7 réponses à ce sujet

[Bayonet Hipshot]

I am curious how necromancy in Thedas is viewed from an ethical perspective. We know that unlike many other fantasy settings, Necromancy in Thedas is Death Magic that is based on the manipulation of small wisps of spirits as opposed to manipulation of souls or the undead.

 

My question is how ethical is the manipulation of small spirit wisps ? According to Cole, they are pieces of a figment of a fragment, not fully actualized spirits but they have the potential to be one. & a necromancer breaks these pieces in order to cast their necromantic spells.

 

So in a sense necromancy is a lot like killing the "spirit sperm" and "spirit egg" before they have chance to become full spirits. In essence, a necromancer is committing spirit abortion of sorts.

 

However, if we hold this to be true, then killing living female and male enemies is harmful as well since male enemies produce sperms and female enemies produce ova, which can potentially form another being but when we kill them, we break that potential from becoming a possibility. We could also say that eating eggs of animals and eating young plants are bad things since we are preventing them from being fully formed.

 

Additionally, we also know from Solas that a spirit never truly dies. It is reborn but it is not the same spirit again. I think we can assume that if this applies to a fully actualized Spirit of Wisdom, it can apply to tiny spirit wisps.

 

So what is your opinion on necromancy in Thedas ? Is it ethical or no ? Or perhaps you see necromancy no differently than someone who eats chicken eggs ? Thoughts & comments

 

 

[Lazarillo]

I think the first, and probably most important, really, thing to keep in mind is that the standard belief regarding spirits is that they aren't "real people". Demons are an adversarial force but spirits and wisps are just sort of seen as animals at best, and probably not even really that. The prevailing opinion more seems to be that Necromancers are "weird" for spending time involved with the dead and with spirits...maybe like someone who spends all his or her time playing with dolls? You've got souls that aren't "real" interacting with bodies that aren't alive. So your average person probably would want nothing to do with a Necromancer just because of the connotations of what it involves, but probably wouldn't see it as any more "wrong" than any other form of magic, really.

[AedanStarfang]

I think other regions in Thedas maybe adverse to Necromancy, especially Mortalitisi Necromancy for moral and ethical reasons (the dwarves certainly wouldn't want the corpses of their ancestors uprooting and killing, and the Dalish probably have some stigma against it) but it's nowhere TES IV levels of moral-law/ethics where a worldwide-ban is in place. 

[electricfish]

Necromancy has quite a bit of stigma associated with it in southern Thedas. Really, only the Tevinter Imperium and the Mortalitasi of Nevarra are the only ones who equate the practice with other "normal" magic such as primal or healing spells.

 

Anything to do with interacting with or manipulating spirits is given the Chantry Seal of Disapproval, which largely extends to the common populace as well. Circle mages may have less prejudice about it, depending on what Circle they are from. Necromancy is not considered unethical in terms of its treatment or its use of spirits, but more like edges on "immoral" due to religious stigma associated with interacting with spirits. Many people in Thedas don't really understand the difference between Necromancy and Blood Magic either, so that's an extra bit of prejudice that limits the study and application as well.

 

On a personal level, I don't really see necromancy as unethical. The spirit pieces that Cole mentions are not even quite on the same level as sperm or egg because it would imply that they have structure or the beginnings of a consciousness. The pieces are more like condensed collection of Fade stuff, like gas coalescing in space that could either form a planet or a star. Because it's a higher concentration of magic and more "dense," it can be used to power things in a different way. Magic is all about using your will, and a necromancer is willing that piece to perform a function that other spells can't replicate yet (e.g. animating a dead person's body to fight for you).

 

Outside of combat, necromancers such as the Mortalitasi actually use fully formed spirits to teach apprentices. This is the purpose of the skull the necromancer specialist has you craft. It houses the spirit of a dead Mortalitasi (supposed to, at least), which will whisper secrets and teachings from the skull. In that sense, necromancy is actually quite useful and reverent.

 

The biggest issue I'd say is whether a person actually chooses to reanimate dead bodies for combat and stuff. That is an ethical/moral line that I personally wouldn't normally be willing to do, even if the body is some skeleton that's long been dead. Reanimating some guy who you just killed is...an uncomfortable thought. That's the morally grey area I personally have issue with, and it's easy enough to just not take the skill as far as game mechanics goes.

[Big I]

Unlike blood mages, the spirits necromancers use aren't people (blood mages can also raise the dead, but I believe in that case they're using demons to inhabit the corspes). Even Solas, great friend of the Fade, doesn't have a problem with necromancy. At worst, necromancy might be akin to mistreatment of animals.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

My question is how ethical is the manipulation of small spirit wisps ? According to Cole, they are pieces of a figment of a fragment, not fully actualized spirits but they have the potential to be one. & a necromancer breaks these pieces in order to cast their necromantic spells.

 

So in a sense necromancy is a lot like killing the "spirit sperm" and "spirit egg" before they have chance to become full spirits. In essence, a necromancer is committing spirit abortion of sorts.

 

I've never heard this bit before. Source?

 

As for how ethical necromancy is considered to be, most people don't care about the use of spirits. (Except when demons are concerned; that is viewed as both evil and stupid.) Sacrificing a potential spirit is something else, but they probably wouldn't care about that either. Defiling a flesh-and-blood being's body, however, seems to be viewed as rather heinous.

[Bayonet Hipshot]

I've never heard this bit before. Source?

 

 

Check out Cole's dialogue if the Inquisitor chooses to be a Necromancer.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Check out Cole's dialogue if the Inquisitor chooses to be a Necromancer.

Good catch, thanks.

 

It does seem like using necromancy in this case is arguably unethical. As for whether I personally think it is, I suppose it depends on whether or not the wisps are conscious. On the other hand, I don't know that mainstream Thedas would even see the question.

 

Edit: And of course, this won't stop me from making Glyndwyr Lavellan a necromancer.