348 réponses à ce sujet

[Steelcan]

Do we need to quibble which quests and missions should count as magic related?

[The Hierophant]

The catalyst for DA's main story arcs is usually magic. The turmoil in Inquisition is entirely the product of Corypheus'/Solas'/Inquisitor's misuse of an ancient magical artifact, the red lyrium idol degrading Meredith's mind, Anders' being a mentally unstable abomination, and Orsino hiding evidence of Quentin's blood magic research contributed to the main conflict in DA2. The verdict is still out on the Darkspawn being products of magic but the Architect was still responsible for awakening the archdemon in DAO.

[Xilizhra]

Urgh!  Lol. Aw come on now! You *know* what I mean...   I'm talking about major story arcs.  But fine, if you want to go through all the trouble and get technical with every last quest, you are right. 

 

Anyways, everything is the fault of the damned Evanuris *mages*, plus mage Solas, plus mage Corypheus. The Blight, red lyrium, regular lyrium, the entire plot of DAI. It's all magic, which is the source of the bulk of the messes that the player has to clean up. 

 

But I gave you a like for going through all the trouble. 

Corypheus wouldn't have gotten anywhere without vast quantities of mundanes willing to serve him. Nor, it seems, would Solas, given all of the mundane help he has. Blaming everything on magic is absurd.

[Steelcan]

Corypheus wouldn't have gotten anywhere without vast quantities of mundanes willing to serve him. Nor, it seems, would Solas, given all of the mundane help he has. Blaming everything on magic is absurd.

remind me, are Corypheus and Solas mages?  Are they seeking to use magic for their purposes?

[Bleachrude]

Corypheus wouldn't have gotten anywhere without vast quantities of mundanes willing to serve him. Nor, it seems, would Solas, given all of the mundane help he has. Blaming everything on magic is absurd.

 

Eh...not sure I'd agree with that, especially with Cory

 

It was the warden mages that were responsible for adamant and the red templars I certainly wouldn't call "mundane".

[Lumix19]

Eh...not sure I'd agree with that, especially with Cory
 
It was the warden mages that were responsible for adamant and the red templars I certainly wouldn't call "mundane".

To be fair Corypheus could already control the Wardens, it just so happened that demons make better soldiers. And the red Templars are technically mundane, they are made from lyrium, no different than ordinary Templars.

[Lulupab]

I agree that mages like all the mankind will want power. But mages were never given the chance to govern themselves. NO the old circles were not even close to this.

 

In certain epilogues, mages vie for power. BUT they do it among each other because they have been given the right to govern themselves. We have seen the mages of thedas are no less pious than the mundanes and have the same values. A mage from Ferelden is first a person from Ferelden then a mage. The old circles used to alienate mages from that and it was wrong.

 

A semi-independent mage organization can work greatly. Serving the people of their own country in various ways. For example, sending out Knight Enchanters as body guards for important people, sending out healers on patrol to visit from town to town and heal people. Enchantment services. Solving other sorts of magical problems.

 

This is not a very good example, but the resemblance is there. The mages will be like Liberians in warhammer, who train themselves and once ready to serve they can have various ranks. Some have been regular soldiers, some have been advisers and some have been chapter masters.

[Lulupab]

remind me, are Corypheus and Solas mages?  Are they seeking to use magic for their purposes?

 

In a nutshell only very few of Cory's followers did it willingly. Whether red Lyrium or mind washing, majority of his followers didn't join him willingly.

 

Same cannot be said about Solas.

 

And the chance that Andraste was a mage still stands, so if she was in fact a mage, I'm not seeing your point here. Magic certainly helps someone with ambitious goals because its a tool. But you know, a large army could help just as well.

[Nixou]

Better tell that to the (western) Roman Empire because I don't think they realize they should have won over the comparatively primitve tribes that eventually destroyed their realm.

 

The Western Roman Empire saw it's population collapsing from 30 million at its peak to 6 million when the Ostrogoths finally gave him the coup de grâce: its infrastructures deteriorated from lack of upkeep, agricultural mismanagement (the richest landowners wanted to produce only cash crops, counting on imports from places like Egypt were the soils were so overused that they turned barren) rendered the urban centers uninhabitable because food wasn't delivered to cities in sufficient quantities, and with a demographic and societal collapse well underway, the mere shadow of the Empire that remained was quite evidently utterly incapable of grooming the intellectual and technicians needed to maintain its technological level.

[Ieldra]

This has veered somewhat from the original topic:

 

That magic is a dangerous and powerful tool is uncontested, and like any such tool, some people will try to use it to further their own ends at the expense of everyone else. That people like Solas and Corypheus exist is perfectly plausible, just as it's plausible that in RL, there are religious extremists who'd love to get their hands on a nuke and use it against the "unbelievers".

 

This is irrelevant to the topic though: the question was about how magic and rulership relate, and here neither Corypheus nor Solas are good examples. Solas doesn't have political power, in fact he's closer to the aforementioned religious extremists, and Corypheus has special circumstances that might as well apply to a non-mage: he controls the Blight, and can thus in part circumvent - by mass mind-control - the restrictions that would apply to any other mage.

 

The question, here as there, is how the personal enforcement power of a mage relates to government. Naturally there is a relationship between those two, but it becomes less and less as societies get bigger and more sophisticated. A mage can dominate a small tribe, but even a town will be a little problematic, and that's not even considering that there may be other mages opposing them. My basic assumption that the mageborn, apart from having magic, are like other people, which means they're are (un)likely to agree with each other as everyone else. It's much more likely that there will be factions of mages who all want something different than a single class that ends up dominating society. Unless, that is, you give them a reason to forget their differences and band together as mages - such as systematic oppression measures like lifetime internment in Circles.

 

Of course it *can* happen that mages end up as the ruling class, but without special circumstances that's not more likely to happen than domination by any other group of people. As I said, politics is a social skill, and mages would be much more likely to be employed in enforcement roles rather than being rulers themselves. Another RL analogy: once a technical specialist (like, say, a soldier) ends up as a ruler nonetheless because they also happen to have that social skillset, they'll end up using their personal enforcement power less and less, leaving things to the people that work for them. The same would happen with mages, because being a mage gives you as much an advantage in government as carrying a gun around would give you in RL. One oddity, btw., is that apparently no kind of magic attainable by humans or elves (as opposed to spirits) can *read* minds. Such an ability would skew the probabilities significantly, and there would actually be a case for mages ending up as rulers - because such a skill would be highly relevant to social interaction, and thus to politics and rulership. On the other hand, it may also result in other powerful people being especially distrustful, and have the opposite result.

[Il Divo]

 

 

The question, here as there, is how the personal enforcement power of a mage relates to government. Naturally there is a relationship between those two, but it becomes less and less as societies get bigger and more sophisticated. A mage can dominate a small tribe, but even a town will be a little problematic, and that's not even considering that there may be other mages opposing them. My basic assumption that the mageborn, apart from having magic, are like other people, which means they're are (un)likely to agree with each other as everyone else. It's much more likely that there will be factions of mages who all want something different than a single class that ends up dominating society. Unless, that is, you give them a reason to forget their differences and band together as mages - such as systematic oppression measures like lifetime internment in Circles.

 

Or simply have them bond over shared interests, which is what the scientific community does and arguably is a parallel for Mages. What the scientific community does not really have the ability to do is engage in Blood Magic, summon demons, or in general wreck havoc with the wave of their hand.  

 

That's the k​ey issue: it's not that it's utterly impossible to have a government where Mages don't engage in abuse, assuming a class-system based government. It's that the likelihood is far higher, given the disparity in their position/status is further enhanced relative to your mundanes, as well as when abuse/corruption occurs, its effects will be amplified. ​

 

 

Of course it *can* happen that mages end up as the ruling class, but without special circumstances that's not more likely to happen than domination by any other group of people. As I said, politics is a social skill, and mages would be much more likely to be employed in enforcement roles rather than being rulers themselves. Another RL analogy: once a technical specialist (like, say, a soldier) ends up as a ruler nonetheless because they also happen to have that social skillset, they'll end up using their personal enforcement power less and less, leaving things to the people that work for them. The same would happen with mages, because being a mage gives you as much an advantage in government as carrying a gun around would give you in RL. One oddity, btw., is that apparently no kind of magic attainable by humans or elves (as opposed to spirits) can *read* minds. Such an ability would skew the probabilities significantly, and there would actually be a case for mages ending up as rulers - because such a skill would be highly relevant to social interaction, and thus to politics and rulership. On the other hand, it may also result in other powerful people being especially distrustful, and have the opposite result.

adfas

 

 

Still, this is assuming that we put aside the mind control abilities inherent to Blood Magic, also a critical aspect. Also with us assuming class-based societies, while politics itself might be a social skill, we're not talking about true democratically elected leaders in any modern sense of the word.

[SgtSteel91]

As if it's so easy to mind control someone. You have to find an intelligent Demon and bargain with it to teach you the method without screwing it up and getting killed/possessed. Then there's preforming the mind control, making sure you drown out the Demon's voices as you preform Blood Magic and not messing up or, again, you get killed or possessed by a Demon. Then you have to make sure no one catches you trying to control your target or notices the target is suddenly starting to act strangely just around the time you came around.

[Il Divo]

As if it's so easy to mind control someone. You have to find an intelligent Demon and bargain with it to teach you the method without screwing it up and getting killed/possessed. Then there's preforming the mind control, making sure you drown out the Demon's voices as you preform Blood Magic and not messing up or, again, you get killed or possessed by a Demon. Then you have to make sure no one catches you trying to control your target or notices the target is suddenly starting to act strangely just around the time you came around.

 

Given the sheer number of Blood Mages running amok throughout the Dragon Age series, we're not exactly lacking for Mages willing to try or who see themselves as strong enough to pull it off. Likewise with Dorian pointing out how practically everyone in Tevinter is a practicing Blood Mage, even while they attempt to laugh it off. As people love pointing out, Tevinter is in fact still standing, so while they might be a despicable bunch of people, it seems there are individuals able to drown out the Demon Voices at the highest levels of power.

 

Regarding the latter bit: It's also not exactly difficult to find yourself in a one on one scenario (or 3 on one or anything depending on number of conspirators) to perform the mind control itself. Really, the only tough bit is the "acting strangely" element, but even there, that's circumventable.

[Iakus]

 

The question, here as there, is how the personal enforcement power of a mage relates to government. Naturally there is a relationship between those two, but it becomes less and less as societies get bigger and more sophisticated. A mage can dominate a small tribe, but even a town will be a little problematic, and that's not even considering that there may be other mages opposing them. My basic assumption that the mageborn, apart from having magic, are like other people, which means they're are (un)likely to agree with each other as everyone else. It's much more likely that there will be factions of mages who all want something different than a single class that ends up dominating society. Unless, that is, you give them a reason to forget their differences and band together as mages - such as systematic oppression measures like lifetime internment in Circles.

 

I would point out that Redcliffe in DAO and Blackmarsh in Awakening demonstrate that, yes a single mage can hold sway over communities of substantial size.

 

 

 

 

[Dean_the_Young]

If you're worried about magocracy, tell Varric to share Bianca's schematics. Technology can help level the playing field.

 

Not really- or at least, not until you reach a point where technology is indistinguishable from magic, and can do all the same things. We don't have that today, and Thedas certainly won't in any sort of foreseeable future: the controlers of magic will enhance and still receive disproportionate advantages from the technologies available.

 

 

 

 

If it needs levelling. The military failure of the mage rebellion suggests that they aren't all that powerful anyway. Though that's mages as a group. Mages in DA seem to follow Conservation of Ninjutsu logic sometimes - mages as a group are basically cannon fodder, but individual mages can really screw things up.

 

 

Gameplay versus lore aside, the mage rebellion simply shows that an utterly incompetent, poorly organized, isolated mage force with no real training or preparation for war will lose against a far more numerous, better organized, and prepared force custom-built to hunt them down.

 

If that's all mage forces ever were, then there wouldn't be an issue. But it's not- mages can be organized, and have good leaders, and build alliances of their own.
 

[Wulfram]

Not really- or at least, not until you reach a point where technology is indistinguishable from magic, and can do all the same things. We don't have that today, and Thedas certainly won't in any sort of foreseeable future: the controlers of magic will enhance and still receive disproportionate advantages from the technologies available.

I didn't say that it would eliminate all advantages, but it will erode them.

OK, you can shoot fireballs? That's useful, sure, but I'd rather have 100 peasants with repeating crossbows and a bit of training - and they're more common too. And, yeah, a mage can pick up a crossbow too, but its not going to do much for them compared to what it does for the peasant.
 

Gameplay versus lore aside, the mage rebellion simply shows that an utterly incompetent, poorly organized, isolated mage force with no real training or preparation for war will lose against a far more numerous, better organized, and prepared force custom-built to hunt them down.
 
If that's all mage forces ever were, then there wouldn't be an issue. But it's not- mages can be organized, and have good leaders, and build alliances of their own.

Focusing on the things working against them shouldn't blind you to the remarkable circumstances working in their favour.

The mages of all the nations of White Chantry Thedas together get trounced by a disunited minor faction without the intervention of national governments or of the Chantry against them. That's distinctly unimpressive for such an unprecedented gathering of magical might, whatever the weaknesses of their leadership.

[Dean_the_Young]

I didn't say that it would eliminate all advantages, but it will erode them.

OK, you can shoot fireballs? That's useful, sure, but I'd rather have 100 peasants with repeating crossbows and a bit of training - and they're more common too. And, yeah, a mage can pick up a crossbow too, but its not going to do much for them compared to what it does for the peasant.

 

It will, however, do wonders for their thralls, or their undead necromatic legions. Especially if magic is used to enhance the aim. And that's without various forms of magical protection.

 

In fact, I'd probably wager that an undead army with repeating crossbows would be better against a mundane equivalent than an undead army with swords.

 

 

 

 

Focusing on the things working against them shouldn't blind you to the remarkable circumstances working in their favour.

The mages of all the nations of White Chantry Thedas together get trounced by a disunited minor faction without the intervention of national governments or of the Chantry against them. That's distinctly unimpressive for such an unprecedented gathering of magical might, whatever the weaknesses of their leadership.

 

 

Hm? I Think you have it backwards- most of what you list as factors in their favour is either wrong, or worked against them.

 

The Templars were largely united- and were hardly a minor faction, considering that until the Inquisition comes around they were the Chantry's private army. They had garrisons, ties, and supporters across Thedas, and in many respects they became the core of the Inquisition's forces. The Templars were likely the strongest non-national army in Thedas- or, if not, a very close second to the Wardens.

 

It was the mages who were largely divided- physically and politically- and the lack of allies just underscores how bad and inept their efforts were because of their leadership and political acuemen. Had just one kingdom stood with them against the Templars, they almost certainly would have won the conventional war- because magic isn't just a direct action, but a terrific force multiplier.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Focusing on the things working against them shouldn't blind you to the remarkable circumstances working in their favour.

The mages of all the nations of White Chantry Thedas together get trounced by a disunited minor faction without the intervention of national governments or of the Chantry against them. That's distinctly unimpressive for such an unprecedented gathering of magical might, whatever the weaknesses of their leadership.

Most mages are not actually trained for combat, you know that right? The majority of mages, probably don't even know a single spell applicable to combat situations. On the other hand, Templars are trained for the specific purposes of being an army and combatting mages and magic in all its forms. Does it really come as a surprise then that the mages fared poorly in the war? Hell, the only reasons that they weren't bulldozered immediately by the Templars are probably becasue Lambert was murdered by Cole, and Lucius fell under the influence of Corypheus.

[Wulfram]

It will, however, do wonders for their thralls, or their undead necromatic legions. Especially if magic is used to enhance the aim. And that's without various forms of magical protection.
 
In fact, I'd probably wager that an undead army with repeating crossbows would be better against a mundane equivalent than an undead army with swords.

I don't see much evidence that Mages can raise a significant number of thralls or undead necromatic legions, or that said undead necromantic legions would be capable of using such mechanisms. And in this situation, I still think the Peasants have come out ahead, particularly if they can stick a few bolts through the mage early.

Plus, the really important people are now those making and selling the crossbows. 
 

Hm? I Think you have it backwards- most of what you list as factors in their favour is either wrong, or worked against them.
 
The Templars were largely united- and were hardly a minor faction, considering that until the Inquisition comes around they were the Chantry's private army. They had garrisons, ties, and supporters across Thedas, and in many respects they became the core of the Inquisition's forces. The Templars were likely the strongest non-national army in Thedas- or, if not, a very close second to the Wardens.
 
It was the mages who were largely divided- physically and politically- and the lack of allies just underscores how bad and inept their efforts were because of their leadership and political acuemen. Had just one kingdom stood with them against the Templars, they almost certainly would have won the conventional war- because magic isn't just a direct action, but a terrific force multiplier.

The mages will always be divided physically and politically, because they're people. If the mages need to be more united than they were to be a threat, then they're not a threat, because there's no prospect of it happening.

Had one nation stood against the Mages and Templars both, they'd have almost certainly won the conventional war. Neither of them have shown themselves to be any sort of real power capable of competing at that level.

[Dean_the_Young]

I don't see much evidence that Mages can raise a significant number of thralls or undead necromatic legions, or that said undead necromantic legions would be capable of using such mechanisms. And in this situation, I still think the Peasants have come out ahead, particularly if they can stick a few bolts through the mage early.

 

Numbers is already given by our experience with Redcliffe, and other undead-heavy areas. Redcliffe is the posterchild of the necromatic potential in Thedas.

 

Skill is given by the primary advantage of a crossbow- that it was something so simple, even barely-trained peasants could do it. Considering the undead already have archers, which are harder to train...

 

 

And if an mage is in control of a force, why would they stay in bolt range at all?

 

 

 

Plus, the really important people are now those making and selling the crossbows. 

 

 

Hooray for magical fabrication, automation of the pre-industrial age!

That won't give an economic/political/military edge to mages at all.
 
 

The mages will always be divided physically and politically, because they're people. If the mages need to be more united than they were to be a threat, then they're not a threat, because there's no prospect of it happening.

 

 

 

Sure there is- because organizations are quite capable of uniting physically spearated groups of people into coordinated efforts. That's what militaries do all the time- and what the Templars did as well, which helped them win.

 

The Mage Rebellion was an example of bad leadership, not good leadership- and good leadership could get far more synergy, and effect, from the mages under it's control than Fiona's ad hoc, unplanned rebellion. Even if it had fewer numbers, it could be far more capable if it actually prepared for a war beforehand.

 

Had one nation stood against the Mages and Templars both, they'd have almost certainly won the conventional war. Neither of them have shown themselves to be any sort of real power capable of competing at that level.

 

 

Sure- but that's because mages are currently weak, disorganized, and politically stunted- a deliberate goal of the Circle system.

 

It's when mages start infiltrating the Kingdoms and halls of power, and co-opting the organizational strengths of the mundanes, that they start getting too big to stop..

[MisterJB]

Hooray for magical fabrication, automation of the pre-industrial age!

That won't give an economic/political/military edge to mages at all.

I always held this is how they would take over.

[Wulfram]

Numbers is already given by our experience with Redcliffe, and other undead-heavy areas. Redcliffe is the posterchild of the necromatic potential in Thedas.
 
Skill is given by the primary advantage of a crossbow- that it was something so simple, even barely-trained peasants could do it. Considering the undead already have archers, which are harder to train...

There are lots of occasions of "mage screws up, unleashes army of demons wearing corpses", but none that I'm aware of where the mage exhibits actual control over many of them.
 

And if an mage is in control of a force, why would they stay in bolt range at all?

Because zombies aren't really very effective combatants if they don't have back up.
 

Hooray for magical fabrication, automation of the pre-industrial age!
That won't give an economic/political/military edge to mages at all.

I'm not aware of any indication that this exists. Except perhaps back in pre-Veil times, anyway.
 

Sure there is- because organizations are quite capable of uniting physically spearated groups of people into coordinated efforts. That's what militaries do all the time- and what the Templars did as well, which helped them win.

But the mages aren't a military and will never be a military. They're a more or less random group of people, with nothing to tie them together but the common threat of the Templars
 

The Mage Rebellion was an example of bad leadership, not good leadership- and good leadership could get far more synergy, and effect, from the mages under it's control than Fiona's ad hoc, unplanned rebellion. Even if it had fewer numbers, it could be far more capable if it actually prepared for a war beforehand.

The notion that the mages had bad leadership, aside from the decision to side with Tevinter, is basically head canon as far as I can see. I mean, Fiona doesn't inspire confidence in me, but neither does Lucius McCrazypants commanding the other side.

And even if you handwave all the mages natural weaknesses away and turn them into a single united military force taking on the Templars... they'll maybe stalemate them? Being able to just about keep themselves alive is a long, long way away from taking over.
 

Sure- but that's because mages are currently weak, disorganized, and politically stunted- a deliberate goal of the Circle system.
 
It's when mages start infiltrating the Kingdoms and halls of power, and co-opting the organizational strengths of the mundanes, that they start getting too big to stop..

The Circle system imposes organisation on them. The Templars force a common identity. They're a faction only because they have been made into one.

Once the mages are co-opted into governments and politics, they stop being anything but individuals with little advantage over anyone else, and many weaknesses compared to the established powers.

[MisterJB]

The notion that the mages had bad leadership, aside from the decision to side with Tevinter, is basically head canon as far as I can see.

 

 

Ok, first we have Fiona asking for a vote on independence while she was with a dozen or so other mages...inside the White Spire in Val Royeaux. Which meant that they were surrounded by thousands of Templars, nevermind the thousands of normal soldiers and hundreds of thousands of normal citizens.

That is not even making a bad decision, that is "collective suicide by Templar".

 

And then she actually decided to start a rebellion with no alliances, no spy network, no resources, no money, no infrastructure at all to support a sucessfull rebellion.

The only thing that keeps the mages alive is other people's plotting from Ferelden to Tevinter to the Inquisition.

 

Really, it's even hard to qualify this as leadership at all.
 

[Lumix19]

Numbers is already given by our experience with Redcliffe, and other undead-heavy areas. Redcliffe is the posterchild of the necromatic potential in Thedas.

Skill is given by the primary advantage of a crossbow- that it was something so simple, even barely-trained peasants could do it. Considering the undead already have archers, which are harder to train...


And if an mage is in control of a force, why would they stay in bolt range at all?




Hooray for magical fabrication, automation of the pre-industrial age!
That won't give an economic/political/military edge to mages at all.



Sure there is- because organizations are quite capable of uniting physically spearated groups of people into coordinated efforts. That's what militaries do all the time- and what the Templars did as well, which helped them win.

The Mage Rebellion was an example of bad leadership, not good leadership- and good leadership could get far more synergy, and effect, from the mages under it's control than Fiona's ad hoc, unplanned rebellion. Even if it had fewer numbers, it could be far more capable if it actually prepared for a war beforehand.


Sure- but that's because mages are currently weak, disorganized, and politically stunted- a deliberate goal of the Circle system.

It's when mages start infiltrating the Kingdoms and halls of power, and co-opting the organizational strengths of the mundanes, that they start getting too big to stop..

Redcliffe really isn't, the undead army was due to an abomination and those have godlike power. Connor had no control over the scenario.
I know people like to throw around Fiona as the prime example of bad mage leadership and I won't get into a debate about that (I simply disagree) but we've had examples of pretty good leadership as well. Wynne was a pretty good mage leader, Irving was a good First Enchanter, I would even argue that Vivienne was an excellent mage leader since she managed to organise and protect the loyalists.

[Ieldra]

I would point out that Redcliffe in DAO and Blackmarsh in Awakening demonstrate that, yes a single mage can hold sway over communities of substantial size.

Redcliffe (DAI): a terrified group of people meets a person who says "I have the solution", and they end up following him on the road to hell. Why does that sound very familiar from the real world, where magic doesn't exist? I'd rather say a single person - mage or not - can hold sway over communities of substantial size, given the right situation. Also, Redcliffe isn't "substantial". It's a village.

 

Redcliffe (DAO): That wasn't the mage but the demon.

 

Blackmarsh: I'll have to check up on the story, but wasn't this a demon as well?