work to segregate mages just encouraged a mage society, the very thing they fear. And life isn't fair, is it fair that nobles get to run around and do whatever they want? Is it fair that some people are more intelligent than others? What makes mages different from geniuses that one gets segregated and the other gets celebrated?
And the Tevinter mages are not the mages of the South. Arguing that all mages are the same is like arguing all elves are the same, they're really not. I'm not arguing that there's no difference between being ruled by mages or nobles, I was arguing that both are born to power, yet nobles get to do whatever they wish with theirs yet mages do not. However Xilizhra makes a good point, what of all those Chevaliers who slaughter elves? What of the Kirkwall magistrate's son who killed little children? People are capable of horrible things, being a mage has nothing to do with it.
Of course Wynne did. But since when did she become leader of the Circle? And even if it is good for the Circle why should they be put into a situation when they have no choice? They still have no say in the matter and the fight has nothing to do with them. They are tools which could just as easily be turned to a corrupt purpose as a noble one. And as we've seen the Chantry is quite happy to use it's tools in ways that aren't befitting of a religious organisation, usually ways that benefit Orlais.
Unless of course the Circle would be given a vote on the matter? Oh wait, no they wouldn't.
When have the Templars done something even remotely close?
The major difference here is the absence of true slavery and blood sacrifice. The inter today isn't substantially worse than Orlais, perhaps, but ancient Tevinter committed mass atrocities. Kirkwall, after wall, was an excess of Tevinter's far longer than it was one for the chantry. The real comparison here is to IRL history. Tevinter is not much worse than other IRL human led empires.
I would use a different modern example: the Qunari. We are talking about a police state with an actual thought crime police.
"True slavery" seems like almost a semantic distinction, when we see how easily the lives of Orlesian servants are thrown away.
When have the Templars done something even remotely close?
Meredith's death squad headed by Mettin.
Meredith's death squad headed by Mettin.
Doesn't even come close to forcing people to push their friends into pits so they'll be eaten alive by dragons for no other reason than to increase the production of your quarry.
ugh, people still complaining about mage freedom as if "natural inalienable rights" are a thing in Thedas >.>
On the other hand, the mages rank and file may have had misgiving but they all chose to remain allied with Tevinter and I have yet to see evidence they weren't attacking Haven of their own free will.
Oh boy, this detritus again.
Doesn't even come close to forcing people to push their friends into pits so they'll be eaten alive by dragons for no other reason than to increase the production of your quarry.
What about kidnapping people from the nearby village to subdue them to a slow painful death just in order to increase the production of your red-lyrium quarry?
Or if we are not counting red templars(since I will openly admit that this might be an unfair move on my part):
Punishing people with tranquility for sending love letters. (Keep in mind that it's pretty much a fate worse than death for mages since two out of two mages who were temporarily cured of it begged for death instead of enduring it again.)
Or inflicting the same thing on someone because she won't sleep with you willingly.
Granted the templars do indeed not match the excess of ancient Tevinter and there are many good templars as well (as we contiuously see in the DA games and books), nevertheless let's not pretend that they don't even get remotely close to ancient Tevinter levels of being a huge d*ck. Because in quite some instances they get frightengly close to that level.
What about kidnapping people from the nearby village to subdue them to a slow painful death just in order to increase the production of your red-lyrium quarry?
Or if we are not counting red templars(since I will openly admit that this might be an unfair move on my part):
Punishing people with tranquility for sending love letters. (Keep in mind that it's pretty much a fate worse than death for mages since two out of two mages who were temporarily cured of it begged for death instead of enduring it again.)
Or inflicting the same thing on someone because she won't sleep with you willingly.
Granted the templars do indeed not match the excess of ancient Tevinter and there are many good templars as well (as we contiuously see in the DA games and books), nevertheless let's not pretend that they don't even get remotely close to ancient Tevinter levels of being a huge d*ck. Because in quite some instances they get frightengly close to that level.
when the regular templar order sunders the Veil, kills thousands of slaves in blood magic rituals, and unleashes the Blight upin the world, then they will be comparable, until then, no dice
Perhaps, but if the Chantry really wanted to prevent that distinction they didn't do a good job. Their work to segregate mages just encouraged a mage society, the very thing they fear.
They don't fear a mage society. They fear mages abusing their powers.
And life isn't fair, is it fair that nobles get to run around and do whatever they want? Is it fair that some people are more intelligent than others? What makes mages different from geniuses that one gets segregated and the other gets celebrated?
And the Tevinter mages are not the mages of the South. Arguing that all mages are the same is like arguing all elves are the same, they're really not. I'm not arguing that there's no difference between being ruled by mages or nobles, I was arguing that both are born to power, yet nobles get to do whatever they wish with theirs yet mages do not. However Xilizhra makes a good point, what of all those Chevaliers who slaughter elves? What of the Kirkwall magistrate's son who killed little children? People are capable of horrible things, being a mage has nothing to do with it.
I would never claim the normal people of Thedas have created perfect societies and mages are the only ones capable of doing bad things but I am also not blind to threat they poses. Either through misuses of their powers, demonic possession or dominance of society.
No, not all mages are the same but expecting them not to use their advantages for their benefit is naive. And if your argument is that life isn't fair, I can use it too. Life isn't fair and normal people have a right to protect themselves and their positions which includes locking all mages up.
Of course Wynne did. But since when did she become leader of the Circle? And even if it is good for the Circle why should they be put into a situation when they have no choice? They still have no say in the matter and the fight has nothing to do with them. They are tools which could just as easily be turned to a corrupt purpose as a noble one. And as we've seen the Chantry is quite happy to use it's tools in ways that aren't befitting of a religious organisation, usually ways that benefit Orlais.Unless of course the Circle would be given a vote on the matter? Oh wait, no they wouldn't.
Remember how in DAO, if you ask Gregoir for the Circle's assistance, he directs you to Irving?
The Circle is asked for help, not commanded to fight, and they use this newfound clout to earn privileges. It has been like that since Drakon enlisted the aid of mages during the Second Blight.
What about kidnapping people from the nearby village to subdue them to a slow painful death just in order to increase the production of your red-lyrium quarry?
Or if we are not counting red templars(since I will openly admit that this might be an unfair move on my part):
We could but there's the fact Red Lyrium will warp your mind and they were commanded to do so by a Tevinter.
Punishing people with tranquility for sending love letters. (Keep in mind that it's pretty much a fate worse than death for mages since two out of two mages who were temporarily cured of it begged for death instead of enduring it again.)
That seems much less grave than human sacrifice being a central part of the religion of the Ancient Imperium.
Or inflicting the same thing on someone because she won't sleep with you willingly.
Fenris was raped by Danarius.
Alrik's actions were unforgivable and his position as a Templar aided him in his attrocities but, at least, he had to conceal them because they were crimes.
Danarius was entirely within Tevinter Law and no one would even think twice about it.
The Chevaliers would be a better example. They also have far too many privileges that need to be curbed. But they are not Templars.
Doesn't even come close to forcing people to push their friends into pits so they'll be eaten alive by dragons for no other reason than to increase the production of your quarry.
Killing innocent people for utterly spurious reasons. It's the same crime, ultimately, it's just that Mettin gets stopped much more quickly.
I would never claim the normal people of Thedas have created perfect societies and mages are the only ones capable of doing bad things but I am also not blind to threat they poses. Either through misuses of their powers, demonic possession or dominance of society.
No, not all mages are the same but expecting them not to use their advantages for their benefit is naive. And if your argument is that life isn't fair, I can use it too. Life isn't fair and normal people have a right to protect themselves and their positions which includes locking all mages up.
Your fear of them dominating society would only make sense if there was a democratic alternative.
Silly question tbh, I think everyone wants to be free.
Pretty much. The more relevant question is: would I be willing to kill people over it? And that would depend on the circumstances/conditions of my imprisonment. I'm an indoorsy, bookish person, so spending my life living in a tower with all meals provided and all the books I want and constant professional supervision is no problem for me, although I'd probably become spherical in short order unless the Templars put me on short rations and chased me around the grounds to make me exercise. If I were to join a fraternity, it'd probably be the Isolationists.
I don't know if I'd stick for being made Tranquil, though. I've been fighting clinical depression all my life, so it might actually be nice--but there's no way to know that ahead of time. My preference would be to go into research and try to find an alternative to Tranquility.
Personally, I think Mage Freedom requires a technological solution. Tranquility and Templars are both technological solutions, btw, and they both SUCK, for the mages AND for the Templars. Do research, find better alternatives, and the "problem" may cease to exist.
They don't fear a mage society. They fear mages abusing their powers.
I would never claim the normal people of Thedas have created perfect societies and mages are the only ones capable of doing bad things but I am also not blind to threat they poses. Either through misuses of their powers, demonic possession or dominance of society.
No, not all mages are the same but expecting them not to use their advantages for their benefit is naive. And if your argument is that life isn't fair, I can use it too. Life isn't fair and normal people have a right to protect themselves and their positions which includes locking all mages up.
Remember how in DAO, if you ask Gregoir for the Circle's assistance, he directs you to Irving?
The Circle is asked for help, not commanded to fight, and they use this newfound clout to earn privileges. It has been like that since Drakon enlisted the aid of mages during the Second Blight.
Perhaps mages can do bad things, but their powers don't vanish under Chantry authority, they just get transferred to the Chantry who are just as easily corrupted and far less knowledgeable about magic. And yes life isn't fair but I'm not advocating some kind of might is right position. I question why mages aren't afforded the same playing field as everybody else, nobles are born with the power they have, farmers can work to achieve, geniuses can use their gifts to rise high and make money, yet mages are not allowed to do that? What makes their gift different from the soldier with inhuman stamina, or the scholar with a knack for numbers, or the acrobat with the perfect sense of balance. They rise high and are celebrated for their gift yet mages are condemned to live a life in the Circle. We all have our gifts, we all use them to our advantage, mages happen to have magic.
Regardless my argument is for the path of peace, in my eyes the Circle has failed to do what it intended and bring about peace, the Chantry's authority wasn't enough to prevent a war and reconcile the various factions. Why wouldn't I advocate a new system to replace the old?
Because it's the Grey Wardens asking, not the Chantry. When the Chantry requested that the Circle fight against the Qun were they given a choice? If they were asked to fight against a reborn Dales do you think they would have a choice? I doubt it.
Are we going to state what either side did? Because there is no way the templars ti catch up with the destruction the mages have caused.
The sides aren't "mages" and "templars". The sides are "mages" and "non-mages". And non-mages butcher each other all the time yet no-one recommends preemptively locking up everyone in the world--because that would be absurd.
Rights and principles are not a matter of numbers. Cars kill many, many more people yearly than guns do, yet nobody has ever SUGGESTED banning cars.
That, and nobody knows whether the blight was caused by the magisters or not. The Chantry teaches that it was, but there isn't any evidence either way. Depending on the age of that ancient thaig in DA2, the blight may be far more ancient than anyone suspects. Since the ancient thaig was supposedly so old that it didn't even show on the old maps--maps that would have had to predate the blight--it's possible that red lyrium (which has the blight) predates the Imperium. It may even be the *original source* for the blight. There's no way to know, but dating that thaig would at least give a lower boundary for how old the blight has to be.
True the major issue with regulating magic is control. Though knowledge of golem making, and the spread of red lyrium can be controlled, whereas mages being tied at the hip with magic is a different story.I wasn't very clear. What I meant to get at - and should have said expressly - is that Thedas is a magical realm. A lot of our discussions on magic are predicated on this notion that if we regulate mages we've also regulated magic but that doesn't follow. The dwarves for example have created a lot of horrors without mages - the golems and the red lyrium idol - being examples of their works.
Mages being fallible is still an issue with Tevinter. It's an oppressive theocracy whose nobility controls it's mages through the use of a circle system complete with templars. The only difference between their system, and the White Divine's was who's in charge.The fact that Tevinter hasn't managed to wipe itself off the map should be proof that magic isn't necessarily the issue here, nor particularly are mages. The first breach of the fade wouldn't be a counter example here because that wouldn't have been possible without the combination of political office and oppressive dictatorship in tevinter.
Retour en haut
