| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fraternities of Enchanters article. |
|---|
|
I don't think Solivitus is Formari[]
I don't recall any evidence of this even being the case. He doesn't seem like a mage who has been stripped of his humanity like Owan is. Shouldn't this be removed unless one of the writers addresses this, one way or another? Lobsel Vith (talk) 21:35, May 14, 2011 (UTC)
I am not sure that the Formari are a fraternity at all. Codex entry: The Tranquil states that "The Formari, the branch of the Circle devoted to item enchantment, is made up exclusively of Tranquil, and is the source of all the wealth that sustains our towers." Codex entry: The Fraternity of Enchanters lists 5 fraternities, the Formari are not included. A fraternity consists of enchanters by definition, and the tranquil are not enchanters.
Opinions? Asherinka (talk) 10:22, January 17, 2012 (UTC)
- I agree it doesn't make sense that the Formari are considered as a fraternity.
- Since the OP's question went unanswered, I don't know if Solivitus is supposed to be one since it contradicts Codex entry: The Tranquil (unless something happened after the time the codex entry was written by the First Enchanter Josephus). His shop's name suggests it is, but that might just be a classic misdirection from BioWare (wouldn't be the first time). Although she isn't listed here, I don't recall Ambassador Cera looking anything like a Tranquil now that I think about it (yet she still trades items and can enchant them). Unless someone can find a source that says Formari may include non-Tranquil mages, he shouldn't be listed as one. --D. (talk · contr) 15:29, January 17, 2012 (UTC)
The Formaris have been removed as a fraternity and instead moved to the Circle of Magi article. Any further comments should be on the Circle of Magi's talk page. --D. (talk · contr) 19:36, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
I don't think Anders is Libertarian[]
... because he is not an enchanter at all. He is an apostate. From the Codex entry: "Another aspect of Circle life is the fraternity. When a mage becomes an enchanter, he may ally himself with a fraternity." Though he surely sympathizes with them.Asherinka (talk) 00:18, January 9, 2012 (UTC)
I doubt that. Even at his most extreme state Anders still did not approve of blood magic, which we have seen Libratarians use. I feel Anders and Libertarians are seeking the same goal but are unable to come to terms with differing political outlooks.--Ironreaper (talk) 05:54, January 9, 2012 (UTC)
- Are all Libertarians supposed to use blood magic? It occurred to me that only some do.. Asherinka (talk) 08:00, January 9, 2012 (UTC)
Apologises i briefly mistook Libratarians for Resolutionists. Libartarians do not support blood magic, which is probably one of the factors that led to the offshoot exsisting.
I still do not believe Anders would be a Libartarian. At his Awakening stage he probably would be an Isolationist. But most of all when he is in DA2 he never seems to have a definative standpoint on what should happen after this war. Him and Justice can't seem to see past what they want to change, while the Libatarians have a standpoint, like maintaning the Circle for training--Ironreaper (talk) 03:32, January 10, 2012 (UTC)
- I think I agree. So its wisest to simply remove him from the article, which you already did anyhow. Asherinka (talk) 07:39, January 10, 2012 (UTC)
Article Layout[]
I think it would be better to start with "Known fraternities" and then to proceed to "History", as it is not quite clear otherwise. Currently the layout is inverse. Any opinions on the subject? Asherinka (talk) 10:58, February 10, 2012 (UTC)
- I think it makes sense to start with history than listing the fraternities. For example, though it's not the same but similar in essence, pages for games and novels list the plot of the story first, then characters. --D. (talk · contr) 16:42, February 10, 2012 (UTC)
I was actually thinking - is it the history of fraternities or the history of the Circle? Asherinka (talk) 13:22, February 15, 2012 (UTC)