[This is enough like discussing (arguing, really) the Chant with Vandelin that it gets a weird, nostalgic little smile out of Myr.]
All that you say is true, messere, and the Chantry's motive behind the ban could have nothing to do with blood magic being harmful per se. Although I will say it is not only through their graces that we know about it; even in my lifetime, two Circles were riven by its use, and we heard from their survivors through our own channels that are less--mm--subject to Chantry censors.
[Defensive as he was of his faith, Myr does not see it as beyond reproach; he's scholar enough that the penchant for censorship and alteration of texts was tiresome and offensive to his sensibilities. Bless the College of Enchanters for having their own aways of working around the Chantry's restrictions.]
Whether the blood mages of the Gallows and Kinloch Hold sinned or not in their actions, they did unleash horrors on the world--whatever their intent. That gives me reason for caution about it even beyond my religious scruples. [Really, blood magic being awful was one of the very few things he and his staunchly atheist cousin were wholly agreed on, which did say something.
He then tips out a hand in gracious acknowledgment of the Ascian's correction.]
Forgive me--you did make that distinction, and I elided it in my haste. Regardless, as you have amply explained, I do have every reason to suspect the texts that said He did as such.
Which raises an interesting point: Why are you willing to take that particular negative depiction of my Creator as undistorted by mortal ambition or misunderstandings, but challenge the idea that His word on blood magic is authoritative?
no subject
All that you say is true, messere, and the Chantry's motive behind the ban could have nothing to do with blood magic being harmful per se. Although I will say it is not only through their graces that we know about it; even in my lifetime, two Circles were riven by its use, and we heard from their survivors through our own channels that are less--mm--subject to Chantry censors.
[Defensive as he was of his faith, Myr does not see it as beyond reproach; he's scholar enough that the penchant for censorship and alteration of texts was tiresome and offensive to his sensibilities. Bless the College of Enchanters for having their own aways of working around the Chantry's restrictions.]
Whether the blood mages of the Gallows and Kinloch Hold sinned or not in their actions, they did unleash horrors on the world--whatever their intent. That gives me reason for caution about it even beyond my religious scruples. [Really, blood magic being awful was one of the very few things he and his staunchly atheist cousin were wholly agreed on, which did say something.
He then tips out a hand in gracious acknowledgment of the Ascian's correction.]
Forgive me--you did make that distinction, and I elided it in my haste. Regardless, as you have amply explained, I do have every reason to suspect the texts that said He did as such.
Which raises an interesting point: Why are you willing to take that particular negative depiction of my Creator as undistorted by mortal ambition or misunderstandings, but challenge the idea that His word on blood magic is authoritative?