168 réponses à ce sujet

[Daerog]

I think necromancy is worse XD how is it more acceptable?

 

It is not necessary to harm someone to use it. It tends to use "pre-formed-spirit material" or whatever. Similar to how the Knight Enchanter makes a Spirit Blade.

 

It does not attack (or draw from) life, unlike blood magic.

 

It's still creepy and Cole doesn't like it since it must be like a person using the organs of other people to make a monster to him, even if those organs were not stolen from a formed/conscious being.

 

It is Fade magic that focuses more on the material that spirits are made of. It is not like the spirit binding that the Venatori and Tevinter mages do... sorta.

[Cute Nug]

Ask me again after DA10 and we might have a better answer. Blood magic in Thedas seems to have been used for evil purposes at times.

 

What if the current use of magic in general in the veiled Thedas has bad effects the mages don't understand? After centuries of study mages are clueless about spirits and demons it seems. Seems like mages are pretty clueless if regular magic has any negative effects on the Fade or elsewhere. It's okay to use lyrium even though they don't fully understand it because extra power is nice if you use it according to the Maker's will of course.

 

What if shedding blood in general was "evil"/risky? Or maybe you get a pass if you kill just the people that deserved it. It definitely has an effect on the world. Are the HoF, Hawke, and Quizzy more at risk for all they have killed?

 

What started the blight? Was it shedding Mythal's blood? Was it all the blood the magisters shed to breach the veil?

Currently I think we can only make assumptions about powerful tools we don't understand well enough in game. Maybe by DA10 in the year 2020 we will know. 

[Baekwan]

It is not necessary to harm someone to use it. It tends to use "pre-formed-spirit material" or whatever. Similar to how the Knight Enchanter makes a Spirit Blade.

 

It does not attack (or draw from) life, unlike blood magic.

 

It's still creepy and Cole doesn't like it since it must be like a person using the organs of other people to make a monster to him, even if those organs were not stolen from a formed/conscious being.

 

It is Fade magic that focuses more on the material that spirits are made of. It is not like the spirit binding that the Venatori and Tevinter mages do... sorta.

 

Ah ok thanks! I need to review my lore. I was thinking of the Nevarran's belief in which spirits would take possession of dead bodies, and thus they mummify corpses so the bodies would be comfy for the spirits XD. And yeah, still think it's creepy.

[Daerog]

Ha, I just realized that debating on whether blood magic is evil or not is similar to debates on whether the Dark Side of the Force is evil or not.

 

Just saw a Star Wars clip and I am just reminded of KotOR 2 and such.

 

(Just a thought on kotor2: It would have been nice to have the option of a third ending for KotOR 2, where the hero could agree with Kreia and die, like the third ending for JE.)

[Jedi Master of Orion]

How could you agree with Kreia AND die? Her goal was for the Exile to survive and pass on the teachings.

[Lumix19]

If you think about blood magic had some things in common with what we know of Dreamer powers.

[Aren]

*Sigh* Time to beat this dead horse again.

Blood magic isn't itself evil, but most of its applications are evil. To paraphrase Dorian:

So let's say you use your blood or that of a willing participant. No harm in that, right? But that only gets you so far. What if you need more power? You ALWAYS need more. That's when you get into human sacrifices and demon summoning.

And then let's consider that we know very little about the nature of blood magic. In the book Last Flight, a Warden used blood magic to empower the griffons so that they would fight harder. Without that ritual, the Archdemon might not have been beaten. So a good was achieved, right?

Spoiler

Except that the spell also ended up creating a magical disease that drove the griffons violently insane. They ended up being killed by each other or by the Wardens themselves.

One could speculate that this was the true cost of the spell. In exchange for ending the Blight, it cost the lives of an entire species, and now the Wardens are severely hampered in their efforts to battle the Archdemon.

Blood magic has never been used to achieve a good end without severe repurcussions. Consider that.

i love your post,the Wardens were inane,in order to stop Andhoral they extinct the Griffins,there is always a way to make things better and if Archdemons of the past were beated without be forcing to sacrificed the griffins,well then use that magic was  a mistake without good deed coming from it.

[Aren]

Anders: So we agree that it doesn't take a demon for someone to be a vicious killer? Good.
 

No please don't use Anders.....

From healing magic he jumped the blood magic and reached directly the nuclear bombing

also Hawke summary on blood mages is what i like the most  at 2:25

 

[Daerog]

How could you agree with Kreia AND die? Her goal was for the Exile to survive and pass on the teachings.

 

Eh, maybe I'm remembering some stuff wrong. Mostly, I just remember that Kreia wanted to kill the Force and saw the potential for the Force to die in the Exile, who was a "wound in the Force." Killing or at least disconnecting the galaxy from the Force would have been an interesting ending. Maybe the Exile wouldn't need to die to kill the Force, but I just thought that it would cause the Exile to die by killing the Force.

[Aren]

 

 

Ironically, the Grey Warden Joining is probably the most successful and important use of Blood Magic

If you are referring to the joining that is indispensable to create GW,then is not necessary to consider it as a form of blood magic,since Gaider said that darkspawn taint in suffice potency (with an archdemon drop)is enough to create a GW.

The joining is blood magic only when in absence of a source of suffice potency in terms of taint (archdemon blood),blood magic is used to empower the regular darkspawn blood.

[Lumix19]

If you are referring to the joining that is indispensable to create GW,then is not necessary to consider it as a form of blood magic,since Gaider said that darkspawn taint in suffice potency (with an archdemon drop)is enough to create a GW.
The joining is blood magic only when in absence of a source of suffice potency in terms of taint (archdemon blood),blood magic is used to empower the regular darkspawn blood.

I didn't know this but if true that doesn't really change anything. Archdemon blood is such a rare resource that it's impractical not to use blood magic.

[Daerog]

Blood magic was used to imprison Corypheus. It was specifically blood magic, too, not that "gray area" that involves Templars and GWs... although GWs are known to use blood magic, anyway...

 

Could they have stopped Cory without blood magic? They probably didn't have the means to, and Cory was only recently defeated due to ancient elf magic, which the early Wardens probably didn't know about.

[AnUnculturedLittlePotato]

Technically: No.
Practically: Yes.
It's like communism! On paper it's great! When you actually try it it sucks

[SomeoneStoleMyName]

It is like rhetoric. It is a neutral tool which is easily misused but can be equally good. Consider if rhetorical prowess needed blood magic. You now have Hitler on one side and lets say, Ghandi on the other. They both influenced the world heavily with the use of rhetoric, one for the worse and one for the better. 

 

Blood magic is not evil. It is not even immoral. Saying blood magic is evil is as stupid as someone claiming that a hammer is evil because it can lead to someone's death-

[Daerog]

It is like rhetoric. It is a neutral tool which is easily misused but can be equally good. Consider if rhetorical prowess needed blood magic. You now have Hitler on one side and lets say, Ghandi on the other. They both influenced the world heavily with the use of rhetoric, one for the worse and one for the better. 

 

Blood magic is not evil. It is not even immoral. Saying blood magic is evil is as stupid as someone claiming that a hammer is evil because it can lead to someone's death-

 

If one is just talking about Fade magic, sure.

 

Blood magic, unlike normal tools (or Fade magic), requires harm and is rooted in pain and death.

 

It's like saying that buying clothes made by slaves in sweat shops is not that bad because it is just clothes and buying clothes is not evil. It may not be from that bad of a sweat shop, but it's still a sweat shop. Those clothes can keep people warm and allow people to survive a cold winter... but they are still made by slaves in a sweat shop...

 

It's more the context of blood magic that makes people claim it is evil/bad.

[Lumix19]

If one is just talking about Fade magic, sure.

 

Blood magic, unlike normal tools (or Fade magic), requires harm and is rooted in pain and death.

 

It's like saying that buying clothes made by slaves in sweat shops is not that bad because it is just clothes and buying clothes is not evil. It may not be from that bad of a sweat shop, but it's still a sweat shop. Those clothes can keep people warm and allow people to survive a cold winter... but they are still made by slaves in a sweat shop...

 

It's more the context of blood magic that makes people claim it is evil/bad.

If we're being honest though the lore's a bit all over the place regarding blood magic. In Asunder the mana seems to come from the blood itself, but WoT tells us it's "pain magic". We've been told that it's purely tied to the physical and makes it harder to connect to the Fade, but WoT tells us it makes mages more susceptible to demonic spirits. Some clarification would really be good.

[Daerog]

If we're being honest though the lore's a bit all over the place regarding blood magic. In Asunder the mana seems to come from the blood itself, but WoT tells us it's "pain magic". We've been told that it's purely tied to the physical and makes it harder to connect to the Fade, but WoT tells us it makes mages more susceptible to demonic spirits. Some clarification would really be good.

 

Ya, that is true. Although, I remember old "blood magic evil?" threads where... I think it was Mr. Gaider, came in and said how blood magic gets stronger with pain, and this was before WoT. So... the darker aspects may be getting emphasized due to people dismissing the dark aspects of it early on in the series.

 

It also could just be like the dark side... depending on who is doing the story, it may just be a huge power source that freaks people out or it may be a totally corrupting, self degrading, overpowering evil that consumes the user.

 

I find the emphasis on the dark parts, but the hero still needing to resort to it due to not being an all powerful demigod, to be pretty dramatic and a way to connect with and sympathize with the character (potentially)... so, that's why I tend to push the dark nature of it more. On the other hand, blight magic is another kind of beast, that's super dark, that's not ripping at life, that is unlife or anti-life stuff, and that kind of magic sounded scary when it was described in The Calling.

 

 

Since this is never shown to be in game as it is described in codex entries and other sources, I tend to stay away from bloodmagic in game until they are able to have it match the lore more.

 

Edit: I really want to see DA4 mages hear spirit/demon whispers at some points in the game where a non-mage character/player would not. What it is like to be a mage in lore is not being translated well in the games so far. I can understand wanting to balance combat and gameplay, but the whispering and such would not impact that... although it may be seen as giving more content to mages, so maybe they could do class specific quests or something... with the mage ones emphasizing the challenges of being a mage rather than a mundane and the rogue/warrior ones just being class or background specific quests.

[Lumix19]

Ya, that is true. Although, I remember old "blood magic evil?" threads where... I think it was Mr. Gaider, came in and said how blood magic gets stronger with pain, and this was before WoT. So... the darker aspects may be getting emphasized due to people dismissing the dark aspects of it early on in the series.

 

It also could just be like the dark side... depending on who is doing the story, it may just be a huge power source that freaks people out or it may be a totally corrupting, self degrading, overpowering evil that consumes the user.

 

I find the emphasis on the dark parts, but the hero still needing to resort to it due to not being an all powerful demigod, to be pretty dramatic and a way to connect with and sympathize with the character (potentially)... so, that's why I tend to push the dark nature of it more. Although, blight magic is another kind of beast, that's super dark, that's not ripping at life, that is unlife or anti-life stuff, and that kind of magic sounded scary when it was described in The Calling.

 

 

Although, since this is never shown to be in game as it is described in codex entries and other sources, I tend to stay away from bloodmagic in game until they are able to have it match the lore more.

Blight magic is actually strangely underutilised. You'd think it would be a bigger plot point that carries over to the games or something but it just seems to die with Remille.

[Daerog]

Blight magic is actually strangely underutilised. You'd think it would be a bigger plot point that carries over to the games or something but it just seems to die with Remille.

 

I like that they are keeping it under wraps right now. It keeps it mysterious and something they can come back to later. I'm sure Duncan reported the incident, and with Avernus' research, the Wardens probably have an idea on how blight magic works. Perhaps First Enchanter Remille even kept a journal describing the special enchantments he used and such so he could keep track for future experiments/research on this new power source.

 

It would be interesting to see Elgar'nan (or Geldauran) using complete/pure/whatever Fade magic against a hero (PC or NPC) who resorts to counter the mastery of Fade magic over centuries/millenia that the Elf God has with blight magic, dooming the hero to the taint or whatever, but it being the only quick way to respond to such a foe without some ancient macguffin. (villain fighting with "life" and hero fighting with "unlife" kind of thing... maybe that is too edgy and just a throwback to 80s and 90s antiheroes...)

[Homeboundcrib]

Blood magic is evil in most ways, blood magic uses people's life force. It allows victims to become possessed, turned into abominations etc. any magic can become evil it really just depends on who is welding it, anyone can become corrupted.

[Urzon]

Because you can't mentally enslave people with it, you can't summon demons with it, you aren't likely bargaining with demons to learn it and it isn't inherently corruptible like blood magic is.

May not be able to enslave them mentally, but you could in theory enslave their body (after death) and possibly their soul as well if you summon and bind it to a corpse. (I'm not sure if it's correct or not, but I'm assuming this is what happened with Leandra in DA2, since it looked like her decapitated head got attached to Quentin's rotting corpse bride but she still retained conciseness.)

[Uccio]

Blood magic, unlike normal tools (or Fade magic), requires harm and is rooted in pain and death.

 

The problem with this is that it was added afterwards, just to make Blood Magic more "evil". The only thing it did was made me think devs are backpedaling like there is no tomorrow, just for the sake of justifying why the spec was left out of the game.

[Medhia_Nox]

That was not the point of my reply. The functional similarity is that the use of none of these tools makes you "weak". That blood magic presents a special moral question is uncontested, but a different matter and unconnected to that.

First, logic does not provide truth, it is a path by which a truth is explained.  

 

That you disagree with someone's logic does not mean you are correct.  

 

Also, from my point of view you're missing the point.  It's not blood magic that makes you weak, it's what leads all the mages we've seen so far in game to use blood magic that makes them weak. 

 

- Jowan:  "I thought it would make me a better mage." 

- Dorian's father:  Doesn't have the courage to love a son who shames him in the face of Tevinter.

- Avernus:  supreme narcissism converted to powermongering

- Uldred:  fear of the world converted to powermongering

- Orsino:  fear of the world converted to paranoia and panic

- Merryl:  supreme narcissism converted to savior-complex 

- A bevvy of lesser characters:  fear of templars, mundanes or whatever boorish excuse is popular this week.  

 

I don't care about hypothetical do gooder blood mage cutters performing self-mutilating acts for the sake of the "greater good".  I haven't seen any in the game yet. 

 

For me - weakness of character is WHY morality is even a question to begin with.  

 

There are, so far, no good purposes presented for blood magic: 
 

- Phylacteries

- Violence (not unique to blood magic by any stretch of the imagination - but when it's one of your only purposes...) 

- Mind Control

 

Again, hypotheticals are not the best basis to make an argument on.  I'm loathe to say it - but I'll "believe it when I see it" (I tend to think only the dullest people believe only the things they can see).  I hear people talking about what a blood mage "could" do... yet, I see no in game representations of any of them doing it.  Forumites claiming that's just some weird moralizing by the creators have no foundation to make that argument.  

 

Lastly, I'm not making arguments about why anyone else should see the way I do.  Nor am I explaining why I see the way I do.  Simply that this is how I see it.  Take that for what you will.  It's just opinion and how I would proceed on Thedas were I to be somehow transplanted there.  

[Ieldra]

First, logic does not provide truth, it is a path by which a truth is explained.  
 
That you disagree with someone's logic does not mean you are correct.

The attempt to cast doubt on my arguments by stating the possibility that I could be wrong - which is trivial, of course I can be - without attempting to demonstrate that I actually *am* wrong is a rather cheap rhetorical tactic. Also, logic does provide truth if the propositions you use to make your conclusions are themselves true.
 

For me - weakness of character is WHY morality is even a question to begin with.

Morality is a question because we're born with conflicting passions. If we weren't "social animals", we wouldn't have it. Also, what constitutes "strength of character" is rather subjective. I disagree with the idea that humbly accepting your limitations without ever trying to overcome them constitutes strength of character. I don't condemn Jowan. I don't condemn Merrill (not for using blood magic, at least). In fact, I dislike Lily for how she rejected him, and I dislike the level of prejudice expressed by Merrill's clan.

IMO, in order to *really* show some strength or weakness of character, give us two characters who both use blood magic - and one ends up sacrificing humans and the other doesn't, given similar "provocation".

 

Forumites claiming that's just some weird moralizing by the creators have no foundation to make that argument.

I think there is a very good foundation for that argument: here we have a tool that's as versatile as magic as such, that makes it possible to augment any spell without lyrium, which is a very rare and controlled resource, a tool which is, yes, highly tempting to misuse but doesn't force you into doing the bad stuff - and *everyone* only does the bad stuff with it? Do you think that makes any sense? People being who they are, as clear as it is that someone will always misuse it, as clear it is that someone won't. Besides, I don't condemn Jowan for defending himself and Lily against the templars.


Bottom line: I think it is fundamentally unjustified, as a rule, to condemn someone for something that didn't do any actual harm, and I see no reason to make an exception with blood magic. I also see no reason for seeing "weakness of character" when someone tries to use a stronger tool because the one they've used before wasn't sufficient.

Of course, since moral statements aren't truth-apt, this is also just opinion.

[Iakus]

 
I think there is a very good foundation for that argument: here we have a tool that's as versatile as magic as such, that makes it possible to augment any spell without lyrium, which is a very rare and controlled resource, a tool which is, yes, highly tempting to misuse but doesn't force you into doing the bad stuff - and *everyone* only does the bad stuff with it? Do you think that makes any sense? People being who they are, as clear as it is that someone will always misuse it, as clear it is that someone won't. Besides, I don't condemn Jowan for defending himself and Lily against the templars.
 

Most, people, yes, end up doing "bad stuff" with it.  Not at first, perhaps.  But in time, the misuse of blood magic seems to grow.  And even when it is used for a "good" cause, things seem to backfire.  Look at Isseya, Avernus, Lady Harriman.  

 

Blood magic is clearly far more than "simple magic augmentation.  That barely scratches the surface. It is something different.  It's a different kind of magic altogether, Something darker.  We have no idea where the power comes from, just what fuels it.  It's extremely dangerous and destructive, It has side effects we can't begin to predict.  Spirits loathe it and demons teach it.  I'd say it's something to be kept at arm's length whenever possible.