410 réponses à ce sujet

[Heimdall]

Ever heard "Inquisition"? Many people who going through Inquisition are out of false accusations. Practicing chemistry alone could make you being accused of being a witch and burned at the stake. The accusation not nessessarily comes from the Church but by anyone, your rival maybe, anyone who ****** off at you. They see you concocting something in your personal lab in your home, they call it magic and Inquisitors will knock on your door...

The Church is power in medieval time, they control everything, politic, economy, social. They who make laws. Monasteries own lands and become enterprise by their own. They are super rich. You can't build anything if not get permission by the Church. You think you want to build windmill to grind your grain? No, that windwill will be burn out if the Church don't approve. And this is historically accurate, not an accusation. This is the Dark Age, and this is why Europe are so backward compared with the east during that time...

Ashagar has covered it, so I'll just specify that the Catholic Church never accused anyone of heresy for chemistry.

Your views on the Catholic Church's history are flat out outlandish and inaccurate. Sure, monasteries could own land and act as a landlord. That didn't make them any different than any vassal in Europe and they still owed fealty to the feudal lord. Bishops often were vassals to rulers. There was a long running controversy over whether the Church or the rulers had the right to appoint Bishops. The Church was certainly no absolute authority at any point in its history.

[Addictress]

The Descent warriors used auto crossbows like Bianca, not really guns.

[Typhrus]

Making long posts and claiming to be historian doesn't make you are right...

 

Christianity that makes Europe backward, in other way Islam makes Middle East advance. But Muslims following the footsteps of the Catholic that makes Muslims like we see today...

 

Alright, what i am writing about is actually taken from the work of the most popular historian, father of socialism, Ibn Khaldun...it is the theory of the rise and fall of civilization...what i am talking about based on his theory mostly. I also included the work of Ibn Rushd, the father of secularism.

 

I simplify them much, but if you are interested just take a look at their work. Even Voltaire and Karl Marx copying their ideas.

 

I said I was done, but I will answer this as it was directed at me.

 

I never claimed I was right and as a historian if I claimed that what I said was 100% right and true, that would send alarm bells off (and quite frankly I'd be concerned if myself or other historians said that). Other posters like Heimdall, Ashagar, Andraste_Reborn and a few others would likely tear into me if that was the case too. So on that note, I'll put it simply: Your arguments so far have not been convincing and have little historical relevancy when you attempted to use it. I have, along with many other posters suggested evidence that contradicts what you have posted as a reasonable explanation as to why fire arms of the time period will be nothing like what you have stated. I've also noticed that you have shifted the goal posts several times, which is an indication of a weak argument.

 

So am I right? Maybe, maybe not, but I've at least put forward reasonable ideas and backed them up with evidence as to why your initial thesis is wrong. So just because you imply that you are right, does not make you so.

 

I've answered this before, the Catholic Church did not hold back Europe as a whole, you are falling for the popular culture myth that all religion is bad and backwards. The Catholic Church created universities as a centre of learning and yes scientific advancement, particularly in the areas of Astronomy. This is because new ideas were formed within Europe and also from without, the cross cultural ties between Christianity and Islam has not always been violent or mutually exclusive. I'm not going to get caught arguing about the current state of Islam as I do not know enough about its current form to articulate and argument without sounding ridiculous.

 

Maybe it is your wording here and not necessarily the intention, but I'd certainly question Ibn Khaldun or Ibn Rushd being "[...] the most popular historian [...]" That is not to say that their theories and theses are to be disregarded, merely that I question how popular they are. As for Voltaire and Marx, one I know more for quips than actual history, but his insights into politics back then are worthwhile reading and Marx had a great understanding of capitalism, if he had not been 'against it' he might have made a good one himself. Could they have been influenced by Ibn Khaldun and/or Ibn Rushd? Sure, but then I'd also question how well they could access the source material, as it would not have been as simple as it is today to search for their ideas.

 

Now, I'm jumping a head to a few more posts that you made. Just because most of us happen to live in the west (hint, I'm not an American or European), doesn't automatically mean we believe in Jesus. Just like I don't believe all Muslims are terrorists or religious extremists, so stop using stereotyping as an argument. It smacks of a personal attack on a collective as opposed to arguing against their argument, it brings nothing to the discussion apart from maybe leading the thread to a flame war.

 

@AlanC9:

I'm not aware of 'magic' being set out strictly other than the 'schools of magic'. The Tempest rogue falls into a kind of grey area as to whether what they're using constitutes magic or not. If that is considered magic, then do we consider runes inscribed on weapons and armour as magic as well? I'd argue that magic in Thedas has been studied or is being studied as a kind of science, but nothing too concrete.

 

You are right, that this is something interesting to discuss and likely to be more fruitful.

 

edited some basic spelling and grammar issues.
 

[Evamitchelle]

There's a banter between Dorian and Sera discussing the Tempest specialization. Roughly goes like this:

Dorian: For being so unnerved by magic, you aren't shy about benefiting from its effects.
Sera: I don't. I Use normal things, not magic.
Dorian: You consider swathing yourself in flame or ice normal and not magic ?
Sera: For one, it comes out a bottle. For two, I mess up, I get burned. You mess up, your head chucks up a demon. For three (basically repeating one and two).
Dorian: You know what, never mind. Whatever lets you sleep at night.

So Dorian (the actual mage of the two) clearly thinks of it as magic. 

[Qis]

Now, I'm jumping a head to a few more posts that you made. Just because most of us happen to live in the west (hint, I'm not an American or European), doesn't automatically mean we believe in Jesus. Just like I don't believe all Muslims are terrorists or religious extremists, so stop using stereotyping as an argument. It smacks of a personal attack on a collective as opposed to arguing against their argument, it brings nothing to the discussion apart from maybe leading the thread to a flame war.

 

 

I am only giving a thesis, i am expecting an anti-thesis, but so far no one give any...so i continue with my thesis, all i see here is denial, denying whatever i wrote, rebuttals, so what do you expect? The original suggestion is gun is supposed not to be in Dragon Age, i have given my points on, so you are supposed to give a counter suggestion on why it supposed to be in Dragon Age. No one adressing the issue, so i assume everyone want guns in Dragon Age. But it appear to be not, everyone even deny that. So what is the anti-thesis of my thesis?

[TobiTobsen]

I am only giving a thesis, i am expecting an anti-thesis, but so far no one give any...so i continue with my thesis, all i see here is denial, denying whatever i wrote, rebuttals, so what do you expect? The original suggestion is gun is supposed not to be in Dragon Age, i have given my points on, so you are supposed to give a counter suggestion on why it supposed to be in Dragon Age. No one adressing the issue, so i assume everyone want guns in Dragon Age. But it appear to be not, everyone even deny that. So what is the anti-thesis of my thesis?

 

You've been given 13 pages of antitheses. The denial of that is entirely your own problem.

[Qis]

Do we have a coherent definition of "magic" we can use here? Science is easy enough since we can just map the RW equivalent onto Thedas, but what counts as "magic"? Anything involving the fade and/or lyrium? Can we keep those from ending up as particular branches of science? Should we?

(Qis isn't interesting anymore, but these strike me as worth talking about.)

 

I am not aware of being quite interesting before, is there any reason to have such expression?

 

In regard of your question, that is the problem in games universe today, in order to make gameplay interesting, the developers tend to add magic into everything but they deny it is magic, while it is obviously magic. This is the mark where games become shitty. Tempest Archer is a solid evidence for that, now we have archers who are more powerful than what the lore have established. Before it have been established that magic is dangerous beyond imagination, but we keep seeing non-mages are far more powerful than Mages themselves. Some give an excuse for it is a gameplay vs story segregration, but i refuse to accept that.

 

In order to ague with me some say that alchemy is magic, while it is obviously not magic, but they insist on it for the sake of arguing. if alchemy is magic, then why would Mages not rebelled long time ago using just this simple chemistry? Like what i have been established before in earlier post. And if alchemy can give such effect to an archer, there is no reason it will not give any effect on a musketeer or gunner or cannoneer...no reason at all. Everybody can learn alchemy, Thedas would have been destroyed long ago, not by Mages, by everyone.So what the bloody hell is going on in Dragon Age?

[Andraste_Reborn]

So what the bloody hell is going on in Dragon Age?

 

Nugs, mostly.

[Typhrus]

I am only giving a thesis, i am expecting an anti-thesis, but so far no one give any...so i continue with my thesis, all i see here is denial, denying whatever i wrote, rebuttals, so what do you expect? The original suggestion is gun is supposed not to be in Dragon Age, i have given my points on, so you are supposed to give a counter suggestion on why it supposed to be in Dragon Age. No one adressing the issue, so i assume everyone want guns in Dragon Age. But it appear to be not, everyone even deny that. So what is the anti-thesis of my thesis?

 

You do realise that we have been giving you an 'anti-thesis' this entire time right? We have given you arguments on why certain technologies are present in the game universe (but we haven't actually seen any of these cannons closely yet in-game). A codex in DAO establishes that the Qunari do indeed possess incredibly primitive cannons, that is it. We have consistently argued in our theses that given the state of the Dragon Age universe, it would not be possible for early fire arms (as in hand held weapons, not big cannons) to be used in large numbers as they would be less effective than bows and arrows. This was the case in reality too. We have continually pointed out that early fire arms had a ridiculously short range (even 'high tech' muskets only had an effect range of 60 ft...or 20 or so metres if my maths is correct, an archer can shoot much further than that) and even in that short range, they were incredibly inaccurate. This is why we get the 'line' formations with muskets to increase the collective accuracy to maybe hit the broadside of a barn. The only thing that fire arms, whether early or late was that they are much simpler to use. It took years of training to become an accomplished bowman, all that you basically taught people with fire arms was where to roughly shoot and how to load and could be trained in the span of a few weeks.

 

Anyway, you have shifted the goal posts again and are making a nonsensical argument about 'denying things'. We haven't 'denied' anything outright, to the extent that we have argued against your points. If you wish to ignore what others and myself have said, so be it. It is just further confirming your ignorance on general European history, technology and science to which most of this discussion has centred around. I'll probably continue watching this thread for the historical comparisons and maybe getting a more solid definition on whether or not the tempest elixirs can be construed as 'magic'. I will congratulate you though, on managing to bring me back to comment more times than I intended.

[TobiTobsen]

You do realise that we have been giving you an 'anti-thesis' this entire time right? We have given you arguments on why certain technologies are present in the game universe (but we haven't actually seen any of these cannons closely yet in-game). A codex in DAO establishes that the Qunari do indeed possess incredibly primitive cannons, that is it. We have consistently argued in our theses that given the state of the Dragon Age universe, it would not be possible for early fire arms (as in hand held weapons, not big cannons) to be used in large numbers as they would be less effective than bows and arrows. This was the case in reality too. We have continually pointed out that early fire arms had a ridiculously short range (even 'high tech' muskets only had an effect range of 60 ft...or 20 or so metres if my maths is correct, an archer can shoot much further than that) and even in that short range, they were incredibly inaccurate. This is why we get the 'line' formations with muskets to increase the collective accuracy to maybe hit the broadside of a barn. The only thing that fire arms, whether early or late was that they are much simpler to use. It took years of training to become an accomplished bowman, all that you basically taught people with fire arms was where to roughly shoot and how to load and could be trained in the span of a few weeks.

 

Anyway, you have shifted the goal posts again and are making a nonsensical argument about 'denying things'. We haven't 'denied' anything outright, to the extent that we have argued against your points. If you wish to ignore what others and myself have said, so be it. It is just further confirming your ignorance on general European history, technology and science to which most of this discussion has centred around. I'll probably continue watching this thread for the historical comparisons and maybe getting a more solid definition on whether or not the tempest elixirs can be construed as 'magic'. I will congratulate you though, on managing to bring me back to comment more times than I intended.

 

Hey... psssst.... Typhrus...

 

Spoiler

 

At least I hope it's one...

[Qis]

You do realise that we have been giving you an 'anti-thesis' this entire time right? We have given you arguments on why certain technologies are present in the game universe (but we haven't actually seen any of these cannons closely yet in-game). A codex in DAO establishes that the Qunari do indeed possess incredibly primitive cannons, that is it. We have consistently argued in our theses that given the state of the Dragon Age universe, it would not be possible for early fire arms (as in hand held weapons, not big cannons) to be used in large numbers as they would be less effective than bows and arrows. This was the case in reality too. We have continually pointed out that early fire arms had a ridiculously short range (even 'high tech' muskets only had an effect range of 60 ft...or 20 or so metres if my maths is correct, an archer can shoot much further than that) and even in that short range, they were incredibly inaccurate. This is why we get the 'line' formations with muskets to increase the collective accuracy to maybe hit the broadside of a barn. The only thing that fire arms, whether early or late was that they are much simpler to use. It took years of training to become an accomplished bowman, all that you basically taught people with fire arms was where to roughly shoot and how to load and could be trained in the span of a few weeks.

 

Anyway, you have shifted the goal posts again and are making a nonsensical argument about 'denying things'. We haven't 'denied' anything outright, to the extent that we have argued against your points. If you wish to ignore what others and myself have said, so be it. It is just further confirming your ignorance on general European history, technology and science to which most of this discussion has centred around. I'll probably continue watching this thread for the historical comparisons and maybe getting a more solid definition on whether or not the tempest elixirs can be construed as 'magic'. I will congratulate you though, on managing to bring me back to comment more times than I intended.

 

And i have already refute the claim that Qunari simple guns will act the same as any real life primitive guns because of other primitive technology in Thedas don't act in the same way as the real life counterpart. But you guys insist on saying that it will be the same, regardless of irrefutable proof i already given, Tempest Archer for example. Nothing in Thedas work the same way as in real life counterpart.

 

That's my argument, the reason why it can't be NOW is because of that reason. I repeat, they can't be made lower than any primitive technology already existed in the game, it must be higher and more impressive. You can't make an archer shooting hundreds of fireballs in 5 seconds but a handgun shooting one bullet in 30 seconds. That's break everything! Break believeability, break the already established lore. You understand now?

 

I have been patient with all the attacks on me, not once i ever attack anyone personally, but as we all can see BSN never changed.

[Qis]

What happen is when they put magic where it should not be and called it something else, then lowering the quality of magic itself for balancing, to make the other more impressive. But then other things should changed in accordance to the changes made, it will become ridiculous and everything will fall.

 

Qunari guns CANNOT be in lower standard than Tempest Archery, it can't be because guns are comes from higher technology than bow and arrows. And when this happen, magic is irrelevent, magic itself  can't surpassed the hybrid of technology and magic. It will become dull, boring, repititive, uncreative, and it have already begun...

 

Magic will become like Skyrim magic, those who play Skyrim know how suck Skyrim magic is, why it suck? Because of to favor hybrid and balancing. They can't make magic powerful, because of tech plus magic will produce a godlike build. They lower down magic, introduce smithing and enchantment. In the end, everyone makes smithing+enchantment+magic...who want to play 100% Destruction Mage in Skyrim? It suck, it supposed to be a support, work with upgraded and enchanted hand weapon...so magic at the left hand, weapon at the right hand. That's the perfect godlike build for Skyrim, means the conclusion of all build.

 

It becomes like that because they break the law, the law i mentioned before, when magic on the raise, technology should be low, when technology is on the raise, magic should be low...that's the perfect harmony, as in real life even. You can't add both science and magic, or else everything break loose, unbalanced and fall. It is simple rule.

 

If you add religion, magic and science together, you will go crazy and shoot yourself in the head, like many people do in the past, do you guys know how many people going suicide because of it?

[Heimdall]

And i have already refute the claim that Qunari simple guns will act the same as any real life primitive guns because of other primitive technology in Thedas don't act in the same way as the real life counterpart. But you guys insist on saying that it will be the same, regardless of irrefutable proof i already given, Tempest Archer for example. Nothing in Thedas work the same way as in real life counterpart.

This argument has already been refuted several times. The elixirs that empower the Tempest archer are magical in nature, as indicated by Dorian. Screaming 'Alchemy is science' at the top of your lungs doesn't change that, as alchemy in Thedas isn't the same as real world Alchemy. Even if your were to take the irrational position that a substance that covers the user in fire that doesn't burn them and gives them beneficial effects isn't magic, it still isn't archery. The elixirs would be the equivalent of performance enhancing drugs.

Saying "it isn't true" isn't refuting an argument.

That's my argument, the reason why it can't be NOW is because of that reason. I repeat, they can't be made lower than any primitive technology already existed in the game, it must be higher and more impressive. You can't make an archer shooting hundreds of fireballs in 5 seconds but a handgun shooting one bullet in 30 seconds. That's break everything! Break believeability, break the already established lore. You understand now?

Primitive guns were less effective, less accurate, and much slower to fire than bows, why would Thedas primitive guns need to be more effective? There's no reason except some arbitrary need you've decided upon.

[Qis]

This argument has already been refuted several times. The elixirs that empower the Tempest archer are magical in nature, as indicated by Dorian. Screaming 'Alchemy is science' at the top of your lungs doesn't change that, as alchemy in Thedas isn't the same as real world Alchemy. Even if your were to take the irrational position that a substance that covers the user in fire that doesn't burn them and gives them beneficial effects isn't magic, it still isn't archery. The elixirs would be the equivalent of performance enhancing drugs.

Saying "it isn't true" isn't refuting an argument.
Primitive guns were less effective, less accurate, and much slower to fire than bows, why would Thedas primitive guns need to be more effective? There's no reason except some arbitrary need you've decided upon.

 

 

So i ask, those alchemy of yours never work on a Qunari musketeer? If it does, how do you imagine it will be look like?

[Medhia_Nox]

The only reason guns overtook bows in the beginning was because any moron could fire a gun effectively.  The training time for bows was MUCH longer and competent archers were specialists. 

 

A trained archer could fire WAY more arrows than a trained arquebusier.  

 

NOTE:  What would be the big deal with magical guns?  You'd still have to load it.  Magical guns would be even less effective than magical bows... because their magical effect would rely on "rate of fire" and low tech guns would always be slower.

[Qis]

The only reason guns overtook bows in the beginning was because any moron could fire a gun effectively.  The training time for bows was MUCH longer and competent archers were specialists. 

 

A trained archer could fire WAY more arrows than a trained arquebusier.  

 

Surely a Tempest Arquebusier will do better than that, or do you guys still want to argue?

[Qis]

When you mix with the lot, you'll never see what is not...you guys just a bandwagon...you guys who make Dragon Age as what it is today...i will not suprised if there is Iron Man and the proton cannon in DA4 should they make, i will not shocked with whatever would come out in Dragon Age anymore....and I am not really care actually....it just pity how Dragon Age : Inquisition come out to be...a shame isn't it...? What was once, never return...

[Medhia_Nox]

Dragon Age: Inquistion suffers from too much magic... not too much technology.  

[Qis]

That is why there should not be any advance technology in Dragon Age, as I wrote earlier in the original post, let it be forgotten, just scrap it and throw it away into oblivion. make it Qunari suddenly disappear or they all dead, like Atlantis, whatever technology they have will remain a mystery and no one will ever know. Let magic and religion flourish. Surely they'll never do that.

 

The second serries of this game thst is DA2 is already nonsense, but forgiven. Anders magic bomb that is likely created by a sort "alchemy" destroy the very basis of the premise. Anders don't destroy the Chantry by magic, but by "alchemy". We can argue "magic should serve men, not ruled by it", changed it into "alchemy should serve men, not to be used to destroy a church". Jarvis or whatever his name is should not be going through all the problems to trade with the Qunari for the gunpowder, he should trade with the alchemists, their stuff are more cooler than what the Qunari can offer

 

But whatever, if the next game will be in Tevinter, i don't know how they want to handle Tevinter magic vs Qunari technology, i don't want to lay up any hope, i just can speculate how it will turn out to be...something unbelieveable, horrible, terrible...you can't fathom what just happen as you sit and watch cats breeding rats

[9TailsFox]

magic can't work with science/technology? where is so much games witch say you wrong.

[Qis]

Am i...?

 

Arcanum creates a compelling new world where magic and technology coexist in an uneasy balance. As Arcanum opens, the mechanical age has only recently arrived in this ancient land where Humans, Elves, Dwarves, Orcs and other races have learned to survive in the new sprawling industrialized cities. But this radical shift from magic to technology has created a potentially explosive situation. As the townspeople and other thinkers begin mass production of light bulbs, batteries, eyeglasses and guns, the Mages grow leery. This tightly wound setting is the starting point from which the character must set out on his quest.

 

Arcanum is the name of the continent on which the game takes place - a Tolkienesque realm of humans, elves, dwarves, orcs, gnomes, ogres and halflings, in the midst of an industrial revolution reminiscent of 19th century Europe. The technological revolution is led by humans and gnomes, while elves cling to the traditional ways of magick. The rivalry is deeper than mere traditionalism, though, as magick and technology are mutually exclusive. Powerful magicks cause a machinery to fail, while a novice mage will find their spells backfiring around powerful steam engines.

 

http://arcanum.wikia...ck_Obscura_Wiki

 

Magic and science can't co-exist, you must choose which to be dominant, one will destroy the other

[Qis]

How many times i want to repeat myself? Magic/religion and science are opposing values, they will never add up with each other, like cats and rats, either cats eat rats or rats overrun cats, cats and rats don't breed catrats...if ever catrats exist, they are abominations should be put on the torch and shun among the society, they should be fonged and stoned

[Medhia_Nox]

@9TailsFox:  Shadowrun is the greatest IP ever invented.  I'm not talking opinion here... that is cold, hard scientific fact.   Funny that it's tag-line is:  "Where man meets magic and machine." 

 

And that "Soviet Elves" meme is hilarious.

 

@Qis:  Can you repeat yourself one more time?  I don't think I get what you mean.  

[Blood Mage Reaver]

OP think a gun can nerf raining firestorms and turning people to stone with your mind. 

 

 

Magic is not just firing bolts from a staff, Thedas has magics that range from light bulbs to time travel and teleportation.

 

It is flat out stated that mages without restrictions can become godlike beings and that before the veil was made it was the rule rather than the exception.

 

The Qunari were driven out because the Chantry basically said "Magic must serve man my ass, nuke the heretics!" and they turned the mighty dreadnaughts into toothpicks as the Inquisitor can see for him/herself on Iron Bull's mission.

 

Realistically speaking, guns, even modern ones, are less effective at close quarters than white weapons because it is very difficult to point them in a melee struggle without risk shooting yourself. This is why all militaries still train soldiers to fight with knifes.

 

Firearms in Thedas would only be effective in the hands of rogues because they use stealth to properly aim and shoot, if a mage is aware that you are about to shoot him then he will cast a dimensional barrier around him which no bullet, arrow or blade can pierce.

 

Anyone who played Assassin's Creed II knows the advantages and limits of ancient firearms in a medieval fantasy, if you then add magic to the bullets then we can all start naming our player characters Tomoe Mami.

 

It is unlikely that gunpowder can overtake magic as the main source of power in Thedas, what it can do instead is compliment the latter by giving the average man the means to pierce armor without magic arrows and make bigger bombs with less risks of demons breaking loose.

[Illegitimus]

Surely a Tempest Arquebusier will do better than that, or do you guys still want to argue?

 

A "Tempest Arquebusier" would instantly blow himself to smithereens when he ignited his powder.