69 réponses à ce sujet

[Toasted Llama]

You might think so if you are focusing more on the Templar side, but I really don't see that bias there. Many of the main arguments in favor of mage freedom were challenged and called into question in DAI, to show the other side and the cost of the war.

As for killing being less effort. I don't think so. Mages have to train for years to be able to control and focus their abilities to do that sort of stuff. Just like someone would need to train a weapon or condition their physical body.

 

Were the arguments really challenged? A lot of the problematic actions from mages are excused because 'they're oppressed' and because they are taking 'desperate measures' to force change. I'm genuinely curious which arguments for mage freedom you think were challenged and why.

 

 

Sure they need to put in effort to control it, but that doesn't erase the fact that mage spells are a more effective way to kill someone than a sword. As an exaggerated example; a gun and a spoon. Sure, both require effort to properly use them as a tool to kill, but the gun is just a lot more effective than a spoon, much like setting someone on fire with a simple (accidental?) hand gesture as opposed to accidentally cutting someone with a blade (you'll need to put enough force behind a blade and be in close proximity to make a decent cut, the latter being quite difficult when people automatically try to avoid pointy objects).

And then I'm still ignoring the AoE capabilities of a mage versus a warrior at this point.

[thesuperdarkone2]

I can tell this thread is going to end well

[IllustriousT]

You have four weeks left to work out your anger...starting now. 

[Toasted Llama]

You have four weeks left to work out your anger...starting now. 

 

[Wulfram]

I always felt the point of the mage/templar conflict wasn't supposed to be about Abominations. Or at least it shouldn't be. It should be about abuse of power.

You can see this in the history of Thedas. Abominations barely rate a mention. The big thing, the thing that got Andraste talking about how "magic exists to serve man, never to rule over him" was Tevinter. Its about people having unearned power and using that unearned power to oppress those who lack it.

Abominations fit in thematically quite well when they're the result of arrogance or recklessness, but I think one of the problems with Dragon Age 2 was that it went too far in turning mages into (to quote David Gaider) "a kitten that CAN EXPLODE IN YOUR FACE AND TAKE OUT AN ENTIRE CITY BLOCK IF YOU TOUCH IT". It just seemed like they'd turn into abominations at the slightest provocation, and this largely crowded out the other issue.

The theme of abuse of power is an interesting one, and one that follows quite naturally from the basic fantasy idea that magically gifted people exist. I don't think the exploding kitten thing is very interesting, particularly since it seemed to result in the discussions being about the frankly inconsistent evidence we have as to the likelihood of them exploding.

DAI does seem inconsistent with DA2, but I don't think it removes the case for Templars. Its just the case in DAI focuses more on the evil that mages do through greed or hubris. The case against mages in DAI isn't the foolish apprentice turning into an abomination, its Alexius and Corypheus and Solas. And I think its better for it.

[Sah291]

Were the arguments really challenged? A lot of the problematic actions from mages are excused because 'they're oppressed' and because they are taking 'desperate measures' to force change. I'm genuinely curious which arguments for mage freedom you think were challenged and why.

That may have been arguably true in DA2, but I don't really see it in DAI so much. I wouldn't say the game is biased in favor of Templars exactly either, but the mage rebellion is pretty well shown to have had many negative consequences, and even fails completely, unless the Inquisitor happens to ally with them and maybe chooses Leliana for Divine. In every other case the Circles are reinstated. Anders' actions are widely condemned. The conclave explosion is the fault of a mage. The only major mage character who really argues mage freedom is Solas, who turns out to be a villian, planning mass genocide (as far as we know) when he brings the Veil down. The Warden mages fell to blood magic. Cory is a mage with a demon army who wants to rule the world as a god, supported by Tevinter supremacists, and put into play by another mage with similar designs to remake the world on behalf of elves (Solas). There was Alexius. You really think magic isn't still portrayed as something potentially dangerous?
 

Sure they need to put in effort to control it, but that doesn't erase the fact that mage spells are a more effective way to kill someone than a sword. As an exaggerated example; a gun and a spoon. Sure, both require effort to properly use them as a tool to kill, but the gun is just a lot more effective than a spoon, much like setting someone on fire with a simple (accidental?) hand gesture as opposed to accidentally cutting someone with a blade (you'll need to put enough force behind a blade and be in close proximity to make a decent cut, the latter being quite difficult when people automatically try to avoid pointy objects).
And then I'm still ignoring the AoE capabilities of a mage versus a warrior at this point.

More effective against what? It takes years to train a mage, and you have house and feed them, and supply lyrium. For something a little gunpowder could just as easily accomplish. Swords are arguably more common and numerous than mages skilled in magic, anyone could just grab one and try to stab people with it. Why don't they? Because most people aren't set out to just randomly kill and attack people for no reason.

When it comes to battle, the right tool for the job matters, depending who you are fighting and with what. Magic and/or ranged attacks aren't always going to the best or most efficient weapon in every situation.

But regardless that doesn't change the fact that this argument confuses morals with objects. Anything could be turned into a weapon, if the intent was there. This is the reason mages have to learn to focus and control their will, so they don't do things they don't intend by accident. Templars also spend a great deal of time conditioning their minds.

[Sah291]

Then the demons we've seen in DA:I are very weak compared to the demon inside Connor, Uldred, Anders, etc.
------
Corypheous is a darkspawn... not an abomination.
We've seen the whole saga there is no difference between a demon and a spirit, they are both dangerous, and they are not complex like people.

That's not really in line with what Chantry lore considers an abomination. Anything that is a perversion of or contrary to the Maker's will would be, and that would include the Darkspawn and any spirit who wanted to interfere with the living.

The Seekers still work with Spirits, they aren't all considerd evil. According to the Chant, demons are evil because they are jealous of mortals and want to sabotage them, in order earn back the Maker's favor. They are jealous, envious, and opposed to the Maker's will, and the Maker's children. This is behind the reason for possessions and wanting to cross the Veil. According to the Chantry interpretations.

[Toasted Llama]

I always felt the point of the mage/templar conflict wasn't supposed to be about Abominations. Or at least it shouldn't be. It should be about abuse of power.

You can see this in the history of Thedas. Abominations barely rate a mention. The big thing, the thing that got Andraste talking about how "magic exists to serve man, never to rule over him" was Tevinter. Its about people having unearned power and using that unearned power to oppress those who lack it.

Abominations fit in thematically quite well when they're the result of arrogance or recklessness, but I think one of the problems with Dragon Age 2 was that it went too far in turning mages into (to quote David Gaider) "a kitten that CAN EXPLODE IN YOUR FACE AND TAKE OUT AN ENTIRE CITY BLOCK IF YOU TOUCH IT". It just seemed like they'd turn into abominations at the slightest provocation, and this largely crowded out the other issue.

The theme of abuse of power is an interesting one, and one that follows quite naturally from the basic fantasy idea that magically gifted people exist. I don't think the exploding kitten thing is very interesting, particularly since it seemed to result in the discussions being about the frankly inconsistent evidence we have as to the likelihood of them exploding.

DAI does seem inconsistent with DA2, but I don't think it removes the case for Templars. Its just the case in DAI focuses more on the evil that mages do through greed or hubris. The case against mages in DAI isn't the foolish apprentice turning into an abomination, its Alexius and Corypheus and Solas. And I think its better for it.

 

I've probably been not so clear about this in the OP, but I by no means want mages to turn into abominations at the simplest touch. The theme of abuse of power is probably the thing I've been looking for, but couldn't find the words for.

 

However I'm not entirely sure I'd agree Alexius, Corpyheus and Solas are good cases against mages, as ridiculous as that may sound, since they aren't even remotely like your average mage.

 

 

That may have been arguably true in DA2, but I don't really see it in DAI so much. I wouldn't say the game is biased in favor of Templars exactly either, but the mage rebellion is pretty well shown to have had many negative consequences, and even fails completely, unless the Inquisitor happens to ally with them and maybe chooses Leliana for Divine. In every other case the Circles are reinstated. Anders' actions are widely condemned. The conclave explosion is the fault of a mage. The only major mage character who really argues mage freedom is Solas, who turns out to be a villian, planning mass genocide (as far as we know) when he brings the Veil down. The Warden mages fell to blood magic. Cory is a mage with a demon army who wants to rule the world as a god, supported by Tevinter supremacists, and put into play by another mage with similar designs to remake the world on behalf of elves (Solas). There was Alexius. You really think magic isn't still portrayed as something potentially dangerous?

 

The mage rebellion not succeeding is not something that I would consider displaying magic as something potentially dangerous. During war, there's always one side going to lose.

 

Some of the examples you provide were mages using desperate measures to attempt to counter the dire situation caused by external influences. Specifically the Wardens (due to the calling), Solas (due to the fact that his people were killed by an unforseen consequence of the Veil) and Alexius (due to his son dying from the Blight) and anyone can be dangerous, mage or no, if their situation is dire enough.

 

As for Corypheus mweh, on the fence about this one, I don't think it's solely displaying magic as dangerous.

 

 

More effective against what? It takes years to train a mage, and you have house and feed them, and supply lyrium. For something a little gunpowder could just as easily accomplish. Swords are arguably more common and numerous than mages skilled in magic, anyone could just grab one and try to stab people with it. Why don't they? Because most people aren't set out to just randomly kill and attack people for no reason.

When it comes to battle, the right tool for the job matters, depending who you are fighting and with what. Magic and/or ranged attacks aren't always going to the best or most efficient weapon in every situation.

But regardless that doesn't change the fact that this argument confuses morals with objects. Anything could be turned into a weapon, if the intent was there. This is the reason mages have to learn to focus and control their will, so they don't do things they don't intend by accident. Templars also spend a great deal of time conditioning their minds.

 

Magic has been shown to be effective against almost anything, because you can do almost anything with magic, it's the whole point of magic. Training doesn't really matter, it's about the potential. The use of a sword, shield, bow, axe, greatsword, etc. is limited by the tool itself. Gameplay wise the fact that mages are the squishiest of all classes is the counter balance to their damage and utility potential. (And even then, this counter can be bypassed by Arcane Warriors)

 

Either way I'm not trying to argue mages don't need to learn how to control their magic.

 

 

 

On a side note to add to this thread:

 

 

Since I didn't think the arguments being made are strong enough to pull mages back down from their favored position, I've looked for a poll to gauge how the general public viewed the mage and templar issue. And boy, do they favor completely free mages.

 

Almost 70% of players freed the mages: http://www.strawpoll.me/3269053/r

 

And about 50-60% of players choose Leliana as the Divine, thus disbanding the Circles: http://www.strawpoll.me/3269183/r and http://www.strawpoll.me/4977587/r

[MisterJB]

I can tell this thread is going to end well

****, this thread is going to be the last Templar vs Mage one.

[thesuperdarkone2]

****, this thread is going to be the last Templar vs Mage one.

Yeah. Templar supporters better get used to being pariahs now considering this site is seemingly the only place with lots of Templar supporters

[MisterJB]

Yeah. Templar supporters better get used to being pariahs now considering this site is seemingly the only place with lots of Templar supporters

Wow, you really just had to be a dick even as the ship sinks.

Well, I know someone I won't miss, at least.

[Voidinist]

Yeah. Templar supporters better get used to being pariahs now considering this site is seemingly the only place with lots of Templar supporters

 

I, for one, will miss reading your impassioned passive aggression over a fictional minority.

 

at least I'll always have tumblr

[thesuperdarkone2]

I, for one, will miss reading your impassioned passive aggression over a fictional minority.

at least I'll always have tumblr

And I'll miss the rampant condescension and hypocrisy of those who hate an entire fictional group of people for the supposed defense of a fictional continent

Ah, this will be a good month

[Catilina]

I, for one, will miss reading your impassioned passive aggression over a fictional minority.

 

at least I'll always have tumblr

And for me will miss everybody, who compared me and my Hawke's happy sociopaths to a terrorist organization, because one of whom, unfortunately, blew up a virtual chapel with my Hawke's support.

[Sah291]

I've probably been not so clear about this in the OP, but I by no means want mages to turn into abominations at the simplest touch. The theme of abuse of power is probably the thing I've been looking for, but couldn't find the words for.
 
However I'm not entirely sure I'd agree Alexius, Corpyheus and Solas are good cases against mages, as ridiculous as that may sound, since they aren't even remotely like your average mage.
 
 

 
The mage rebellion not succeeding is not something that I would consider displaying magic as something potentially dangerous. During war, there's always one side going to lose.
 
Some of the examples you provide were mages using desperate measures to attempt to counter the dire situation caused by external influences. Specifically the Wardens (due to the calling), Solas (due to the fact that his people were killed by an unforseen consequence of the Veil) and Alexius (due to his son dying from the Blight) and anyone can be dangerous, mage or no, if their situation is dire enough.
 
As for Corypheus mweh, on the fence about this one, I don't think it's solely displaying magic as dangerous.
 
 

 
Magic has been shown to be effective against almost anything, because you can do almost anything with magic, it's the whole point of magic. Training doesn't really matter, it's about the potential. The use of a sword, shield, bow, axe, greatsword, etc. is limited by the tool itself. Gameplay wise the fact that mages are the squishiest of all classes is the counter balance to their damage and utility potential. (And even then, this counter can be bypassed by Arcane Warriors)
 
Either way I'm not trying to argue mages don't need to learn how to control their magic.
 
 
 
On a side note to add to this thread:
 
 
Since I didn't think the arguments being made are strong enough to pull mages back down from their favored position, I've looked for a poll to gauge how the general public viewed the mage and templar issue. And boy, do they favor completely free mages.
 
Almost 70% of players freed the mages: http://www.strawpoll.me/3269053/r
 
And about 50-60% of players choose Leliana as the Divine, thus disbanding the Circles: http://www.strawpoll.me/3269183/r and http://www.strawpoll.me/4977587/r

The mages being popular with players is not really the same as the narrative itself favoring them, though. The mages have been portrayed as oppressed in the Circle system, particularly in past games, and many people can see them as a metaphor for many different real world groups and issues, etc. So that's not really surprising there.

But I'll be upfront I just see them as the apostate remnants of the pre Andrastian cultures and empires that practiced high magic--Tevinter, Elvhenan, etc. The ancient Tevinter Magisters and Evanuris have hardly been portrayed as sympathetic, and there is no shortage of mage villians to demonstrate the bad sides of magic in the game.

That's not to say there's so support or sympathy for the mages at all in the game, I just don't see it as one sided or as biased as you seem to.

Anyway since the forum is being shut down, I guess this will be my last time participating in this debate. Maybe some one on Twitter or Tumblr can chime in.

[Qis]

You can't be that of a fool.

Maybe in Gameplay you can't notice it, but in lore and reality, Abominations are very powerful.

 

Did you hear why Meredith became a templar? her sister was a mage and her family protected her, one day she became an abomination because she wasn't able to control her power, she killed her parents and 60 peasants more from the Village.

 

The Circle is a better option than just killing them or burning they alive for being a mage, that is what they should do. But in the circle if they are cunning enough they can get free, like Wynne, Uldred, Vivienne, etc.

 

The Warden and Hawke kill a lot of abominations with daggers, abominations are just overrated. If you fear something, surely that something is powerful to you because your focus determine your reality.

 

We don't know the real cause of Meredith sister become abomination, there is no proof of the story. As we can see over time Mages only become abomination with reasons, not able to control their power is not one of them.

 

Who want to kill them and burning them alive for being Mages?

[Catilina]

You can't be that of a fool.

Maybe in Gameplay you can't notice it, but in lore and reality, Abominations are very powerful.

 

Did you hear why Meredith became a templar? her sister was a mage and her family protected her, one day she became an abomination because she wasn't able to control her power, she killed her parents and 60 peasants more from the Village.

 

The Circle is a better option than just killing them or burning they alive for being a mage, that is what they should do. But in the circle if they are cunning enough they can get free, like Wynne, Uldred, Vivienne, etc.

Ergo: The Circle are not only cruel, but totally useless...

 

Why Meredith's sister became an abomination? Because she have not learned to use her power, she was scared. Why not learned? Because her parents were afraid to let go her into the Circle. Why do they fear? Because the Circle is a prison, and most parents do not want it for their children.

[Toasted Llama]

My poor, poor thread.

 

 

 

 

The mages being popular with players is not really the same as the narrative itself favoring them, though. The mages have been portrayed as oppressed in the Circle system, particularly in past games, and many people can see them as a metaphor for many different real world groups and issues, etc. So that's not really surprising there.

But I'll be upfront I just see them as the apostate remnants of the pre Andrastian cultures and empires that practiced high magic--Tevinter, Elvhenan, etc. The ancient Tevinter Magisters and Evanuris have hardly been portrayed as sympathetic, and there is no shortage of mage villians to demonstrate the bad sides of magic in the game.

That's not to say there's so support or sympathy for the mages at all in the game, I just don't see it as one sided or as biased as you seem to.

Anyway since the forum is being shut down, I guess this will be my last time participating in this debate. Maybe some one on Twitter or Tumblr can chime in.

 

Alright, let's just agree to disagree then.

[Arshei]

The Warden and Hawke kill a lot of abominations with daggers, abominations are just overrated. If you fear something, surely that something is powerful to you because your focus determine your reality.

 

We don't know the real cause of Meredith sister become abomination, there is no proof of the story. As we can see over time Mages only become abomination with reasons, not able to control their power is not one of them.

 

Who want to kill them and burning them alive for being Mages?

 

I told you already, gameplay is different from Lore..

 

 

Do you want to be around someone with a grave sickness?, there is no cure for being a mage, so it is circle or death.

[Catilina]

I told you already, gameplay is different from Lore..

 

Do you want to be around someone with a grave sickness?, there is no cure for being a mage, so it is circle or death.

This proves that Meredith was not suitable for her position, and the Circle is dangerous, because Meredith-kind persons placed in a high position, who are not suitable for it. 

Nothing else to prove this.

 

You can prove only with a dangerous lunatic, that the mages are dangerous? I'm sure that you can do better.

 

The Mages are not sick. And they want a life, a family, just like everyone else.

[Arshei]

 

This proves that Meredith was not suitable for her position, and the Circle is dangerous, because Meredith-kind persons placed in a high position, who are not suitable for it. 

Nothing else to prove this.

 

You can prove only with a dangerous lunatic, that the mages are dangerous? I'm sure that you can do better.

 

 

I am not into "Blame every mage for the thing one mage did", but if that's what you want...

[Catilina]

I am not into "Blame every mage for the thing one mage did", but if that's what you want...

What did Jowan? Poisoned Eamon Arl... POISONED!

 

Quentin was a serial killer, a mad man. Mage or not, he was a criminal. (And who has not been found him for several years? Yes, the Templars!)

 

Uldred – your point. (BUT: what the skilled Templars did for another innocent mages [do not forget: they are for protecting mages]? NOTHING! Ooops, wait: Gregoir closed the door! Wow! )

 

Anders? Oh yes, he blew the Chantry. Why? Because Elthina did nothing with that lunatic woman. With what he blew the chantry? Yes! Alchemy. Not with magic.

 

Connor? He is the best example of how dangerous the Circle system. 

 

Solas? Even the Templars are not prepared demigods.

 

The Circle is not only cruel, the Circle is useless.

[Qis]

I told you already, gameplay is different from Lore..

 

 

Do you want to be around someone with a grave sickness?, there is no cure for being a mage, so it is circle or death.

 

Why would i want to believe everything come out from her mouth? She's crazy

[Arshei]

What did Jowan? Poisoned Eamon Arl... POISONED!

 

Quentin was a serial killer, a mad man. Mage or not, he was a criminal. (And who has not been found him for several years? Yes, the Templars!)

 

Uldred – your point. (BUT: what the skilled Templars did for another innocent mages [do not forget: they are for protecting mages]? NOTHING! Ooops, wait: Gregoir closed the door! Wow! )

 

Anders? Oh yes, he blew the Chantry. Why? Because Elthina did nothing with that lunatic woman. With what he blew the chantry? Yes! Alchemy. Not with magic.

 

Connor? He is the best example of how dangerous the Circle system. 

 

Solas? Even the Templars are not prepared demigods.

 

The Circle is not only cruel, the Circle is useless.

 

All of them were mages.

When a white person kill someone is because he's crazy or sick. When a black person kill someone is because he is black.

-----

I don't see how Connor is a prove that the circle is dangerous, in fact, it shows what happens when a weak mage doesn't go to the circle.

Jowan only posioned arl Eamon?

 

Quentin was crazy with power, power only a mage can have.

 

- Anders? Oh yes, he blew the Chantry. Why? Because Elthina did nothing with that lunatic woman. With what he blew the chantry? Yes! Alchemy. Not with magic.

So everyone who doesn't intervene in a situation deserve to die? I hope when you see someone being bullyied, assaulted, or something like that, you intervene, if you don't then you deserve to die.

 

Most of the mages are not only dangerous, but stupid too. Maybe mages should stop complaining and blowing up chantries and start being more like Vivienne.

[Catilina]

All of them were mages.

When a white person kill someone is because he's crazy or sick. When a black person kill someone is because he is black.

-----

I don't see how Connor is a prove that the circle is dangerous, in fact, it shows what happens when a weak mage doesn't go to the circle.

Jowan only posioned arl Eamon?

 

 

Quentin was crazy with power, power only a mage can have.

 

- Anders? Oh yes, he blew the Chantry. Why? Because Elthina did nothing with that lunatic woman. With what he blew the chantry? Yes! Alchemy. Not with magic.

So everyone who doesn't intervene in a situation deserve to die? I hope when you see someone being bullyied, assaulted, or something like that, you intervene, if you don't then you deserve to die.

 

Mages are not only dangerous, but stupid too.

Elthina had power. Elthina was not a passerby who did not dare to intervene ... but not this is the point. The point is: Anders blew the chantry with such a method, which anyone can use, not only a mage.

 

All crazy serial killer find a way to kill, not only a mage.

 

What about Jowan? He was not crazy. Jowan worked as an assassin, and he used a method, what use an assassin.  Oh, he used blood magic to escape? Oh my! (My Hawke is a blood mage... no problem)

 

And why Connor is the best example against the Circle-system? Because he was untrained. Why? Because Isolde was afraid to let him go to the Circle. She afraid of losing him forever. Why? Because it usually happens in the mege children and their parents.