faithlikeaseed | [IC/OOC] Fade Rift Inbox & Contact

I don't know why pain would have to be a teacher for all.

[His voice is equally gentle.]

I think mages would look at the rules of the Circles and most would reject them for how cold and cruel they were. Not all Circles were alike, it's true, but what mage would think it only right to send a child into the Fade against a prepared demon? I feel like having the issue in mage hands would make it a lot more personal. And personal is what would protect us.

And the mages who never knew Circles should stand even more against it. They've no rationalizations for the abuse. I know more than a few mages saw others being abused and thought it was their own good behavior protecting them, or their skill at political maneuvering, like Vivienne. Those free of the Circles are free of that baggage.

[Ah.

Well. That didn't quite come across as he'd hoped.]

It's nothing to do with pain being necessary, serah--more, it seems to me your vision of mages being universally just and compassionate to one another is very much grounded in what we'd been through in the Circles. In Tevinter, the Magisterium's got no trouble with rationalizing the abuse of mages who have the misfortune of being born slaves. The Dalish won't hesitate to abandon surplus mage children as a risk to their clan, if there's nowhere else for them to go.

Remember the Circles were a compromise struck with mages to begin with--mages who, I'm sure, had nothing but good intentions when they negotiated the rules we all lived by.

It's not impersonal because we've magic and others don't, though that's a small piece in alienating them from us. It's impersonal because mankind are flawed and sinful and compassion comes easy to no one.

...Now I see what you're saying.

[And unfortunately, Myr has a point. Anders sighs.]

You're right. But if this generation sets up the facility that's to be the model of the future, and sets up the rules as influenced by what we've learned and been through, it could last. We'd need written guiding principles, our own chant of mages if you will.

[It's something he's had a very long time to think about. Having Vandelin around to articulate the rebel side of things cogently and without malice had helped them both formulate their arguments.]

It could last. It might even last a long while, if you're careful about who's given power and who's kept from it, and raise your mages aright. How would you plan to do that?

And how will you deal with abominations, or blood magic, or mages who choose to prey on their neighbors?

Let's take the relative easier one first, abominations, blood magic, and predatory mages.

For abominations whose bodies have been twisted, I don't believe there is anything left. I'd like to see if we could dispell and ensnare one long enough to make sure of it, but until and unless that happens, twisted-body abominations would have to be treated like demons. Those who are simply... merged would be monitored. If they and their spirit manage to work together in a harmony that does not hurt people, which I know one has accomplished, then they're allowed to continue on with the option of the ritual that freed me. If there is harm in their merging, then they are put through that ritual.

[Justice would have fought it, he would have been furious for a time, but the truth of the matter is that they needed to be separated.]

Blood mages will be taken on a similar case-by-case basis. I've met plenty who do harm with it... and I know of two who use it for a greater good. It took me a very long time to come to terms with it, but they're not all demon-cavorting malevolent manipulators as we were taught. Not to mention the Circles used blood magic on all of us while condemning it. No. It's based on whether or not they're a predator, not what school of magic they use.

And predatory mages will be treated like the criminals they are, as if they weren't mages. The crimes that would get a non-mage executed will be the crimes that get a mage executed. The crimes that would lead to imprisonment for a non-mage, etc. They should get fair trials first, and then equivalent punishments.

[No more Tranquility. There's a short pause, and then a chuckle.]

And those were the easier ones. For the other... I think we have to acknowledge that someone who wants power for malevolent reasons will stop at nothing to get it, and the best laid plans will not last forever, not for any institution. With those in mind, precise roles with balances should be drawn up, with a few people weighing in so that weaknesses are found. It would need to be an odd number of leaders, and there shouldn't be perks that come along with leadership. Rooms the same size as any other full mage, pay just the same, meals the same, and so on, so that those are not the driving force behind seeking the position too.

...Have I put you to sleep yet?

Why d'you think I'd fall asleep over this? [The words are mild, amused. It's good they're not speaking in person, good that Anders won't have seen the flinch at the mention of phylacteries--because right now Myr's better at keeping his tone level than his emotions off his face.] It's too important to be boring.

Setting aside the additional risks blood magic poses--much as I'd be interested in hearing its benign uses, [sort of]--and... I suppose the handling of abominations isn't so different from what the Avvar do, much as I personally dislike the idea--who d'you imagine will be judging mages in these situations? [He suspects an answer, but he'd rather not leap to conclusions.] And what of crimes that only mages might commit--if you find one of those otherwise-benevolent blood mages, say, using her magic to cheat people of money or property? That's clearly worse than simple fraud and can't be judged the same.

[A considering pause, then more softly,] No, the best laid plans don't--nor would your code for mages, without a lot of care. Look at what's been done to the plain text of the Chant. [There's a note of pain there, well-concealed.] I worry that you seem intent on setting it up outside all other worldly authority--not just because I've a bias toward the Chantry, but that what you propose hasn't got any roots and is liable to dry up and blow away.

Every society that hasn't got Circles as we have them has a well-defined place for its mages, whether it's on top or at the bottom, and they make it a matter not just of law but of culture and religion. What meaning will you give your mages?

Edited 2018-01-15 06:37 (UTC)

[It's a little bit of a relief to know that Myrobalan isn't annoyed by the flood of words. The topic is important, and it's very, very complicated. There's a little huff of agreeing laughter after the question and statement of it being important, then he dives in.]

Service, as for meaning. The Grey Wardens exist outside of nations, and I'm envisioning the mages as being available to serve without the conscription or requirements of support. We'd need treaties to protect ourselves after all. Service still ties into the Chant, and while I know it won't set everyone's minds at ease, if that is in the code it will at least set a good starting note. Service is fulfilling, and there are so many varieties of it that mages shouldn't wind up feeling trapped in any one specific role unless they want to specialize in it.

For judgement, mages would handle it entirely if the crime is against another mage. If the crime is against a non-mage, then the non-mage authority that would handle such matters among the non-mages, [that's clunky, they really need a better term,] would have an equal voice on the matter.

[The protest would likely be too great on either side if it wasn't an equal voice.]

And as far as unique crimes, I don't have an answer for that just yet. I'm certain that those more involved with laws and carrying them out would have ideas; I need to contact Aveline and see what she'd say on it, but I'm open to opinions.

And what about mages who don't feel their birthright should bind them to a life of service? What will you do with them?

[Were he discussing this with Van, he'd bring in a comparison to the Circles here--but he hasn't the familiarity with Anders to know what might touch off unproductive bickering instead of a worthwhile discussion.

And they've had far too much of that for one lifetime, he thinks.]

Speaking with someone more versed in the law's sensible enough, though. I can't begin to think what might be appropriate for some of these--coercing someone's free will away from her is awful enough to me to warrant a death sentence, though I s'pose it should depend on how much damage the coercion did.

They can go as they will. This is to provide a place for education, training, and an offering of stability as well as protection. There may be some sort of compulsory training time for mages included in the treaty, whether by the community or by another fully trained mage that wants to take in an apprentice, just for the sake of safety, but the basics a mage needs to know could be covered within two years.

I realize giving the option to go one's own way will weaken the standing of the group. But freedom and options are of paramount importance. Without them, things absolutely will go downhill.

And I... would not disagree regarding a death sentence for such an act. But the line will have to be set at which doing that earns it because the law attempts to make black and white things that can sometimes be grey. Mind control for personal gain should be punished severely. But what if a blood mage mind controls a slaver to set slaves free?

"May" seems a weak word when an untrained mage is as much risk to herself as to others. But what about those who refuse even that--how d'you plan to make learning truly compulsory with the recalcitrant? And if they should take all their training and turn around and harm others, for gain or for spite, will the mages of your school be obligated to bring them to justice?

[A brief noise that's almost a laugh follows.] That's what the law's for--making things black and white. It's up to righteous judges to bring the gray back in where it's warranted.

What if she does? Did she have other options to free the slaves? Stripping someone of her volition, her Maker-given free will, even if it's only temporary--it's evil. Maybe not evil beyond excuse, maybe it's evil the same as killing is evil, sometimes excusable-- But this is why I'm not a judge. [Among many other reasons.]

Teaching is absolutely needed. Everyone can agree on that. The how... I don't have that figured out yet. If there are enough mages we could send out tutors, and I hope for that, but I don't know if we will. There are so many unknowns because we've never had anything like this before.

But I do think that mages of our school should be tasked with bringing in mages who have used their magic for ill after training with us.

And life is shades of grey. The law can dictate and try to make things black and white, but life never is clear the way the low wishes it to be. Two wrongs does not always make a right, but sometimes it does. Kill the bandit who is robbing and killing, mind control a slaver to free people, one is permanent, and both seem fair.

[Thoughtful,] And mages who haven't trained with you, but still use their magic for evil? --Although before I go on, I should ask: D'you envision this world being one entirely without templars, or anyone who's access to their skills and training?

Two wrongs don't ever make a right, serah. If I kill a man in self-defense, he's dead beyond help and redeeming, condemned to wander the Void until he's penitent enough to embrace Andraste's mercy. [That's an interesting bit of theology right there, but--] And in that I wronged him, even if in doing so I prevented many greater wrongs he'd have committed.

Though that's a digression from the point. I'm not convinced that any use of blood magic to overthrow the minds of others is ever legitimate, but that's something to be decided much later, I imagine.

I... Let's set aside the talk of blood magic for the moment, perhaps. That's a large topic in its own right and we're discussing a great deal already. And perhaps the wrongs and rights. We can come back to that.

[Because that's especially interesting in light of Myrobalan's belief. It's not something he's encountered before.]

As far as Templars go, they get their abilities from lyrium, and that same lyrium is an addiction that is by all accounts nearly impossible to overcome. I do not see a reason to make more Templars as if we are scared of policing our own. Those who are already Templars, if they come with recommendations from several mages as someone who has not abused or taken advantage of, we could allow to serve out the rest of their time helping teach their non-lyrium skills to mages.

I feel that keeping them is simply too risky as well, as with mages in charge it could look like an army of swordsmen serving mages. And if they choose to try to take control we've the wolves penned with the... Mm. Wolves and sheep aren't exactly the right comparison, mages have magic, but there is something disconcerting about training people to defeat you, given them the means to strip you down, and keeping them on an addictive substance the whole time. Mages can learn Dispell; we don't need Smite thrown around.

As far as mages who do not train with us but choose to break the law... [He contemplates this for a moment.] I think we need a team of mages at the school that is prepared to go up against the unknown to bring them in. It would be irresponsible of us to say that we will only take care of mages gone wrong if they've been with us when we want Thedas to trust us to do right by them. We have to protect our vulnerable people, but we also have a duty to protect those who do not have magic from those who do.

[IC/OOC] Fade Rift Inbox & Contact

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject