243 Votes in Poll
@Bloody Apostate @CaiusGermanicus
"Better to kill them as they are and be done with it, than to leave them alive and subject them to such a terrible fate, making them a husk of their former selves."
Fair enough. With Tranquility off the table, there will be more Mages possessed by demons and/or fail their Harrowings and/or mages found guilty of a crime that they didn't commit, will be unjustly executed. That is the trade off. (The Circles will also lose their primary source of income. Tranquil Mages enchanting runes and selling them.)
"First let take a look at how the rite of tranquility started...."
It started because the history of Thedas up until that point had been under a brutal Mage Supremacy, *Evanuris and Tevinter.* Abuse of magic was rampant. It was non-mages pushing back against the oppressive system. If mages didn't abuse their gift, perhaps the Rite of Tranquility may have never of happened? It certainly didn't help them out by oppressing and enslaving everybody they saw fit to do so.
"Many mages feel guilt or hate for their magic and these feeling are put in them by the chantry, teaching them everything there is to know about their magic like it's Pros, it's Cons is different for constantly only telling them how dangerous their gifts are."
"And those are valid reasons? No."
That is a small part. The crap your pants part is either you fail your Harrowing and be killed OR be possessed by a demon later. A different option for not worrying about either of those two parts wouldn't look so bad for some.
"No, because you do not lobotomize a patient with depression."
"Lobotomy is different, but it happened someone asked for it. Then why they banned it, why they don't let people chose? The Tranquility is almost as terrible."
Depression, or any other real world condition, thing or whatever doesn't give that person supernatural powers. Nor does a person need to worry about being possessed by a demon and becoming an Abomination. This is an apples and dust on Mars comparison.
"Tranquility isn't an option for those who choose it freely."
"I'm a tyrant for wanting to ban this GREAT "option", "choice"."
This isn't a perfect metaphor, analogy, whatever correct grammatical term. Think of it in relation to this, "My body, my choice."
"However, I think it's a choice that must be made as the mage in question is at or near adulthood at earliest, and should involve a great deal of education as well as requiring them to talk to Tranquil."
I agree with everything you said before this, I'm big on free will as well. My only critique of this paragraph is, perhaps a Mage doesn't have time until adulthood before they take the Harrowing. I doubt demons care about an age limit before they try to possess a mage, for example, Connor. Should there be an age limit for the Harrowing? No age limit? Is the skill of the mage more important than the age of a Mage? Why do they only test them against demon possession one time? No idea.
"Do I think it should be used as a punishment? By and large, no. IF you have a unique situation like Erimond: critical knowledge that the mage has, utter lack of repentance, willingness to continue doing shitty things - then maybe. But I think that makes things much harder for the mages who choose Tranquility to be treated as people who made a choice, and respected for that fact."
Erimond did enough evil acts to deserve being executed. He isn't the problem. The problem is Mages who commit crime(s), or repeat offenders that wouldn't warrant a death penalty for a non-mage. This is where the rubber meets the road. Tranquility off the table, it is basically Cory binding spell on that Tevinter dude at the Shrine of Dumat or execution. If you would rather have those, fair enough.
"It's fascinating, because every single person who calls a Tranquil incapable or a husk...is a mage. So how much is bias, we have no real idea, but I tend to use what we get from the Tranquil themselves first."
True. It is hard to think how it would be not to feel. Or, correctly interpret an answer or thought from a being who can't feel.
Depression, or any other real world condition, thing or whatever doesn't give that person supernatural powers. Nor does a person need to worry about being possessed by a demon and becoming an Abomination. This is an apples and dust on Mars comparison.
Then they should kill them, if they fear them. More honest. But... just because a POTENTIAL danger?
(And I don't care the tranquils are useful –this is Qun method, the Qamek – if we can't convert, we will use in another way...–, I know, they maintain that prison: to me, it makes it much more a danger: they will abuse this.)
Also: I can't see: this is for their right to choose (a lifeless life), or against them: because they're dangerous? If the latter, then it's not a choice, but coercion.
This isn't a perfect metaphor, analogy, whatever correct grammatical term. Think of it in relation to this, "My body, my choice."
Not, because the apprentice doesn't know what exactly is the Tranquility – how the Tranquils feel, if they feel something. Again: we have two men, who said what he felt. And it is terrible. I tend to believe, they know what they speak about. And to ruin someone's brain is not some acceptable thing to me.
(Another thing: they have depression? Hmm, I think I would if I would be locked.)
Of course, it's my opinion.
*
If that is the worry, one could be an immortal Golem.
Locked in the stone prison, helplessly and wait to the control rod's call to do something – what maybe/probably against your will. The rest times only about the unbearable boredom. Remember Shale. This is the hell itself, isn't?
Side question: some Dwarves chose that... the Warden has the right to destroy the Anvil?
Full disclosure. I had some difficulties understanding your responses. If I'm not clear on what I'm saying, please let me know. I'm going to *mostly* question rather than debate here, so I can understand what you are saying.
"Then they should kill them, if they fear them. More honest. But... just because a POTENTIAL danger?"
So, if Tranquility isn't an option. Are you advocating for executing mages that refuse to take the Harrowing? If so, whose responsibility is it to do these executions?
"(And I don't care the tranquils are useful –this is Qun method,"
I don't know the exact number of Tranquil Mages that asked to be made tranquil in comparison to Tranquil Mages that were made tranquil through punishment. However, x-amount of Tranquil Mages chose their condition. Not one single individual Qunari Mage gets to choose their position. It is decided for them. This is an apples and oranges comparison that you are trying to make. It doesn't work.
"I know, they maintain that prison: to me, it makes it much more a danger: they will abuse this.)"
I have no idea what point you are trying to make here. Please clarify.
"Also: I can't see: this is for their right to choose (a lifeless life), or against them: because they're dangerous? If the latter, then it's not a choice, but coercion."
I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. Please clarify.
"Not, because the apprentice doesn't know what exactly is the Tranquility – how the Tranquils feel, if they feel something."
It is obvious that a person can't fully know what an experience is until they actually experience the experience. One may have a vague idea of how that experience might entail, but, it can't be fully known until that person lives it. Having said that, sure a mage can't fully know how it will feel or not feel as a Tranquil mage. They do know however, that they will be more protected from demon possession and that they don't have to die if they fail their Harrowing. That is the trade-off, for some it is worth it. That should be their decision and their decision alone to make.
"Again: we have two men, who said what he felt. And it is terrible. I tend to believe, they know what they speak about. And to ruin someone's brain is not some acceptable thing to me."
With regards to Karl, I will re-post my earlier response directed to you, that I brought up about Karl.
With regards to Karl, I don't exactly remember why he was made tranquil. I think he was unjustly made Tranquil, correct me if I was wrong. He does say to kill him, however, at that time, there was no knowledge of the possibility of tranquility being reversed. Perhaps his plea would be different if he had that knowledge? I don't know.
With regards to Pharamond. I haven't read the book he is in, nor does the wiki state whether he was made Tranquil by his own volition or as punishment. *If someone knows that answer, I would greatly appreciate it.* *This will be a "rough draft" idea until I know the answer to my previous statement.* What I do know from the wiki, is that, almost instantaneously when his Tranquility is reversed, homey becomes possessed and a slew of innocents get killed and their corpses possessed by demons. From going from Tranquil, to not Tranquil, to possessed by a demon to then finally a non-Tranquil Mage. That is a lot to go through in a small amount of time. I wouldn't consider him a reliable character witness. That is a lot to process in a short amount of time, especially dealing with all that trauma as well.
My assumption is that, he willingly asked for Tranquility, for whatever his reason. That reason seemed on point, because he instantly succumbed to demon possession when he wasn't tranquil. Pharamond should be a Tranquil Mage. Guess what? That doesn't diminish him in any way. He must be an intelligent and capable humanoid being. The Divine herself, asked him to research the Rite of Tranquility. She could have asked anyone, but she asked him. So, it would deduce his tranquility doesn't reduce him as being an intelligent and capable humanoid being.
Karl, against his will *I looked it up,* was made Tranquil. Of course he wouldn't want to be Tranquil if he had the choice. He braved The Harrowing and passed it. Pharamond, suffered a great deal of change and trauma in a short amount of time. They aren't ideal examples to support your opinion.
"And to ruin someone's brain is not some acceptable thing to me."
Yeah, demon possession does exactly that. Wouldn't it be better for an individual, of their own volition, choose to take a measure that would protect them from a malevolent being that would ruin their brain?
"(Another thing: they have depression? Hmm, I think I would if I would be locked.)"
This is out of context of what was discussed. But yes, I agree with you. It would be no small miracle for any mage in a Circle, under Chantry control, not to be depressed. We all need that Vitamin D. (among other reasons)
"This is the hell itself, isn't?"
That depends on the individual. If an individual was so concerned about what the afterlife may bring. The "best" way to deal with is to become an immortal Golem. To each their own.
"Side question: some Dwarves chose that... the Warden has the right to destroy the Anvil."
Eh, a Paragon asking a favor of a person to do something is probably all the authority an outsider would need to do something that deals with Orzammar. With all the backstabbing in dwarven politics though, that doesn't fully protect you from getting a knife in the back.
Are you advocating for executing mages that refuse to take the Harrowing? If so, whose responsibility is it to do these executions?
I should start with saying: I oppose the harrowing. This isn't an exam, just a distress. Not because of the demons, but the circumstances. And most of the known possessed mages are harrowed mages. It's just an unnecessary stressor in this way, doesn't prove anything, but can cause more danger as well. AND: yes, the mages feared from this bullshit, and I don't think, it's (only) about the demons, rather about the secrecy and the Templars behind them.
So: no, absolutely no.
About that, a Tranquil is safe from possession. No. Nobody and nothing is. But true, the tranquil doesn't attract the demons much more than a table or a chair. Pharamond was a tranquil, and be possessed. He "achieved" it for his experiment – but a Tranquil can't feel fear, and probably the only thing was before his eyes: the task. You said well: he was terrified AFTER.
Maddox followed Samson blindly – I don't think he would work for him if not Tranquil. The emotions can put us into trouble, but their absence can cause the same effect as well. Without fear, sympathy etc. our judgment is wrong about a situation or a person.
Yeah, demon possession does exactly that. Wouldn't it be better for an individual, of their own volition, choose to take a measure that would protect them from a malevolent being that would ruin their brain?
But the one, who asks for tranquility isn't possessed. It just a possible danger, and to ruin his/her brain, for a possible danger seems wrong to me.
The person, who would pick that lifeless life just to protect the others from the danger, would never accept the offer of a demon, I'm sure. So: who would pick it, isn't the real danger. The real danger is the one, who harrowed, but because of a possible side-effect PTSD, became more weak... or who harrowed and won, and became overconfident: s/he would rule those demons.
Tranquility isn't a cure of fear or depression.
Yes, Karl was made tranquil violently, just because he was "too rebellious", as he said –probably they caught Anders and his letters– and they wanted to use him as a bait to Anders. If he and Anders know, it's reversible, Anders would take more try with justice, or to find another way. I don't think he would choose to remain tranquil – also: I think, this was some agreement between them: if one of them become tranquil the other gives him peace.
He was clear about, like Pharamond as well: they feel something, but not like other people: happiness, sadness, fear, love, hatred... but a meaningless loss. Both of them chose the death.
Pharamond and Karl simple mages. They're very good examples.
Pharamond was a mess, after he got back his emotions? Of course, just imagine it: if a person loses the ability of walking, and can't stand on their legs for a while, when became healthy again, they should learn to walk again. Pharmond recurrent emotions rushed him.
Just imagine: many people would question the reversion because they're unstable... instead of giving them time to live with their emotions, would deny the reversion, or make them tranquil again (like the Seeker wanted to Pharamond, and the Divine allowed it... – and she was not a malevolent Divine...), so: I would rather ban the whole Tranquility thing, yes.
The question is: the Tranquil would want to be whole again (not my wording, Karl used it) – as a tranquil. (We saw Karl as Tranquil and after he gained back his emotions: we saw two different persons, with different choices.) So: I would test every tranquil, including the ones who chose it, what they want.
About the tranquils' ability to use raw lyrium maintains the Circle: you said that, and I agree. And this fact makes it even worse...
"I should start with saying: I oppose the harrowing. This isn't an exam, just a distress..."
I strongly disagree with this. Only educating and training the mages while not testing them to protect themselves from demonic influence is a recipe for disaster. The Templars don't want the Mages to talk about the details of the Harrowing is obvious. Giving away the answer to the test does the Mage no good in the long run.
"Pharamond was a tranquil, and be possessed. He "achieved" it for his experiment – but a Tranquil can't feel fear, and probably the only thing was before his eyes: the task. You said well: he was terrified AFTER."
I don't know the particular way that Pharamond got into the fade. The wiki says that he went somewhere where the veil was thin. As long as a Tranquil Mage stays away from thin spots in the Veil and doesn't actively search the fade like Pharamond did. They are going to be protected from demonic influence.
"Maddox followed Samson blindly – I don't think he would work for him if not Tranquil."
I disagree with your conclusion. They where bro's before Maddox was involuntarily made tranquil and Samson was dispelled from the order. When the Mage-Templar War broke out, most of the Tranquil Mages were abandoned by the Mage and Templars. Yet, Samson searched for Maddox and rescued him. If Maddox had no free will, he would of had no loyalty to Samson, but he kept his mouth shut and poisoned himself to protect Samson.
"But the one, who asks for tranquility isn't possessed. It just a possible danger, and to ruin his/her brain, for a possible danger seems wrong to me."
That is for you to decide for yourself. Not for others. It isn't your business.
"The person, who would pick that lifeless life just to protect the others from the danger, would never accept the offer of a demon, I'm sure. So: who would pick it, isn't the real danger.
Demons don't give two craps about making honest handshake agreements about possessions. They just do it because they can, they aren't too precious about the method(s) it takes to get their way.
"The real danger is the one, who harrowed, but because of a possible side-effect PTSD, became more weak... or who harrowed and won, and became overconfident: s/he would rule those demons."
There could countless ways we could cherry pick scenarios on what type of mage or who could overcome or not overcome demonic possession. There is no point. Resisting demonic possession is constant struggle for mages, that is why I have no judgement and I'm sympathetic to Mages that would rather be made Tranquil than have to deal with that.
"Pharamond was a mess, after he got back his emotions? Of course, just imagine it: if a person loses the ability of walking, and can't stand on their legs for a while, when became healthy again, they should learn to walk again. Pharmond recurrent emotions rushed him."
This is exactly my point. He was in no proper mental state evaluate his mental being. This is why I don't think he is valid example to use for anti-Tranquility viewpoint. If anything, he supports a pro-Tranquility argument. It took him all of 5 seconds from him going from Tranquil to being possessed by a demon. Which resulted in numerous innocent lives being killed.
Karl is a good argument for not unjustly using the Rite of Tranquility on Mages. Which, I agree with that. That isn't the argument we are having though. I support it for Mages that choose to do so under their own volition. You don't. That is our disagreement.
"Just imagine: many people would question the reversion because they're unstable... instead of giving them time to live with their emotions, would deny the reversion, or make them tranquil again"
I answered this in an earlier post that was directed towards you.
That depends, if the mage is tranquil due to their own volition. Then no, I would not reverse it. If a Mage was unjustly made tranquil, then I would be open to it. Not before though, there was a council of people that would talk with all of that Tranquil Mage's family, friends and associates, to better suss out if that Individual would want their tranquility reversed understanding what possible dangerous side effects may or may not occur.
I agree that they should have time to figure out there newly awakened state. However, that goes right out the window if they become possessed. Which, this happened to Pharamond, so it is understandable that they wanted to make him Tranquil again.
"So: I would test every tranquil, including the ones who chose it, what they want."
I disagree. I start with the ones that where involuntarily made Tranquil, as long as they didn't commit any serious crimes. I'd leave the ones that willingly chose Tranquility alone. To each their own.
"About the tranquils' ability to use raw lyrium maintains the Circle: you said that, and I agree. And this fact makes it even worse..."
They have a gift to create something valuable and beneficial to society. While using those funds to provide food, security, shelter and education for Mages within the Circle, There are far worse things than that.
"Tranquility isn't a cure of fear or depression."
I don't know one way or another if is or isn't. I do know that Tranquility is a highly effective treatment for fear or depression.
Most people agree with the necessity of the Harrowing, I don't. It's my view, and of course, I'm sure I'm right about it. Nothing is proved the Harrowing's effectiveness, but many cases prove the fail...
***
Pharamond seemed absolutely okay to me. His emotions messed up, but he spoke contently and knew what he speaks about. And no, he had not enough time: we don't know how much time needs to the regeneration: they ruined his mind. Probably not that easy...
And while Pharamond was in pain and fear and happiness and sadness – he still would choose that mess, that fear and guilt, that roller-coaster to feel again, or the death, not just wandering endlessly in that meaningless void. He begged for it – when he felt guilt for what he caused... as a Tranquil.
So: I think, his behaviour absolutely supports my view. And also showed: the Tranquils can be dangerous.
(I think, was a sin to agree to make him tranquil again. Why didn't the Divine ordered the Templars to kill him rather? HE begged for it. Seems she still believe, this is mercy – no matter what the Tranquil mage –who was sent by her to research the reverse– said about his own experience and will...)
Why would you do not test the ones who asked for it? To give them a chance to feel again?
Your point was that this is reversible, then let it be!
If you think, Pharamond was in no proper mental state to evaluate his mental being, how the Tranquils can be?
When they chose, they didn't know about what is this, and what they will lose.
Now they will see it.
What if Karl and Pharamond would right about it, and not just because they made tranquil violently? (I'm sure they're right, and this is an endless nightmare, in their whole life.)
If they don't get a possibility, maybe they would suffer in their whole life, just because of a bad choice.
And if they really don't want to feel again? Then okay. Then can stay Tranquil. No force. Just a test.
***
Tranquility is not a gift from any view. Yes, there is a useful side-effect, but not gift, they paid hard for this useful side effect (okay, gift for the Chantry, that the Circle can maintain itself...).
***
I don't know one way or another if is or isn't. I do know that Tranquility is a highly effective treatment for fear or depression.
Like death. No more feeling.
Personally, i'm okay with the harrowing, it test the mettle of a mage and their ability to slap a demon b**** in the face (you know, like some of did when saving connor in origins), but i can also see where others are coming from saying it puts significant stress on the apprentices. Here why i don't believe tranquility should be considered an option or solution.
As we all know, mages don't choose their magic, most of them have regular childhoods until their preteens and *poof* they wake up one morning with their bed on fire and then it's off to the circle where where you train, train, train, learn the dangers of magic from the chantry and then train some more, and for what? so that at the last second some scared apprentice who could really need a moral boost from his senior and piers can choose tranquility because they are afraid of the final exam and flush almost a decades worth of hard work, teaching and possibly prayer from the chantry down the toilet to become an emotionless servant. Come on, that is just one anti-climatic sucky mess. imagine how the enchanters who taught said mage for years must feel? how their friends must feel? honestly i don't think i'd be able to handle it. i'd probably turn into a sobbing mess every time i looked in their direction because deep down inside they're not really the person i knew anymore, yeah sure they still have the memory we made together, but that's about it, there nothing else because they no longer have the emotional capacity to assign meaning to these memories and thus can't relate to them. It's emotional death, yeah, sure they gain impeccable concentration allowing them to craft stuff of perfection, but then after that what good are. The chantry complains about how blood magic is evil due to how grants the user to control and mess with peoples minds and somehow they see that this still the same thing, you're messing with a persons mind still, taking away one of the core parts(if not the only core part) that make them who they are as a person. Our emotions combined with our memories and thought pattern make us who we are, taking away the emotions and the memories lose their value and the thought pattern becomes unable to function properly because significance can no longer be placed to anything due to absence of emotion. That's what becoming tranquil is. you lose yourself and a mage asking for it doesn't change that fact. yes they won't mind their mind state post tranquility rite but thats because they lack they emotional capacity to understand how messed up it is.
In my opinion, the circle and the chantry could a page from the Avvar's or rivaini seer's book. i mean they have mages other and i'm pretty sure no tranquility.
(All that being said, i think we call all agree the Qunari are the absolute worst at handling mages)
Tranquility is worse, because it opens the door to so much abuse. Now, a mage willingly be made Tranquil? That's fine. But against your will? That's a horrible punishment, worse than death. At least with death, all your pain and suffering ends. As a Tranquil, your feelings die and so, in a way, your pain and suffering ends, too, but it goes on for those around you. The Tranquil undoubtedly had friends and loved ones, and to see them reduced to an emotionless husk who can get (and as we later learn in supplemental material and later games, often is) raped, used and abused as manual labourers would be soul-crushing to friends and loved ones. So being made Tranquil is not only being worse than dead for the Tranquil himself, but for those close them. It is *very* telling that, all individuals we've ever known in the setting to be freed from their Tranquil state have unambiguously stated death to be preferrable.
Now, is being made Tranquil *the* worst thing ever? No. Being made a Broodmother would be infinitely worse. But between the two options of death and tranquility? Death is better.
If you read Asunder, then you have a leg up on me with certain particular details. I remain skeptical for a couple of reasons.
Did he willingly chose to be made Tranquil to avoid taking the Harrowing? Or was it a punishment for him to be Tranquil?
Since he was possessed by a demon, and it caused a bunch of innocents to be killed by demons. What was his thoughts on that? Remorse? Guilt? Neither? Something else?
For the sake of argument, lets say that he chose to be Tranquil. He probably did that because, I assume, that he feared he would fail his Harrowing. Which, in later events, the second he wasn't Tranquil, he became possessed and that resulted in a bunch of innocent people dying due to his incompetence. I'd say his initial instinct to be made Tranquil is correct. Conversely, if he was made tranquil against his will. He got a once in a lifetime opportunity to reverse it. It took him only a few moments to blow it, by becoming possessed by a demon and innocents losing their lives because of it. In my opinion, a Mage, who is an adult. Doesn't get a second chance if they have been possessed by a demon. Especially if that possession, resulted in innocents being killed. With regards to Pharamond. He is guilty of both those. He absolutely has no say in the matter. None. He needs to accept whatever punishment from whomever decides for him or take agency of his situation before his fate is decided for him.
It is rather straightforward why I wouldn't reverse tranquility for a Mage willingly asked to be made Tranquil. That is because that is what they wanted and it would be sinful of me to go against their wishes and to do so without their consent.
"And if they really don't want to feel again? Then okay. Then can stay Tranquil. No force. Just a test."
You don't want any mage to be made Tranquil for any reason. Now, you are advocating for a mage to be made Tranquil, twice!?! There is absolutely no data on anyone being made Tranquil twice. It could be disastrous. The "no force" you speak of is incorrect. You would force a mage, who willingly decided to be made Tranquil. Into not being Tranquil.
Let me try to explain this from another angle. If a person has above average physical strength, should that person be forced into participating in combat sports or combat? Just because a person has particular above average physical gifts, that doesn't necessarily mean that they have the mental strength to endure/manage pain, queasy to the sight of blood and/or aren't capable of hurting, injuring, and/or killing other people. Perhaps they don't like competition. Perhaps they can't deal with working outside.
Same could be said for Mages. Just because the have the ability to use magic. Perhaps they don't want to use magic for whatever the reason or reasons and/or they are so unsettled/scared by becoming a demon, and/or some are just mentally incapable of resisting demon possession that they would rather be protected from that possibility.
To summarize so this doesn't become more circular than it already is.
A mage willingly asks to be made Tranquil: I have no problem with that. A mage unwillingly is made Tranquil: Depends on the situation. If there was a vote to get rid of Tranquility. I'd vote against it for a couple reasons. One, obviously support Mages who willingly want to be Tranquil and secondly, people speak of getting rid Tranquility all together because it can be abused. Fair enough, it definitely can be abused. However, with Tranquility off the table, due to the power of Mages. Executions will be abused because you can't contain/treat mage criminals the same as non-mage criminals. Unjust Tranquility is a hell of a lot easier to rectify as opposed to an unjust execution.
If I was a mage, which would I rather have happen to me? Depends on the situation, if I'm so scared that I may fail my Harrowing and die. Execution doesn't sound so good does it? If I wanted nothing to do with magic, but don't want to die. Execution doesn't seem like an ideal option for me. If I was unjustly or justly convicted of a crime, perhaps death would be better. No idea. If I was justly convicted of a crime, my thoughts on the matter are void. I shouldn't have committed the crime that I am being punished for.
What do you think?