348 réponses à ce sujet

[Sah291]

@leldra: Your idea of "if everyone will accept everyone, they will all be happily riding rainbow unicorns together, mage or not" is nothing but a utopia.
 
I agree that in ideal, perfect world it doesn't matter if mages rule or not. But the last time I checked, Thedas is far, far from ideal.

I don't think it would be a utopia by any means. I just don't think it would necessarily be any worse than what already exists. It would likely not be much different than it is now--mages would come to rule in some places but not in others. It wouldn't be universal. Unless someone like Cory came to power and tried to set up some kind of global empire across Thedas...but that's a danger of any single powerful empire that rules through conquest.

Blood magic is indeed powerful and advantageous...but then there are non magical equivalents to blood magic for mind control and violence. That is what the Champions of the Just quest with the envy demon tried to show--what an imperial and authoritarian Inquisition would look like.

But the idea that magic is just inherently better and more powerful, or always advantageous, is a big assumption though. Solas, one of the most powerful mages we have encountered so far, still has his head stuck up the fade half the time and is far from infallible. If mages were all powerful, Andraste would never have accomplished what she did. Tevinter wouldn't be so paranoid of the Qunari, etc. The Elven empire wouldn't have fallen...and even they all supposedly had magic at the time.

[MisterJB]

I'm ok with "the regime" selling my preferred attitude if the majority isn't clear. Wouldn't it be better for the nations of Thedas to explore the possibilities for coexistence first, and only go back on that idea after evidence shows it won't work? Surely co-existence is fundamentally desirable if it can be achieved, is it not? And don't mention Tevinter. I'd like to see co-existence attempted in a society without a prevailing acceptance of slavery.

 

By "selling", I meant that the regime attempts to convince the population of what they wish to be reality so that they live under the impression that it is reality and thus act in accordance to it. Basically, repetition of ideas.

For instance, attempting to isolate political opponents by propagating the idea that they are unpopular or that voting for them is wrong by using loaded words that have been associated with negative things which themselves are negative because it works against the interests of the "elites".

 

If your ideas happen to coincide with theirs, good for you. In this particular case, co-existence may be desirable but we have no reason to believe it is possible. The only example may be the Avvar but their society is primitive and we have seen far too few.

I for one, believe that Drasanil's arguments are far more convincing that one DLC.

 

As for the other thing being a loaded discussion, not for me. I'm not emotionally invested in either side, though I do have a preference, basically because I don't see the point of the other side. Also, we live in different countries.

Unless I am not remembering it correctly from the glory days of the Miranda fan thread, you are German.

 

 

 our societies have become plutocracies in all but name, but so far it has managed to keep the peace.

Indeed they have. And magic is a very useful tool in the accumulation of wealth and thus power.

 

Imagine if Thedas has 21st century technology which was entirely based upon magic.

Sure, it would have a better standard of life than Thedas currently but mages would hold all the power which brings us to two different points on question 2 of your OP.

 

First. we have the obvious bias towards one own's group. In Orlais, Chevaliers have absolute power over the common man. Therefore, you are right to question how this is any different from a Magister.

However, in Orlais, mages are kept separated from the population so they can't hurt them. And the same is true in Ferelden, Anderfels, Antiva, possibly Nevarra. So wherever normals rule.

On the other hand, in Tevinter, the Dalish and Rivain, where mages rule, the mechanisms accounting for the possibility of an Abomination are, literally, just "deal with it".

Hence, a visible way in which who rules ends up positively or negatively affecting the people, even if both mages and normals ruler can be egotistical, entitled, selfish, etc.

 

Second, there is the matter of independence. Now, this is a more complicated matter for what it means to be independent varies from person to person.

Since I have seen you use the word subservience in a negative context, I can only assume you believe in independence.

A way in which it manifests is to be ruled by one's own kind. For instance, both Ferelden's Rebellion and the mage's had this goal.

 

Therefore, on principle alone, one may oppose a magocracy if imposed upon normal people. I certainly do.

 

 

[Drasanil]

The reality for the mageborn in Thedas, however, is not so clear. Again, look at the Avvar, their society has been stable for a very long time with no oppression of the mageborn, even as the necessity of the occasional drastic measure is acknowledged. So we can conclude that co-existence is possible, if perhaps harder to achieve than I'd like to believe. The question is then: how can we tweak the other systems so that individual mages can use their advantages in legitimate ways, without that eventually resulting in unbalanced influence for mages as a political faction? Any solution must appear reasonably fair to either side, or it will just fan the conflict. Disenfranchising the mageborn is no solution, it serves no purpose but to turn more mages into supremacists, based on the reasoning: "We can't have coexistence, and we won't accept subservience, so we must rule."

 

Whilst the Avvar are an interesting case of possible coexistence, we do have to keep it in perspective. We've met two clans, a "good" one namely stonebear hold where things seem to be humming along well enough at the moment and a "bad" one the Jaws of Hakkon whose destructive ambitions are intrinsically tied to the abuse of magic.

 

From what we've seen the "good" Avvar don't seem exactly pleased with the idea of binding their gods to create dragon-abominations, yet that didn't exactly encourage them into rallying the other holds against the Jaws. In fact according to Sunhair multiple holds including her own signed peace/friendship treaties with the Jaws despite allegedly being against the idea of what they were doing. In that alone we can already see a break down when it comes to the control of magic. Yes the Avvar will readily slit the throats of mages too weak to control their powers. But by the same token they hardly seem all that interested in actually doing anything about outright abuses of magic, even if they are theoretically opposed to them, unless prompted to do so by an outside force. 

 

That aside, there are the practicalities of the Avvar model to consider. It works, or at least appears to work, because whilst the Avvar are largely unified in a cultural sense, they are not at all unified in a political sense. Each Avvar hold is essentially a nation unto itself, with populations small enough to preclude the formation of rigid social strata. Even though it is worth noting the shamans still have prominent positions despite not being the outright rulers. In other words its not a model that you can reasonably expect to apply in larger societies.

 

When it comes to larger Thedasian societies the closest match to an "Avvar Model", would in fact be something akin to a properly functioning if a bit more liberal circle as Vivienne, or even Wynne, would view it. Baring mages from political office [like the Avvar seemingly do, no mage-thanes] while allowing those mages who demonstrate good character access to roles greater societal influence such as the priesthood [something Vivienne approves of] or medicine or trade or the military. Which I would like to note the latter three are already in effect to some extent with mage healers, tranquil enchanted goods on the market and the order of knight enchanters. 

[Ieldra]

Unless I am not remembering it correctly from the glory days of the Miranda fan thread, you are German.

And unless I am not remembering it correctly, you are British.
 

Indeed they have. And magic is a very useful tool in the accumulation of wealth and thus power.

Not so. The most important skill for acquiring wealth is communication. Selling stuff to people, whether it's goods or ideas. Convincing others the X you want people's money for is better than another's X. The skillset of a merchant and those of a mage overlap even less than those of a ruler and a mage, and given that mind control is always noticeable by the victim by any evidence we've seen so far, even blood magic isn't really a good tool.

What magic does best is to give you autonomy, but that doesn't translate well into power over others, and also not in acquiring wealth. It translates much more into having less need of money and political power.

 

Imagine if Thedas has 21st century technology which was entirely based upon magic.
Sure, it would have a better standard of life than Thedas currently but mages would hold all the power which brings us to two different points on question 2 of your OP.

You assume much. It is by no means a foregone conclusion that mages would hold all the power. There are two scenarios: either magic depends utterly on the personal energy of a mage, then magical technology will always be very limited. Or it does not depend on that, and then non-mages can use it as easily as mages. Do, in our societies, the scientists hold all the power? Not by any measure.

 

Second, there is the matter of independence. Now, this is a more complicated matter for what it means to be independent varies from person to person. Since I have seen you use the word subservience in a negative context, I can only assume you believe in independence. A way in which it manifests is to be ruled by one's own kind. For instance, both Ferelden's Rebellion and the mage's had this goal.
 
Therefore, on principle alone, one may oppose a magocracy if imposed upon normal people. I certainly do.

As I said elsewhere, I am not saying that a magocracy is a good system of rulership, just that it isn't necessarily any worse than others. If you identify with the non-mageborn, then of course you oppose it. I'm not saying you shouldn't. I do, however, say that you won't necessarily fare better.

As one who identifies with the mageborn - I'm generally drawn towards the weird, the other, that with the potential to transcend the human condition - I have, of course, fewer problems with the idea of being ruled by a mageborn, but yet again, I won't necessarily fare better either. And if magic suddenly appeared in people in the real world, I might actually vote a mageborn into the most important government office just because I am a transhumanist and I support any newly-acquired abilities with the potential to transcend the human condition. I would *certainly* vote that way, even as a "normal", if the other parties proposed oppression. If such abilities appear, they should be the future. Rather than insisting on the continued rulership of normals, I would lobby - and even war, should that be necessary - for a way for everyone to acquire those abilities for themselves if they so choose.

In this context, the question "Could anyone be a mage" is an interesting one. Since everyone is connected to the Fade, this remains a possibility.

[Drasanil]

As one who identifies with the mageborn - I'm generally drawn towards the weird, the other, that with the potential to transcend the human condition - I have, of course, fewer problems with the idea of being ruled by a mageborn, but yet again, I won't necessarily fare better either. And if magic suddenly appeared in people in the real world, I might actually vote a mageborn into the most important government office just because I am a transhumanist and I support any newly-acquired abilities with the potential to transcend the human condition. I would *certainly* vote that way, even as a "normal", if the other parties proposed oppression. If such abilities appear, they should be the future. Rather than insisting on the continued rulership of normals, I would lobby - and even war, should that be necessary - for a way for everyone to acquire those abilities for themselves if they so choose.

 

That makes your entire point/thread rather disingenuous doesn't it? "Magocracies are no worse than other forms of government." With the caveat you failed to mention at the start being "Because consequences be damned, a chance at the superpower lottery outweighs any negatives anyone could and would ever suffer from it."

 

You say people shouldn't be worried about mage supremacism, but your entire position is derived exactly from that very point of view whilst you're pretending it's not. 

[Ieldra]

That makes your entire point/thread rather disingenuous doesn't it? "Magocracies are no worse than other forms of government." With the caveat you failed to mention at the start being "Because consequences be damned, a chance at the superpower lottery outweighs any negatives anyone could and would ever suffer from it."

That was not what I was saying. I was just explaining why I personally identify with the mageborn. And actually I would do the same in that RL scenario even if there was no chance of winning the "superpower lottery" because this is bigger than me.

The point that mages as rulers are not better or worse than non-mages stands independently from that. It is, of course, undesirable to restrict rulership to any class of people, but assuming there is such a restriction, mages aren't any worse than others.

[Bayonet Hipshot]

21st century Thedas will not be a place where magic holds sway for the simple reason that technology exists and will have either caught up to or surpassed magic.

 

Think of magic as biotics and technology as tech. If you look at Mass Effect universe, they seem to be coexisting well together and more importantly, tech has come up with innovative ways to block biotics and what have you.

 

As of now in Thedas, we already have teleportation lanterns, alchemical flasks of power, chemical weapons, gunpowder, cannons, etc. Magic can barely keep up with those.

[Reznore57]

21st century Thedas will not be a place where magic holds sway for the simple reason that technology exists and will have either caught up to or surpassed magic.

 

Think of magic as biotics and technology as tech. If you look at Mass Effect universe, they seem to be coexisting well together and more importantly, tech has come up with innovative ways to block biotics and what have you.

 

As of now in Thedas, we already have teleportation lanterns, alchemical flasks of power, chemical weapons, gunpowder, cannons, etc. Magic can barely keep up with those.

 

Yeah but magic in Thedas is different , using the Fade , you could control everybody's thoughts....(well maybe not dwarves)

A magisters tried to do this in a comic , a massive world wide mind control spell.

[dragonflight288]

21st century Thedas will not be a place where magic holds sway for the simple reason that technology exists and will have either caught up to or surpassed magic.

 

Think of magic as biotics and technology as tech. If you look at Mass Effect universe, they seem to be coexisting well together and more importantly, tech has come up with innovative ways to block biotics and what have you.

 

As of now in Thedas, we already have teleportation lanterns, alchemical flasks of power, chemical weapons, gunpowder, cannons, etc. Magic can barely keep up with those.

 

I think if magic existed in the world in the 21st century, it would actually be a lot like the game Dragon Commander, which you can get on Steam. 

 

The basis of that game is that you are the son of the late emperor, and a half-dragon who can assume dragon form in combat as you spread and build your empire in a war with your siblings for the throne. 

 

Magic is as much as part of the the game's world as technology. Even our political council in the game is often divided on several mock-real-life-issues, from games promoting too much violence in the children, how much influence does the church have in day-to-day life, censure or lack of it on the press, healthcare through gnomish inventions, dealing with the religiously fanatical undead, the environmentally fanatical elves, the wealth-fanatic dwarves and so on. 

 

The political decisions are as important to the game as the strategy for the war.

 

But I digress.

 

If magic existed in the world, like in that game which also has technology and tanks and stuff, it would be developed alongside technology, and some situations call for one thing and others call for the other. 

 

In that game, magic and science kind of are in harmony. Magic is used to advance science, or act independent of it, and science also advances without magic in some cases. 

 

Choosing a bride in the game is fascinating, in that the undead princess has multiple paths for her personal story, involving either science, forbidden dark arts, or even a combination of the two to solve her personal story. 

 

Long-story short, I disagree that one would overlap the other simply by both existing. It would depend on the culture and individuals. They may even support one another in certain situations as well. 

[dragonflight288]

Yeah but magic in Thedas is different , using the Fade , you could control everybody's thoughts....(well maybe not dwarves)

A magisters tried to do this in a comic , a massive world wide mind control spell.

 

Not really. You would have to be a dreamer, and those are exceptionally rare. Feynriel is the only one in southern Thedas that we know of who survived childhood. 

 

And where is the source of magisters trying to control the world through a massive mind-controls spell? 

 

But I do know the result of it, even if I don't know if it actually did happen. It didn't work. 

[Reznore57]

Not really. You would have to be a dreamer, and those are exceptionally rare. Feynriel is the only one in southern Thedas that we know of who survived childhood. 

 

And where is the source of magisters trying to control the world through a massive mind-controls spell? 

 

But I do know the result of it, even if I don't know if it actually did happen. It didn't work. 

 

It's in a comic , and well you had to launch a Qunari attack at him + a number of DA companions.

The magister wasn't a dreamer.

 

http://dragonage.wik.../Aurelian_Titus

[SgtSteel91]

The guy also needed special equipment and a very specific person to make it function. And that he was stopped in the end.

[Reznore57]

The guy also needed special equipment and a very specific person to make it function. And that he was stopped in the end.

 

Yes , he did need something special, and yes he was stopped.

Doesn't change my point of "it's possible to mind control the whole world using the fade."

[SgtSteel91]

Yes , he did need something special, and yes he was stopped.

Doesn't change my point of "it's possible to mind control the whole world using the fade."

 

Yes it does, because not every Mage has the resources of a Magister to be able to "control everyone using the Fade" (and they can't use Blood Magic to control people either because of the Litany) and because there are people who won't allow that and will stop it.

[MisterJB]

I would like to reopen this discussion by pointing out a fact of the human condition.

People like power.

 

The very existence of games like Dragon Age and Mass Effect prove this for we do not play this games to be the Average Joe who has to get up at 8 and work in the fields, vulnerable to the whims of the powerful. We play it so we are the unkillable murder machine who gets to tell rulers to sit down and shut up because we are going to do things our way from now on.

 

We all love that rush when we feel superior to someone else, either physically, intelectually or morally. This is not a condemnation because I would be condemning myself. It's just how we evolved. And mages are, on average, more powerful than non-mages.

 

There are, of course, outliers and exceptions. For instance, there is a codex entry in DAI where a mage is mauled by a bear. Meanwhile, Cassandra's brother killed an High Dragon by himself according to The World of Thedas Volume 2.

But, on average, mages can do a lot of things that are both useful and dangerous and that non-mages cannot.

 

The writer of the upcoming comic "Magekiller" had this to say.

 

 

 

"[It's a] tension that really should exist in any fantasy world where magic exists, which is" (here he raised his voice and exclaimed the next few phrases) "‘Magic exists!’ And it grossly, grossly slants the playing field! It is incredibly problematic, and it’s problematic on every level. It’s problematic on a social level, on a political level, on an economic level, on an interpersonal level, on a spiritual and religious level. If you have societies that have some people who have the ability to — literally! — alter reality, and everybody else can’t [laughs], then you have a immediate tension."

 

Ultimately, if not through the Circle, how can one prevent mages from seeing themselves as superior when if there is an argument they can just threaten the other person with fire? Or how whenever someone tells them "no", they can just use some blood and change it to a yes? How can workers compete if a mage can reeaminate corpses to do their jobs for them?

The truth is that, even on an interpersonal level, the odds of a free mage seeing someone without magic as their equal are slim to begin with. In government, in society? Impossible.

[Xilizhra]

I would like to reopen this discussion by pointing out a fact of the human condition.

People like power.

 

The very existence of games like Dragon Age and Mass Effect prove this for we do not play this games to be the Average Joe who has to get up at 8 and work in the fields, vulnerable to the whims of the powerful. We play it so we are the unkillable murder machine who gets to tell rullers to sit down and shut up because we are going to do things our way from now on.

 

We all love that rush when we feel superior to someone else, either physically, intelectually or morally. This is not a condemnation because I would be condemning myself. It's just how we evolved. And mages are, on average, more powerful than non-mages.

 

There are, of course, outliers and exceptions. For instance, there is a codex entry in DAI where a mage is mauled by a bear. Meanwhile, Cassandra's brother killed an High Dragon by himself according to The World of Thedas Volume 2.

But, on average, mages can do a lot of things that are both useful and dangerous and that non-mages cannot.

 

The writer of the upcoming comic "Magekiller" had this to say.

 

 

 

 

Ultimately, if not through the Circle, how can one prevent mages from seeing themselves as superior when if there is an argument they can just threaten the other person with fire? Or how whenever someone tells them "no", they can just use some blood and change it to a yes? How can workers compete if a mage can reeaminate corpses to do their jobs for them?

The truth is that, even on an interpersonal level, the odds of a free mage seeing someone without magic as their equal are slim to begin with. In government, in society? Impossible.

So, I would assume you want to eliminate hereditary nobility as well, given that the same psychological effects of power and seeing others as inferior is at least as strong among them?

[Il Divo]

So, if you imagine a nation ruled by a mageborn elite, it doesn't have to look like Tevinter, nor is it destined to become like Tevinter over time. And if you imagine a culture where mages are as free as everyone else apart from requiring mandatory training, subject to the same laws as everyone else, you are not necessarily seeing a magocracy in the making.

 

I'd say this is where the argument runs into problems in regards to your second conclusion. It might be true that a Mageocracy doesn't have to be worse than any other class system. But given the simple nature of power and corruption, all other factors being equal, a Mageocracy will be worse because it by definition creates further disparity between the powerful and the powerless, in addition to all the other abuses which a rich vs poor class distinction might lead to. It also doesn't help that a lot of magic is designed to work behind the scenes.

[MisterJB]

So, I would assume you want to eliminate hereditary nobility as well, given that the same psychological effects of power and seeing others as inferior is at least as strong among them?

 

Yes.
 

[Xilizhra]

Yes.
 

Then before anything else, you'll need to start establishing Enlightenment principles about why, in fact, all people should be considered equal under the law, with equal opportunities and equal representation in government and all that.

[MisterJB]

 

We all love that rush when we feel superior to someone else, either physically, intelectually or morally. This is not a condemnation because I would be condemning myself. It's just how we evolved. And mages are, on average, more powerful than non-mages.

 

There are, of course, outliers and exceptions. For instance, there is a codex entry in DAI where a mage is mauled by a bear. Meanwhile, Cassandra's brother killed an High Dragon by himself according to The World of Thedas Volume 2.

 

Hell, the simple fact that I felt the need to point out how some mages are killed by bears and some non-mages kill High Dragons by themselves only further proves my point. It came from the inate need people have to prove that neither they nor those they identify with are inferior.
 

[MisterJB]

Then before anything else, you'll need to start establishing Enlightenment principles about why, in fact, all people should be considered equal under the law, with equal opportunities and equal representation in government and all that.

 

Except for mages.

[Iakus]

In this thread, I would like to discuss how magic and rulership relate. In particular, I propose the following statements as a base for debate:

 

(1) The common assumption that any society with free mages will inevitably end up being ruled by them is flawed.

(2) A magocracy isn't any worse than any other system of class-based rulership. 

 

To see how I end up with these statements, let's start with a rather intuitive assumption: apart from having magic, a mageborn individual is like any other individual. Magic doesn't make you a better person, and it doesn't make you a worse person. A mageborn has the same range of character traits, the same range of preferences, the same capacity for hate or love as anyone else. As the non-mageborn population has its share of ruthlessly power-hungry individuals, so does the mageborn population. Which means that mages are more likely to end up being rulers if and only if their magic gives them an advantage in gaining and retaining political power.

 

That, however, I question. What magic grants is autonomy, to be more independent from others in various aspects of life, and a measure of personal power. Neither translates easily into political power. Politics is a much more social game, it's about dealing with groups of people and their interests, about compromise, trade of favors and suchlike. It's also about enforcement, of course, but enforcement on a large scale that transcends what a mage can do in person, except, maybe, for the kind of power Corypheus aspired to, if that's even possible to attain. The skillset of a ruler and the skilset of a mage do not necessarily overlap at all.

 

For the same reason, I think in a society where mages are free, a mageborn is less likely to even desire rulership than anyone else. You're far more likely to end up in a position where your magic - or the education that comes with mandatory training - is actually of some immediate use to you. If there is to be a large-scale problem caused by free magic, it's far more likely to be mageborn criminals. The typical skillset of a mage is far more advantageous in that environment than in government.

 

People fear the mageborn because they're unpredictable when their magic manifests, and they continue to fear them later because they're to some degree immune to social control. Those fears are personal, and they have some basis in reality, for a mage's power exists on the same scale. They have, however, little reason to fear being ruled by a mageborn, at least not more than they have reason to fear being ruled by anyone else. A mageborn ruler would be well-advised not to use their powers in politics except in exceptional circumstances, because the more a ruler needs to use their powers of enforcement, the weaker their rule actually becomes.

 

Which brings me to the next point. There is no reason to believe mageborn rulers should be worse rulers than anyone else just because they have magic. Consequently, a magocracy isn't necessarily any worse - or any better - than any other system of government that restricts roles in government to a specific class of people. Like every culture on Thedas does. In Tevinter, the magisters have made themselves immune to many laws that apply to commoners, mageborn and non-mageborn alike, but Orlais' nobility has done the same. Both nations' ruling classes profit from an attitude that defines the lives of some people (slaves, elves) as more expendable than others'. Tevinter's magisters profit more from it because of the possiblity of human sacrifice, but the primary problem is slavery, not magic, and the tendency of the ruling class to set up a system where they aren't accountable before the law, which is also independent from magic.

 

Dorian cites the statement "You always need more" as the main reason why blood magic is used among the magisters, but as I said, magic isn't actually a good tool in politics, and apart from that, that statement applies to every sort of power. Whether your power is magical or not, there's no such thing as "enough power". Regardless of where you stand in society, there's always the desire to have more, and always the temptation to cross lines in order to get it. In any functional, reasonably just society, the killing of another human is one of the most highly-punished crimes, and in the end human sacrifice is no different from premeditated murder for any other reason. As a rule, I wouldn't expect the ruling class to get away with that on a regular basis (as opposed to common preconceptions, even most medieval societies weren't like that), unless there are specific cultural circumstances like certain religious ideas or a tradition of slavery. 

 

So, if you imagine a nation ruled by a mageborn elite, it doesn't have to look like Tevinter, nor is it destined to become like Tevinter over time. And if you imagine a culture where mages are as free as everyone else apart from requiring mandatory training, subject to the same laws as everyone else, you are not necessarily seeing a magocracy in the making.

I will say that yes, mages are like anyone else, just with magic, with the same capabilities fro good or evil as anyone else.

 

That's actually part of the problem.  Because anyone can have magic, be it a simple scholar or a serial killer of elven girls.  Magic grants power that can easily be abused, or used for destructive purposes.  And it's not something that can be taken away.

 

How does one deal with a power-hungry mage who can burn down a village if he doesn't get what he wants?  An ordinary corrupt muggle needs flunkies to make that kind of threat "Give me tribute of my men will burn down your village"  A mage can do that alone.  Unless, perhaps, countered by another mage. (let's lave Templars out of the equation for right now)  Magic is power.  Power is what makes ruler.  Not good rulers necessarily.  but having the will and the ability to impose it on those around you is the essence of power.  Magic gives the ability.  That only leaves the will.

 

Thus given muggles would be dependent on other mages to keep them free of other mages misusing their power to impose their will on them, that would lead to a stratified society:  mages vs non-mages.  Look at how Solas sees Thedas, a land populated by Tranquil.  People to be pitied and made comfortable before their inevitable end.  

 

So I'm afraid I would see a land of unfettered mages becoming a magocracy eventually.  Perhaps not a nightmarish one like Tevinter, but it would happen.  Just as other nations are ruled by influential Houses with power over the masses:  money, armies, knowledge.   Mages would be much the same. 

[Xilizhra]

Except for mages.

A mage rebellion happened even without ideas of inherent governmental equality; if you'd try to introduce them to everyone except for mages, they'd become far more frequent. The only way it'll work in a stable manner is to give the mages an incentive to buy into the system, and they'll need to have representation for that. If you're going to try to create some kind of parliament, you could have regional representatives for various nations, plus a representative for the mages; they can be considered their own demographic, due to their special needs, provided your government possesses the necessary minority protections.

[Iakus]

A mage rebellion happened even without ideas of inherent governmental equality; if you'd try to introduce them to everyone except for mages, they'd become far more frequent. The only way it'll work in a stable manner is to give the mages an incentive to buy into the system, and they'll need to have representation for that. If you're going to try to create some kind of parliament, you could have regional representatives for various nations, plus a representative for the mages; they can be considered their own demographic, due to their special needs, provided your government possesses the necessary minority protections.

The thing is, while mages are people like everyone else, they are not in fact like everyone else.  You can take a sword away from a murderous chevalier.  You can seize the property of a corrupt merchant.  You can even topple the throne of a wicked king.  How how do you take magic away from a mage?

 

How does a city watch deal with a criminal mage who can set constables on fire with a wave of the hand?  How can you imprison a mage who can call down lightning?  You will need mages to protect you from them.  They will become leaders against other mages.  And remember how Solas described things after their mysterious war:  "Generals became respected elders, then kings, then finally gods.  The Evanuris."

[Hazegurl]

Mages will always end up on top if free , at least in human societies ...

You've got an example of what could happen with mage freedom , Malcolm Hawke , apostate , was forced by the Grey wardens to turn to blood magic.

If mages don't get on the top of the food chain , their powers will be used by those who are in charge wether they like or not.

 

In small communities , mages are accepted but their magic is used for the good of the society they live in.

And if they don't follow the rules of that society , they get kicked out .

Merrill and blood magic .

The Avaar girl who didn't want to let her spirit friend go , for example.

This in a nutshell is why Mages will eventually rule.  And because it's human nature to seek more power for yourself and your group above that of any other.  The idea that everyone will be equal and respectful of each other's rise to power and that it would all be done fairly and by the book is a crock.  Tevinter's political landscape is really no different than it is in Southern Thedas, it's just that they use magic to their advantage and with the use of magic things can spiral bit faster.   As Dorian says "What if you need more power?...you always need more." and there will always be Mages who will want more, who won't be satisfied with hitting that glass ceiling when they know they have the power to break it.