She does no such thing, if she did that Samson bastard would be dead in Inquisition.
But people coming back from the dead is not incomum for Bioware.
Talk to the Templars and mages around the gallows if you choose the kill conspirators. Also, the short story implies that not making Samson a Templar and him living is canon
Did she?
The only Act 2 or earlier sources I can think of regarding tranquility as a punishment in DA2 was... Ser Alrik, who was doing so illegally, and Anders, who was operating under a delusion that Alrik's crime was sanctioned policy.
Ignoring that Anders is an unreliable and hyperbolic source at the time (his very claim that Tranquility is occurring constantly is, ahem, nowhere near that often), Act 2's 'tranquility in the circle' subplot was pretty clear that it wasn't Meredith's policy. We don't get Meredith breaking out the Tranquility hammer until Act 3.
Samson was kicked out of the Order for delivering love letters for a mage in the Circle named Maddox, who was then made Tranquil. Going by interactions with Samson, this would have happened some time before Act 1, and thus before the Red Lyrium was brought to the surface. When asked about this event, Cullen will also comment that Meredith "wielded the brand for far lesser offenses".
I don't think we have a source that says Maddox was a harrowed mage, and it's not clear if Cullen is referring to a time before the red lyrium.
His status as an apprentice or harrowed mage would be irrelevant, as Tranquility is not meant to be used as a punitive measure. As stated above, this would have happened before Hawke's incursion in the Deep Roads. Meredith was indeed dirty before the Idol even reached her hands.
I'm likely reading your post wrong, but what position did she have a Ostwick as a result magic?
The only positions I can think of are First Enchanter which is irrelevant by the time of Inquisition. And the other being Court Mage to the Empire which she leaves because Morrigan came into the picture offering a different view. Gaining favor with Celene, and making her position weaker, to the point where she decides to leave.
Her strength is her connections which gave her more then many mages will ever know. But, IMHO as the game progresses she begins to lose even that. If you don't befriend her in the game its sounds like she plans to wait for the next inquisitor to come along with the hope of influencing them. (the furniture moving scene)
But that is just my opinion.
Do you also forget that there is a magic school that can dispel magic?
That's doesn't mean much in the end of the day. Blood mages get around most of that school since don't rely on mana to cast their spells. They pull the power directly from their blood, and that's what makes them so dangerous since they can keep casting as long as they have an open vein. Also, the "good" mages are just a susceptible to dispel magic as their supposed enemies. They wouldn't be able to do much if their opponent, either a blood mage, demon, or abomination, knew just as much dispel magic as them.
Where does it say that dispel magic doesn't work on blood magic? If I recall, dispel magic is part of a school of magic that effects the body, mind and mana.
Also, blood mages have a backlash to worry about since their using their own life force to use their blood magic. Using it for too long or pushing their limits at one time could easily tire them out or even kill them.
Where does it say that dispel magic doesn't work on blood magic? If I recall, dispel magic is part of a school of magic that effects the body, mind and mana.
This is missing the forest for the trees.Not only is dispel magic not some ultimate 'I win' in mage duels- or else all mages would use it- not only is it not reserved for the 'good' mages- but it simply doesn't resolve magical threats in a systemically significant way.
The Circle system is built around pre-emption of the abomination problem: putting Mages through training and under watch. Dispel magic doesn't fulfill a pre-emption role. It's just another reaction tool- just like fireballs, or swords.
Also, blood mages have a backlash to worry about since their using their own life force to use their blood magic. Using it for too long or pushing their limits at one time could easily tire them out or even kill them.
That's the same for all mages- who can run out of mana/be exhausted/pushed beyond their limits.
The advantage of blood magic is that it pushes your limits and abilities further- and that you don't even have to use your own life force as the fuel. Trying to attrit blood mages is worse, not better, than trying to attrit regular mages.
I have a question for Vivienne's supporters.
You're not bothered to make her divine when she only pay lip service to the Maker ?
I think the Divine is also supposed to be a spiritual leader , Cassandra and Leliana have strong view about that .
If softened Leliana think she should completly reform the chantry teachings and turn it into a message of luv and acceptance.
Cassandra is not clear on what the Maker's "message" is supposed to be but she's always on a path to become a better person .
I'm not a huuuge fan of the Chantry but I find it strange to leave them with a Divine who ...well doesn't really care.
She has a political agenda , it's fine , but when it comes to the spiritual she seems a bit bankrupt to me.
I'm not a huuuge fan of the Chantry but I find it strange to leave them with a Divine who ...well doesn't really care.
She has a political agenda , it's fine , but when it comes to the spiritual she seems a bit bankrupt to me.
Having a Divine who is more concerned with earthly dilemmas seems like a plus to me, but calling her spiritually "bankrupt" is quite a stretch. She just seems less outspoken than the other two in her religious views.
First you dont know if she pay lip service or if she really believe on the Maker.I have a question for Vivienne's supporters.
You're not bothered to make her divine when she only pay lip service to the Maker ?
I think the Divine is also supposed to be a spiritual leader , Cassandra and Leliana have strong view about that .
If softened Leliana think she should completly reform the chantry teachings and turn it into a message of luv and acceptance.
Cassandra is not clear on what the Maker's "message" is supposed to be but she's always on a path to become a better person .
I'm not a huuuge fan of the Chantry but I find it strange to leave them with a Divine who ...well doesn't really care.
She has a political agenda , it's fine , but when it comes to the spiritual she seems a bit bankrupt to me.
Samson was kicked out of the Order for delivering love letters for a mage in the Circle named Maddox, who was then made Tranquil. Going by interactions with Samson, this would have happened some time before Act 1, and thus before the Red Lyrium was brought to the surface. When asked about this event, Cullen will also comment that Meredith "wielded the brand for far lesser offenses".
His status as an apprentice or harrowed mage would be irrelevant, as Tranquility is not meant to be used as a punitive measure. As stated above, this would have happened before Hawke's incursion in the Deep Roads. Meredith was indeed dirty before the Idol even reached her hands.
@Deztyn
I'm likely reading your post wrong, but what position did she have a Ostwick as a result magic?
tl;dr Version: At it's heart, I'd say the argument is about security for the majority vs. freedom for a small minority. You can try to color the argument as one that is purely about independence and mage rights being trampled over. But that requires you completely ignore both the proven dangers and authorial intent. In short, it's an argument made from willfull ignorance rather than an objective examination of the facts.
If my neighbor had a child who could burn down the neighborhood because he had a nightmare, turn into a virtually unstoppable killing machine because someone offered him candy in a dream, or could accidentally fry my own children with lightning when they had an argument about toys-- I would not want him living there.
Perhaps you sincerely feel differently. But I suspect that if most people were honest about the realities of the situation instead of arguing from principle they would agree.
Principles are nice when you're talking about pixel people and it isn't actually you, your friends, or your family in danger.
The thing is, this minority wouldn't be treated the same way if it wasn't a minority. Or you do think that people would put up with being imprisoned for all their lives as a rule? That they would meekly agree if it was *they* who were to be imprisoned? For others - for those perceived as "other" - it is apparently ok. Thus, we don't have a system that just implements necessary security measures, we have a system of oppression.
No, I would not want an untrained mageborn child to live next door to me. That's why I've alway supported mandatory training - perhaps that wasn't clear on my earlier post. But I do, in fact, trust my neighbours not to bomb my house, go on a shooting spree or turn into serial killers, as a rule. I would trust a trained mage not to go out of control the same way, and yes, I would have no objection to one being my neighbour - or my lover. Yes, the bad stuff happens nonetheless, but I'd be quite as defenseless against a suicide bomber or a trained soldier gone mad as I'd be against a fireball-slinging mage. Yet we don't imprison everyone who might go mad and turn on their neighbors - meaning everyone - do we?
Also, it does matter who does the goalkeeping and policing. In the Circles, mages are kept by representatives of an ideology that has "keep mages under [your] control" as a consequence of its core tenets. That's like recruiting the American police force from the KKK. Seems exaggerated? Consider what those people's agenda is: "Keep majority faction X in control and minority faction Y controlled" and remember that they see their cause as perfectly legitimate. This illustrates neatly that it does, in fact, matter, who does the policing, and that warriors selected, among other things, for their ideological fervor may not be the best choice.
Not that the mageborn are unique in being kept under control by an oppressive system. See Orlais and its elves. Compared to them, the situation of the mageborn doesn't appear all that bad. However, as I said before, "It isn't that bad" is no argument against autonomy. There *is* no argument for denying someone autonomy but a necessity that weighs higher, and any system that goes beyond mandatory training will justifiedly be regarded as oppressive.
The presence of magic will always mean that there are more dangers compared to a non-magical world. How far preventive measures can justifiedly go will always be a matter of contention. However, things get complicated when real dangers and minorities which are perceived as "other" mix, like in the case of the mageborn. In the real world, people object to rapists who have served their time in their neighborhood. However problematic I find this sort of behaviour, they have a better cause than one who objects to the presence of a trained mage who has done nothing harmful to anyone so far. Beyond mandatory training, I see no reason to break with the principle that people are free unless they do something that requires intervention.
I have a question for Vivienne's supporters.
You're not bothered to make her divine when she only pay lip service to the Maker ?
I think the Divine is also supposed to be a spiritual leader , Cassandra and Leliana have strong view about that .
If softened Leliana think she should completly reform the chantry teachings and turn it into a message of luv and acceptance.
Cassandra is not clear on what the Maker's "message" is supposed to be but she's always on a path to become a better person .
I'm not a huuuge fan of the Chantry but I find it strange to leave them with a Divine who ...well doesn't really care.
She has a political agenda , it's fine , but when it comes to the spiritual she seems a bit bankrupt to me.
Not a Vivienne supporter, but it's possible to care more about the institutional integrity of the Chantry and the common cultural base it brings to the bigger part of Thedas than about its spiritual dimension. Divines with a more political agenda aren't necessarily bad for the Chantry, though a more spiritually inspiring figure is needed now and then, too.
Where does it say that dispel magic doesn't work on blood magic? If I recall, dispel magic is part of a school of magic that effects the body, mind and mana.
Also, blood mages have a backlash to worry about since their using their own life force to use their blood magic. Using it for too long or pushing their limits at one time could easily tire them out or even kill them.
I think most of what I was going to say was covered in Dean's post...
Anyway, I didn't say that dispel magic doesn't work on blood magic. I said that blood mages gets around most of the "dispel" magic - i.e., the Anti-Magic and Mana Alteration branches of the Spirit school. The spells to drain or nullify a mage's mana wouldn't hinder blood mages all that much. The actual dispel magics, as Dean already pointed out, are reactionary spells that only cancel out effects already in action. Those spells may negate further damage, but they don't actually prevent it.
May I mention, again, that the fundamental desirability of prevention does not mean any cost we pay in freedom for preventive measures is necessarily justified. The same applies to "any power an individual might have is only acceptable if it can be easily countered". Beyond controlling weapons of war, human societies dont work that way unless they're totalitarian. I can already anticipate the rejoinder that mages are weapons of war, but (I) they actually aren't without a steady lyrium supply, and (II) they're human beings with the same rights - if such are said to exist in their culture - as other human beings. Things get even more problematic if the people in whose names the measures are implemented don't have to pay any of that cost. That's a perfect recipe for rebellion if ever heard one. I don't think it's coindicence that most cases of possession actually happened within Circles or to escaped Circle mages on the run.
I don't think it's coindicence that most cases of possession actually happened within Circles or to escaped Circle mages on the run.
That's because Circle mages make up the vast majority of the mage population in Thedas. So of course, statistically, they're going to have the most cases of possession on record. It's one of the reasons why the Circle system was made in the first place. Other than being used to protect mages from the suspicious populace at large, and being a place where they can study and hone their craft to better protect themselves, it puts the mages in a controlled environment where if a possession does occur it can be handled quickly by professionals (Templars and Mages) without putting the rest of the population at risk.
Though, since we really don't have any concrete numbers on how many abominations and/or possessions the Qunari, Tevinter, Dalish, Avvar, Seers, or random mages and people in remote areas suffer with, I would put an (*) next to that type of statement. Technically correct, but more information is needed before any type of accurate comparison can be made.
That's because Circle mages make up the vast majority of the mage population in Thedas. So of course, statistically, they're going to have the most cases of possession on record. It's one of the reasons why the Circle system was made in the first place. Other than being used to protect mages from the suspicious populace at large, and being a place where they can study and hone their craft to better protect themselves, it puts the mages in a controlled environment where if a possession does occur it can be handled quickly by professionals (Templars and Mages) without putting the rest of the population at risk.
Though, since we really don't have any concrete numbers on how many abominations and/or possessions the Qunari, Tevinter, Dalish, Avvar, Seers, or random mages and people in remote areas suffer with, I would put an (*) next to that type of statement. Technically correct, but more information is needed before any type of accurate comparison can be made.
Actually, it's the other way round. The plots of the games feature the dangers of magic to some degree, so I'd expect a global over-representation proportional to the number of locations we visit that would plausibly have mages of some kind, and their expected numbers. I could try to make a case from the numbers, but unfortunately, the direction the writers wanted to take the plots has made things even less predictable, between DAI's rebel mage faction not showing any cases at all and DA2's mages getting themselves possessed at the drop of a hat.
However, I would argue that the example of the Avvar shows that it's feasible to deal with the problem on a case-by-case basis (the Augur in Jaws of Hakkon tells you that they do that), and that the nations dominated by the Orlesian Chantry may be going to unnecessary lengths. Which, considering the Chantry's pathological fear of the spirit world, appears rather plausible to me.
Lastly, within DAI we have Dorian. You'd think the man who fears temptation most of all and says that the tale of his homeland should be a cautionary tale would be more supportive of the idea of "Circles as a prison" if possession was such a big problem, rather than mages simply being like other people - occasionally bullies and megalomaniacs.
1) If mages were the majority they absolutely would oppress the normal population. The inevitable consequence of having a large segment of the population that has so much more potential for power is that without restrictions they will eventually use their power to place themselves above all others. This doesn't require all mages to take that stance, only enough of them to rise the top. And the most ruthless will always be at the top because they will always be the most powerful.The thing is, this minority wouldn't be treated the same way if it wasn't a minority. Or you do think that people would put up with being imprisoned for all their lives as a rule? That they would meekly agree if it was *they* who were to be imprisoned? For others - for those perceived as "other" - it is apparently ok. Thus, we don't have a system that just implements necessary security measures, we have a system of oppression.
No, I would not want an untrained mageborn child to live next door to me. That's why I've alway supported mandatory training - perhaps that wasn't clear on my earlier post. But I do, in fact, trust my neighbours not to bomb my house, go on a shooting spree or turn into serial killers, as a rule. I would trust a trained mage not to go out of control the same way, and yes, I would have no objection to one being my neighbour - or my lover. Yes, the bad stuff happens nonetheless, but I'd be quite as defenseless against a suicide bomber or a trained soldier gone mad as I'd be against a fireball-slinging mage. Yet we don't imprison everyone who might go mad and turn on their neighbors - meaning everyone - do we?
Also, it does matter who does the goalkeeping and policing. In the Circles, mages are kept by representatives of an ideology that has "keep mages under [your] control" as a consequence of its core tenets. That's like recruiting the American police force from the KKK. Seems exaggerated? Consider what those people's agenda is: "Keep majority faction X in control and minority faction Y controlled" and remember that they see their cause as perfectly legitimate. This illustrates neatly that it does, in fact, matter, who does the policing, and that warriors selected, among other things, for their ideological fervor may not be the best choice.
Not that the mageborn are unique in being kept under control by an oppressive system. See Orlais and its elves. Compared to them, the situation of the mageborn doesn't appear all that bad. However, as I said before, "It isn't that bad" is no argument against autonomy. There *is* no argument for denying someone autonomy but a necessity that weighs higher, and any system that goes beyond mandatory training will justifiedly be regarded as oppressive.
The presence of magic will always mean that there are more dangers compared to a non-magical world. How far preventive measures can justifiedly go will always be a matter of contention. However, things get complicated when real dangers and minorities which are perceived as "other" mix, like in the case of the mageborn. In the real world, people object to rapists who have served their time in their neighborhood. However problematic I find this sort of behaviour, they have a better cause than one who objects to the presence of a trained mage who has done nothing harmful to anyone so far. Beyond mandatory training, I see no reason to break with the principle that people are free unless they do something that requires intervention.
It specifically condemns the use of magic to harm and control others. It does not condemn magic in general and even calls it a gift, not a curse as everyone likes to claim.Magic exists to serve man, and never to rule over him.
Foul and corrupt are they
Who have taken His gift
And turned it against His children.
They shall be named Maleficar, accursed ones.
They shall find no rest in this world
Or beyond.
May I mention, again, that the fundamental desirability of prevention does not mean any cost we pay in freedom for preventive measures is necessarily justified. The same applies to "any power an individual might have is only acceptable if it can be easily countered". Beyond controlling weapons of war, human societies dont work that way unless they're totalitarian. I can already anticipate the rejoinder that mages are weapons of war, but (I) they actually aren't without a steady lyrium supply, and (II) they're human beings with the same rights - if such are said to exist in their culture - as other human beings. Things get even more problematic if the people in whose names the measures are implemented don't have to pay any of that cost. That's a perfect recipe for rebellion if ever heard one. I don't think it's coindicence that most cases of possession actually happened within Circles or to escaped Circle mages on the run.
I'm just going to go ahead and quote Boost here.Actually, it's the other way round. The plots of the games feature the dangers of magic to some degree, so I'd expect a global over-representation proportional to the number of locations we visit that would plausibly have mages of some kind, and their expected numbers. I could try to make a case from the numbers, but unfortunately, the direction the writers wanted to take the plots has made things even less predictable, between DAI's rebel mage faction not showing any cases at all and DA2's mages getting themselves possessed at the drop of a hat.
However, I would argue that the example of the Avvar shows that it's feasible to deal with the problem on a case-by-case basis (the Augur in Jaws of Hakkon tells you that they do that), and that the nations dominated by the Orlesian Chantry may be going to unnecessary lengths. Which, considering the Chantry's pathological fear of the spirit world, appears rather plausible to me.
Lastly, within DAI we have Dorian. You'd think the man who fears temptation most of all and says that the tale of his homeland should be a cautionary tale would be more supportive of the idea of "Circles as a prison" if possession was such a big problem, rather than mages simply being like other people - occasionally bullies and megalomaniacs.
So how have they NOT shown the dangers of magic in other societies?People think the Dalish society lives well with free mages? Lol.
DAO: Zathrian created the werewolf curse, his clan can be destroyed because of that.
DAA: Velanna goes on a killing spree because she thinks humans have her sister.
DA2: Merill/Marethari/Audacity debacle, their can can be destroyed because of that.
ME: the Dalish clan summoned Imshael, they were destroyed because of that.
DAI: a teen Dalish start using blood magic because he wasnt chosen as the first, the result. was his death.
The Dalish are a clear example of why the Circles are needed.
And lets not forget how the Avvar almost unleashed a dragon ,possesed by a powerful spirit, on a weakened Orlais. If their mages were on a Circle it wouldnt have happened.
That doesn't indicate the timing of these lesser offenses one way or another, only that they were sometime prior to Cullen speaking of it with the Inquisitor. That could be after Meredith went Red lyrium Cuckoo or before. It's not clear.
Meredith came to believe that no matter how cruel the Circle, no matter how bleak the lives of mages, it was preferable to the alternative.
I'd believe it.
Using the Rite on an apprentice who may have also been unfit to undertake the Harrowing is a different offense than using it on a harrowed mage who should not have been made tranquil under any circumstance.
It's about the degree of offense. I'm not suggesting there was no offense at all.
Maddox's potential to survive his Harrowing had nothing to do with his Tranquility, assuming he was even an apprentice at all.
Magic exists to serve man, and never to rule over him.
Foul and corrupt are they
Who have taken His gift
And turned it against His children.
They shall be named Maleficar, accursed ones.
They shall find no rest in this world
Or beyond.
Very good point.
The Chant of Light's stance on magic is essentially 'With great power comes great responsibility"
Problem is, some can't get past the second line. And some can't even get past the first line.
Very good point.
The Chant of Light's stance on magic is essentially 'With great power comes great responsibility"
Problem is, some can't get past the second line. And some can't even get past the first line.
And that's the problem. Templars saw mages more as things to be stopped than people that needed to be protected which is how this whole mess started. Heck, Cole outright says the templars that actually protect mages and see them as people are in the minority.
If the Chantry thinks imprisoning mages in Circles is a way to show their appreciation for the gift of magic, then it's an odd way to show it. How can a mage think that the people respect magic when they live life at the behest of other people's whims. Can people live life being denied going outside, or being denied family or children? A Circle mage is caged and denied a say in their own fate because of jealousy and hatred of muggles for gifts that people assume will be abused. That is punitive. There is no respect for magic, just fear of it, when you restrict liberties because of it. If a man is strong and society decides out of fear that the man may use his brawn to hurt someone, and thus issues a law that imposes all strong men must wear weights on their body so they must be as weak as weakest man, then there is no respect for that man's strength. If a man is smart, and society thinks he's too smart and could use his cunning to build a bomb and hurt someone and thus imposes a law that dictates that smart men must wear impaired vision glasses so they cannot read, that is punitive and is not respecting the smart man's intelligence. Deztyn says that magic is claimed a gift by the Chantry but the Chantry treats mages as cursed.
Calenhad once said , "Perhaps if more of our people lived by honor, we would learn to trust each other long enough to live together." Mages and muggles cannot reconcile because muggles are jealous and insecure and mages think they are being penalized for the way they are born and will fight. Maybe they'll be destined to war with each other until one or all are destroyed.
Vivienne was no more privileged coming into the Circle as any other mage (she was actually of common birth) so there is no reason to believe she succeeded in a position where any other mage just as capable would not.
There is a certain confirmation-bias at work when Vivienne's perspective is arbitrarily written off as 'unrealistic,' in favor of only mages who had bad experiences in the Circle. You have already made up your mind, so Vivienne is just an inconvenient truth.
No, Viv is the 1 in a million who managed to murder and screw her way to domination, and is now a boot stamping on any weaker or less skilled than her to keep that domination intact.
Retour en haut